hold off on that cpu upgrade

[sulky_uk]

interesting video i found while sitting about the house today, basically unless you do video coding a 4770k is just as good as a 7700k )with a 1080 fitted in both cases)

[video=youtube;TiqXpNQLCIU]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TiqXpNQLCIU[/video]

[Lysander]

Thanks for the video.  I've been thinking about upgrading the CPU etc. but I'm still not sure which way to go.

I built my current system back in 2011, but like most people I've updated bits and pieces as time has passed.  In fact a part the case the only original features are the CPU and Motherboard.

My PC is generally fine for almost all the games that I play (and I've got a lot of games) and the only "game" it struggles with is Star Citizen, and whilst I understand a lot of the problems with performance are server side I'm struggle to get a constant double digit FPS rate.

My current spec is...
I7-2600K @ 3.4ghz
16GB DDR3 @ 1333Mhz (2x8gb)
MB: ASUS P8z68-V LE (Serial MT7016K64701289)
Nvidia GTX1070 (8gb)  (Generally playing at 1900x1080)
500gb SDD (for OS & Star Citizen) & 3tb HDD for games etc.

I'm not in video processing etc. so based on this communities expertise I'm interested in what upgrade paths you folks might recommend.

PS. What I price check the I7 4790K vs the I7 7700K they seem to be similarly priced.  I'm assuming the 7700K requires a new motherboard etc. so whilst the CPU costs are similar the new M/B & RAM push the total cost up significantly.

[sulky_uk]

the video below shows the difference between your CPU and a 4790, tbh the differance is about the same as the first video.

i would hold off until it starts to slow in all the games, thats my plan i have a 4790 and a 1070 and 16gig mem and im still happy, save the pennies up so when that does happen, and you upgrade  the jump is huge rather than what it is today

[video=youtube;CWp8L6awpk8]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CWp8L6awpk8[/video]

[Chaosphere]

Tbh, most of us could manage with that 2600k! Sandy Bridge (2000 series) were a real turning point for Intel. Every quad core since then has been a solid chip.

Gaming development is always held back by the lowest common denominator. That has always been consoles. As console generations last even longer (the PS4, with its iterations, will far outlive the PS3 in number of years, for example), that lowest common denominator hangs around for years, holding development back.

Sure, PC games slowly escape the rut, but it's slow progress. Developers don't want to put much into making the PC version of multiplatform games 'better' on PC, it's just not worth their time. Added development for no real gain, from their point of view.

So yep, as long as when you buy, you buy a decent quad core, you'll be fine for years. GPUs are fairly similar (you can still play modern games with fairly old cards, as long as you put settings to console-comparable levels), but we often hit that ceiling faster with new high res or high fps monitors. It also seems to me most of that slow progress is in graphics, and little in the structural complexity of the games and the worlds we inhabit.

The tl;dr bottom line is if you're keen to save your cash and spend it only when needed (rather than buying shiny new PC things 'just because' - plenty of us are addicted to that!), only look to upgrade when the games you play don't run in a way you are happy with.. Personally, for example, Overwatch will chug along at 120+ fps on my 4770k and 980. That's most of my gaming sorted. I don't mind turning down some settings on other stuff for a few years if needs be.

[Lysander]

Thanks for the feedback everyone.  As always it's most welcome.

I guess for the time being I'll stick with what I have until either; a) something fails, b) I start have to seriously compromise my game settings, or c) I win the lottery and the value of money becomes irrelevant.