will 8/8 core/threads still good for the next 5 years

[Kumoko]

or is it about time to get the 8/16 etc to last long time?

[Omega]

It depends on the applications/games you run. Some might actually prefer a 8c/8t CPU without SMT, other which can make use of the extra threads will see benefit on the 8c/16t.

I am sure that if you were to buy a modern CPU you could make use of it until the hardware starts to physically die.

[iceman1980]

Misha Necron님이 먼저 게시:

or is it about time to get the 8/16 etc to last long time?

Maybe, we are fast approaching the limitations of feasible parallelisation. I can tell you due to management reasons games won't be able to use 32 cores+

[Wichtelman]

which cpu was on top 5 years ago? how is it today?
(i7-6700k 4c/8t)

personally i would get 8c/16t but if you already have 8/8 keep it till you have the need for more power...

[Bad 💀 Motha]

Which cpu exactly, as that's more important to know and ask about versus just going by cores/threads alone.

[Lord Flashheart]

This may be helpful

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0Su6dhmWun4

he discusses the long term cost of hardware.


I am looking to get a 5900X at some point when available.
It is 12 cores/24 threads.
Hopefully the many cores and huge CPU cache will make it last.

[nullable]

Misha Necron님이 먼저 게시:

or is it about time to get the 8/16 etc to last long time?

1. Some people seem to imagine core scaling is going to increase linearly. But not all applications can be made to run better on an arbitrary number of cores. And adding more cores isn't just the obvious way to increase performance across the board in all use cases.
   
2. If you buy a decent enough CPU, and aren't obsessed with having top end performance in five years, sure it'll last that long. Or longer. But you determine what your performance tolerances are.
   
3. No one can guarantee what is going to happen in five years. Or that your opinions won't change. Or maybe you get a better job and can afford to rebuild a PC every 2-3 years so this five year stuff becomes moot.

[Illusion of Progress]

8/8 sounds like a Core i7 9700/K to me. I wouldn't necessarily buy one today as my first choice (nothing "wrong" with it, and it's priced rather fairly between the 2700X and 3700X at the moment, but I'd just skip in favor of something 8/16), but if you already have it it's a different story. Yes, it'll be fine for the next five years (IMO). I was using a Core i5 2500K earlier this year.

As someone said, scaling for games won't go on forever, and I expect it to slow as it increases (some may argue it already has). I expect something like an 8 core CPU with SMT to be "usable" 10 years from now (will vary from person to person; as said I was a 4/4 in 2020 but as early as 5 to 7 years ago, others were finding it not enough and the threads from a 4/8 Core i7 were beneficial).

To add to the above, PC CPUs were behind consoles in core count for a while. Of course, the consoles had slow performance per core and slow clock speed, which may be why PCs could still do well despite this. Look at the recent consoles for a good idea; they are essentially Ryzen 7 3700X spec for spec. This doesn't mean you'll NEED as much soon (some of this may be reserved for the console OS and most games won't be threaded to such extent regardless IMO), but it's a good consideration still. I typically recommend 6/12 (Ryzen 5 3600 or Core i5 10400/F) as the ideal minimum to buy into today, and stepping up to 8/16 is something I recommend if the funds are there and/or the user likes to upgrade platform less often. 8/8 will be fine though, but there may (or may not) be cases where you'd wish you had the extra threads.

IMO, if you have it already (or are getting a very good price on it used), it's fair to stay with or buy into. But if you already have it, don't buy another 8 core CPU just to add threads (and if you have a Core i7 9700K, yeah, there's faster things per core, but not by enough to warrant it IMO).

[AustrAlien2010]

Can you run everything at 240 frames per second? No. Is it good? Well, if it ain't broken, then it's good. You can easily expect it to not malfunction for 5 years. Computer parts usually last well over ten years, if not longer.

We have computers that lasted for 20 years and they are still good. They still function, and you can still make stuff on them.

[JC]

I'm still running 4 cores, and i'm building a new comp now that is gonna use 4 cores. the chip is only 100 dollars and boosts to close to 4.5 ghz.. I'll probably be upgrading that some time down the road. Part of the reason why i'm gonna still use the 4 core.

I have zero issue running any game i own, Dragon age, witcher, Crusader kings ect.

Most games are not using the extra cores at even at this point in time. A game like cities skylines does, but people say 4 cores can still run the game just fine.

more cores is better for multitasking, so if your encoding vids, streaming, or doing a bunch of stuff at one time then get the higher core counts. (unless you have a second machine for recording) Outside of that if you are just gaming 4 cores is just fine. Time will tell how much gaming companies optimize for more than even 2. Most games 4 cores with a higher clock is better than 8.

[SeriousCCIE]

It'll be fine. At least I think so; I expect to use mine for another five years.

(At which time,I hope to merge with the singularity, and as as result, no longer need to concern myself with CPU upgrades.)

[r.linder]

8/8 will be fine for awhile. There's not much reason to expect otherwise when constantly pushing the amount of cores necessary raises build cost and leaves lower end gamers behind.
It would be counter-productive for a lot of developers if their games all ran like crap on 4 cores.

[Kumoko]

Omega님이 먼저 게시:

It depends on the applications/games you run. Some might actually prefer a 8c/8t CPU without SMT, other which can make use of the extra threads will see benefit on the 8c/16t.

I am sure that if you were to buy a modern CPU you could make use of it until the hardware starts to physically die.

well i actually use 3 monitor setup with wallpaper engine running on both animated too as of rn i own a cpu which has 6/6 i5 8600k thinking of just selling it still under warranty n get a 9th gen i7 which is 8/8 or just fully go with more cores/threads but i think ryzen 9 is a bit overboard atm as my current i5 lacks the performance needed for a simulator kind of games warhammer etc i might also do some video editing recording which might need a better cpu heck even warhammer 3 might not b enough for a 8/8

PS i own a rtx 2080 super

[🦜Cloud Boy🦜]

8c/8t like i7 9700k is sufficient for today and for upcoming years. It is better than 6c/12t i7 8700k in both Single-core and Multi-core in EVERY workloads (including gaming), which is better than Ryzen 3600/x. So, i7 9700k is actually better than any 6c/12t CPU currently available.

[🦜Cloud Boy🦜]

Here is some performance comparison of i7 9700k vs i5 10600k

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5JG9KluSZy4

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2rqrIl8r1NA

[DieegoPeri]

Misha Necron님이 먼저 게시:

or is it about time to get the 8/16 etc to last long time?

Best answer so far: we can't predict the future