6 ms·

The value of my desktop pc has almost doubled, my ps5 is worth ~ $150 more than I bought it years ago. It's gotten to the point where nvidia doesn't even bothe

The value of my desktop pc has almost doubled, my ps5 is worth ~ $150 more than I bought it years ago. It's gotten to the point where nvidia doesn't even bother to report their gaming revenue anymore. It's a clear sign that we're back to the bad old days of pc gaming being a 'prosumer' hobby, but don't worry I'm sure nvidia and their ilk are salivating at the idea of making pc gaming into a streaming stadia like solution that you pay for monthly

davey48016 4mo ago
Nvidia already has a PC gaming streaming service that integrates with your steam library and a couple other launchers' libraries.
Sohcahtoa82 4mo ago
https://pcpartpicker.com/user/Sohcahtoa82/saved/n76zkL https://pcpartpicker.com/user/Sohcahtoa82/saved/n76zkL I think I paid a total of around $5,500 for the current components of my PC. Hard to say for sure since my PC has been a Ship of Theseus for over 30 years and started as a 486. The link merely reflects its current state. At one point, PCPartPicker was showing my PC as worth $11,000. It's now at $7,200 without including the RAM or PSU. That would put it at $9,000. > It's a clear sign that we're back to the bad old days of pc gaming being a 'prosumer' hobby Yup. I think it's especially bad since the gap between budget-grade and mid-grade feels like it's gotten wide. If you wanna play the latest AAA games and not feel like you need to upgrade in 3 years, you can't settle for the budget grade unless you're still gaming at 1080p. I wouldn't recommend spending under $3,000 for a gaming PC these days, and that's just an absurd price.
- Brybry 4mo ago
  There's nothing wrong with 1080p gaming though. You can get a $200 to $300 microcenter cpu+motherboard+16GB DDR5 bundle [1], then $300-$400 GPU, and you'll be able to play nearly every game on the market just fine at 1080p. I'm sure there are pre-builts using stockpiled RAM that are similar $1000 price range. And if you buy used you can do even better. $300-400 might get you a 5060 or a 9060XT right now [2][3] but if you go used you can get something like a 3080 instead. I play games at 1080p with a 1660 Ti and, outside of some newer UE5 games that heavily rely on frame gen for performance (Monster Hunter Wilds performance was too poor to play), everything I've thrown at it has been playable and some games even 100+ FPS. [1] https://www.microcenter.com/site/content/bundle-and-save.aspx https://www.microcenter.com/site/content/bundle-and-save.asp... [2] https://pcpartpicker.com/products/video-card/#c=594,593&sort=price&page=1 https://pcpartpicker.com/products/video-card/#c=594,593&sort... [3] https://pcpartpicker.com/products/video-card/#c=596&sort=price https://pcpartpicker.com/products/video-card/#c=596&sort=pri...
  - wing-_-nuts 4mo ago
    There's not necessarily anything wrong with gaming at 1080p, but I shudder to recommend anyone use a 1080p display for productivity. I feel like 27" 1440p is a good minimum experience. I also think that you're doing yourself a disservice going with an 8GB gpu in 2026, even for 1080p
    - SapporoChris 4mo ago
      How do you reconcile your comment with the fact that computers were used productively for decades before the invention of 1080p and larger formats.
      - saltcured 4mo ago
        Approximately the same way we reconcile with centuries of scribes being productive with quills and velum?
      - acdha 4mo ago
        We also have decade of studies showing that one of the best ways to boost productivity is to give people more screen real estate. This was true in the 80s, it was true in the 90s, and it didn’t really seem to plateau until something like 5-6K displays. The only reason people didn’t use bigger displays back then was due to the cost — a friend’s dad ran a prints go in the 90s and he really benefited from a display big enough to fit a whole page legibly, but that and an 11x17 printer cost enough that he needed a small business loan to buy them. He could justify it on productivity grounds but most people just accepted the hit.
        tree-hugger 4mo ago
        Do you have links to any of these studies? I'm curious since it does not align with my personal experience, I find myself most productive on my single 720p screen -- perhaps I am missing something?
        4mo ago
- wing-_-nuts 4mo ago
  I'm just trying to imagine what I would tell a younger cousin who was still in highschool. I'm not sure I could recommend they get into pc gaming the way things are now, and that makes me sad.
  - ahartmetz 4mo ago
    I would say there's a ton of great games made >= 5 years ago, almost all still available, and cheap :)
    - jopsen 4mo ago
      The games from 15-25 years ago are also great, especially the ones still available those are the good games. CS 1.5, OpenTTD, AoE2, the likes.. Fancier graphics doesn't make games better. Gameplay, stories and jokes do.
      - Sohcahtoa82 4mo ago
        Fancy graphics won't make a bad game good, but they'll make a great game into a cinematic masterpiece. Examples: Cyberpunk 2077 (Once all the bugs were worked out, I recognize it was dogshit on release), Baldur's Gate 3, Expedition 33. Would they be great games even with 15-year old graphical fidelity? Sure. But the stunning graphics definitely elevates the experience, especially in the case of Cyberpunk 2077. When you have the hardware to run everything maxed out, it's damn nearly photographic. It made me truly feel immersed in the game world in a way no other game has achieved, and I've played lots of VR games.
        ahartmetz 4mo ago
        Also, fancy 2D graphics were possible decades ago. Only fancy 3D graphics have serious requirements for today's hardware.
- nekooooo 4mo ago
  you've 'upgraded' the same pc since a 486? i really can't believe that unless you're counting your mouse and keyboard.
  - Sohcahtoa82 4mo ago
    > you've 'upgraded' the same pc since a 486? Yes. The most I've ever replaced all at once is the CPU/mobo/RAM trifecta. But even when I do that, I still kept the same storage, case, GPU, PSU, mouse/keyboard, etc. But otherwise, upgrades are piecemeal. New storage when my current storage is full or I want to upgrade to a new technology. New GPU when I feel like my current one is holding me back. New mouse or keyboard when my current one starts failing. The CPU/mobo/RAM trifecta when the performance gains make it worthwhile, which at this point is about every 5 years. I'm not sure why this is hard to believe.
    - saltcured 4mo ago
      I get it, the Beige Box of Theseus. I guess most would probably assume at least one epic refresh where there wasn't really anything carried across except maybe the parking spot on your desk. And since the 486 era, most probably expect your desk and/or physical site changed too. There were so many potential PC era boundaries like case and motherboard form factors, external peripheral buses, HDD controller types, expansion card buses, cooling and PSU demands, socket/RAM formats, display types, and display connection types, ... So many opportunities to think, "this seems like a time for a clean slate." If for no other reason than to bring up the new computer and have the old continue in transition or as some kind of spare, backup, or hand-me-down.
      - Sohcahtoa82 4mo ago
        > There were so many potential PC era boundaries like case and motherboard form factors Only one change really from AT/Baby AT to ATX. We've been on ATX now for 30 years. I could grab an A-Bit BH6 motherboard from 1998 and put it in my modern Hyte Y60 case if I wanted to. > external peripheral buses Since we're talking starting from 486 era, that only means going from PS/2 to USB for keyboard/mouse, parallel port for your printer, maybe serial port for a modem. During the transition period, adapters were cheap and common. > HDD controller types, [..], display connection types. I don't know about the ESDI to IDE transition, but I know from IDE/PATA to SATA there was a period where motherboards had both. During the transition from VGA to DVI, then DVI to DisplayPort, GPUs had both. > cooling and PSU demands If you overbuy on the PSU a little, you can get a ton of futureproofing. CPUs came with stock coolers until just a few years ago. > socket/RAM formats Which is why the CPU/mobo/RAM upgrade was typically done as a trifecta. > So many opportunities to think, "this seems like a time for a clean slate." Never felt the need. As mentioned above, there was frequently a transition period for when hardware supported both old and new tech.
- stodor89 4mo ago
  > unless you're still gaming at 1080p I think modern rendering techniques need more pixels. 1440p should be considered bare minimum, and 4K the norm. Unfortunately, the prices are what they are. On the flipside, being a low-spec gamer is better than ever. Indies, oldies, mods... all in great shape.
- dayjaby 4mo ago
  > I wouldn't recommend spending under $3,000 for a gaming PC these days Alternative wording: You recommend to spend more than $3000? There are people out there who don't toss money around as if it's an endless commodity. I spent a friction of that for gaming computers in my entire life.
cromka 4mo ago
> pc gaming being a 'prosumer' hobby, As much as I hate to say it, the move at this point is GeForce Now, at least for the time being... I just subscribed to the 200 USD/year Ultimate plan with a free 007 game. My ping to the datacenter is a mere 5ms, with 5080, RTX, 4k@60Hz (which my projector can drive) I am getting way more performance and similar latency than I would if I were using my own, semi-affordable rig or even a PS5. It's mind-blowing, really, and I recommend anyone to at least give it a try. If I take out the cost of that 007 game, that plan i 140 USD a year. If you consider the cost of the electricity, it alone would likely cover it. In the past one would typically include hardware depreciation cost in such calculations to drive the point home...but the 3-4k USD I am not spending spending on a similar rig alone can generate me some 100-150 USD in bank over a year – not to mention the inflation! So, all in all, it's basically free, comparatively speaking.
- HumanOstrich 4mo ago
  Great if you have fiber and live down the road from the datacenter.
  - cromka 4mo ago
    I'm actually some 200 miles from the data center, but Nvidia has been doing a stellar job in connecting to the backbones of all the major ISPs around. If I actually lived down the road from them, it would be as low as 1 to 2ms, as reported by plenty of users. This isn't uncommon, especially in the EU. But yeah, you need a fiber.
  - soulofmischief 4mo ago
    I routinely use it over a 5G mobile connection, often while moving, far from any datacenter, and it's usually fine as long as my signal is good. They do a fantastic job out of squeezing what they can from your connection.
- soulofmischief 4mo ago
  It makes economic sense. A lot of my gaming happens on GeForce Now. At home, I am still rocking a plain old GTX 1080 with an i7 6700k, it's still kicking ass a decade later and plays most of what I throw at it, and I have an M-Series MBP for work, though it's capable of running plenty modern titles on Ultra. My Steam Deck absorbs the majority of my local gaming, however, even though I have to run games at lower spec. It's just an extremely convenient device and I dock it to my projector, which I run at 1080p@240Hz anyway because I prefer it over 4K@60Hz. For things the deck can't handle though, GeForce Now rocks. If the Steam Machine doesn't become too expensive, I might snag one and a Steam Frame headset as well, and that will probably have me set through any impending breakdown in the supply chain for at least a decade. I'll probably be rocking this GTX 1080 until 2040, the way things are going.

davey48016 4mo ago

Nvidia already has a PC gaming streaming service that integrates with your steam library and a couple other launchers' libraries.

Sohcahtoa82 4mo ago

https://pcpartpicker.com/user/Sohcahtoa82/saved/n76zkL https://pcpartpicker.com/user/Sohcahtoa82/saved/n76zkL I think I paid a total of around $5,500 for the current components of my PC. Hard to say for sure since my PC has been a Ship of Theseus for over 30 years and started as a 486. The link merely reflects its current state. At one point, PCPartPicker was showing my PC as worth $11,000. It's now at $7,200 without including the RAM or PSU. That would put it at $9,000. > It's a clear sign that we're back to the bad old days of pc gaming being a 'prosumer' hobby Yup. I think it's especially bad since the gap between budget-grade and mid-grade feels like it's gotten wide. If you wanna play the latest AAA games and not feel like you need to upgrade in 3 years, you can't settle for the budget grade unless you're still gaming at 1080p. I wouldn't recommend spending under $3,000 for a gaming PC these days, and that's just an absurd price.

Brybry 4mo ago
There's nothing wrong with 1080p gaming though. You can get a $200 to $300 microcenter cpu+motherboard+16GB DDR5 bundle [1], then $300-$400 GPU, and you'll be able to play nearly every game on the market just fine at 1080p. I'm sure there are pre-builts using stockpiled RAM that are similar $1000 price range. And if you buy used you can do even better. $300-400 might get you a 5060 or a 9060XT right now [2][3] but if you go used you can get something like a 3080 instead. I play games at 1080p with a 1660 Ti and, outside of some newer UE5 games that heavily rely on frame gen for performance (Monster Hunter Wilds performance was too poor to play), everything I've thrown at it has been playable and some games even 100+ FPS. [1] https://www.microcenter.com/site/content/bundle-and-save.aspx https://www.microcenter.com/site/content/bundle-and-save.asp... [2] https://pcpartpicker.com/products/video-card/#c=594,593&sort=price&page=1 https://pcpartpicker.com/products/video-card/#c=594,593&sort... [3] https://pcpartpicker.com/products/video-card/#c=596&sort=price https://pcpartpicker.com/products/video-card/#c=596&sort=pri...
- wing-_-nuts 4mo ago
  There's not necessarily anything wrong with gaming at 1080p, but I shudder to recommend anyone use a 1080p display for productivity. I feel like 27" 1440p is a good minimum experience. I also think that you're doing yourself a disservice going with an 8GB gpu in 2026, even for 1080p
  - SapporoChris 4mo ago
    How do you reconcile your comment with the fact that computers were used productively for decades before the invention of 1080p and larger formats.
    - saltcured 4mo ago
      Approximately the same way we reconcile with centuries of scribes being productive with quills and velum?
    - acdha 4mo ago
      We also have decade of studies showing that one of the best ways to boost productivity is to give people more screen real estate. This was true in the 80s, it was true in the 90s, and it didn’t really seem to plateau until something like 5-6K displays. The only reason people didn’t use bigger displays back then was due to the cost — a friend’s dad ran a prints go in the 90s and he really benefited from a display big enough to fit a whole page legibly, but that and an 11x17 printer cost enough that he needed a small business loan to buy them. He could justify it on productivity grounds but most people just accepted the hit.
      - tree-hugger 4mo ago
        Do you have links to any of these studies? I'm curious since it does not align with my personal experience, I find myself most productive on my single 720p screen -- perhaps I am missing something?
        4mo ago
wing-_-nuts 4mo ago
I'm just trying to imagine what I would tell a younger cousin who was still in highschool. I'm not sure I could recommend they get into pc gaming the way things are now, and that makes me sad.
- ahartmetz 4mo ago
  I would say there's a ton of great games made >= 5 years ago, almost all still available, and cheap :)
  - jopsen 4mo ago
    The games from 15-25 years ago are also great, especially the ones still available those are the good games. CS 1.5, OpenTTD, AoE2, the likes.. Fancier graphics doesn't make games better. Gameplay, stories and jokes do.
    - Sohcahtoa82 4mo ago
      Fancy graphics won't make a bad game good, but they'll make a great game into a cinematic masterpiece. Examples: Cyberpunk 2077 (Once all the bugs were worked out, I recognize it was dogshit on release), Baldur's Gate 3, Expedition 33. Would they be great games even with 15-year old graphical fidelity? Sure. But the stunning graphics definitely elevates the experience, especially in the case of Cyberpunk 2077. When you have the hardware to run everything maxed out, it's damn nearly photographic. It made me truly feel immersed in the game world in a way no other game has achieved, and I've played lots of VR games.
      - ahartmetz 4mo ago
        Also, fancy 2D graphics were possible decades ago. Only fancy 3D graphics have serious requirements for today's hardware.
nekooooo 4mo ago
you've 'upgraded' the same pc since a 486? i really can't believe that unless you're counting your mouse and keyboard.
- Sohcahtoa82 4mo ago
  > you've 'upgraded' the same pc since a 486? Yes. The most I've ever replaced all at once is the CPU/mobo/RAM trifecta. But even when I do that, I still kept the same storage, case, GPU, PSU, mouse/keyboard, etc. But otherwise, upgrades are piecemeal. New storage when my current storage is full or I want to upgrade to a new technology. New GPU when I feel like my current one is holding me back. New mouse or keyboard when my current one starts failing. The CPU/mobo/RAM trifecta when the performance gains make it worthwhile, which at this point is about every 5 years. I'm not sure why this is hard to believe.
  - saltcured 4mo ago
    I get it, the Beige Box of Theseus. I guess most would probably assume at least one epic refresh where there wasn't really anything carried across except maybe the parking spot on your desk. And since the 486 era, most probably expect your desk and/or physical site changed too. There were so many potential PC era boundaries like case and motherboard form factors, external peripheral buses, HDD controller types, expansion card buses, cooling and PSU demands, socket/RAM formats, display types, and display connection types, ... So many opportunities to think, "this seems like a time for a clean slate." If for no other reason than to bring up the new computer and have the old continue in transition or as some kind of spare, backup, or hand-me-down.
    - Sohcahtoa82 4mo ago
      > There were so many potential PC era boundaries like case and motherboard form factors Only one change really from AT/Baby AT to ATX. We've been on ATX now for 30 years. I could grab an A-Bit BH6 motherboard from 1998 and put it in my modern Hyte Y60 case if I wanted to. > external peripheral buses Since we're talking starting from 486 era, that only means going from PS/2 to USB for keyboard/mouse, parallel port for your printer, maybe serial port for a modem. During the transition period, adapters were cheap and common. > HDD controller types, [..], display connection types. I don't know about the ESDI to IDE transition, but I know from IDE/PATA to SATA there was a period where motherboards had both. During the transition from VGA to DVI, then DVI to DisplayPort, GPUs had both. > cooling and PSU demands If you overbuy on the PSU a little, you can get a ton of futureproofing. CPUs came with stock coolers until just a few years ago. > socket/RAM formats Which is why the CPU/mobo/RAM upgrade was typically done as a trifecta. > So many opportunities to think, "this seems like a time for a clean slate." Never felt the need. As mentioned above, there was frequently a transition period for when hardware supported both old and new tech.
stodor89 4mo ago
> unless you're still gaming at 1080p I think modern rendering techniques need more pixels. 1440p should be considered bare minimum, and 4K the norm. Unfortunately, the prices are what they are. On the flipside, being a low-spec gamer is better than ever. Indies, oldies, mods... all in great shape.
dayjaby 4mo ago
> I wouldn't recommend spending under $3,000 for a gaming PC these days Alternative wording: You recommend to spend more than $3000? There are people out there who don't toss money around as if it's an endless commodity. I spent a friction of that for gaming computers in my entire life.

cromka 4mo ago

> pc gaming being a 'prosumer' hobby, As much as I hate to say it, the move at this point is GeForce Now, at least for the time being... I just subscribed to the 200 USD/year Ultimate plan with a free 007 game. My ping to the datacenter is a mere 5ms, with 5080, RTX, 4k@60Hz (which my projector can drive) I am getting way more performance and similar latency than I would if I were using my own, semi-affordable rig or even a PS5. It's mind-blowing, really, and I recommend anyone to at least give it a try. If I take out the cost of that 007 game, that plan i 140 USD a year. If you consider the cost of the electricity, it alone would likely cover it. In the past one would typically include hardware depreciation cost in such calculations to drive the point home...but the 3-4k USD I am not spending spending on a similar rig alone can generate me some 100-150 USD in bank over a year – not to mention the inflation! So, all in all, it's basically free, comparatively speaking.

HumanOstrich 4mo ago
Great if you have fiber and live down the road from the datacenter.
- cromka 4mo ago
  I'm actually some 200 miles from the data center, but Nvidia has been doing a stellar job in connecting to the backbones of all the major ISPs around. If I actually lived down the road from them, it would be as low as 1 to 2ms, as reported by plenty of users. This isn't uncommon, especially in the EU. But yeah, you need a fiber.
- soulofmischief 4mo ago
  I routinely use it over a 5G mobile connection, often while moving, far from any datacenter, and it's usually fine as long as my signal is good. They do a fantastic job out of squeezing what they can from your connection.
soulofmischief 4mo ago
It makes economic sense. A lot of my gaming happens on GeForce Now. At home, I am still rocking a plain old GTX 1080 with an i7 6700k, it's still kicking ass a decade later and plays most of what I throw at it, and I have an M-Series MBP for work, though it's capable of running plenty modern titles on Ultra. My Steam Deck absorbs the majority of my local gaming, however, even though I have to run games at lower spec. It's just an extremely convenient device and I dock it to my projector, which I run at 1080p@240Hz anyway because I prefer it over 4K@60Hz. For things the deck can't handle though, GeForce Now rocks. If the Steam Machine doesn't become too expensive, I might snag one and a Steam Frame headset as well, and that will probably have me set through any impending breakdown in the supply chain for at least a decade. I'll probably be rocking this GTX 1080 until 2040, the way things are going.