5 ms·
I've been thinking about these tradeoffs lately. There's an argument one hears that you can "future proof" by buying top of the line and then not having to upg
by gibspaulding 4y ago
I've been thinking about these tradeoffs lately. There's an argument one hears that you can "future proof" by buying top of the line and then not having to upgrade as often. I think that's always been a bit flawed, but it feels like with the massive thermal tradeoffs these top end parts are making it less true than ever.
- sliken 4y agoHeh, don't think that ever made sense. When a machine is 5 years old you don't particularly care if it's the low, mid, or high end CPU, they are all slow. However not buying ram is a killer and often results in replacing a perfectly good machines.
- vladvasiliu 4y agoI don't fully agree. My 9-year-old 3rd gen Xeon is still plenty usable, barely slower than a "normal" i5 10th gen for doing Rust dev. My work PC with a 4th gen i5 has been unusable even for basic tasks for a few years, despite the 16 GB of RAM and SSD drive. Even moving windows around and stuff is sluggish.