Support NeoGAF

[TheHeretic]

Tbh, to me it seems like a far better idea to buy price/performance and upgrade earlier than to try to future proof something. From my experience in the past, the time both builds last really doesn't differ all that much, and there really aren't very many components you can reuse (pretty much only the PSU/case and peripherals). Man do I regret spending a fuckton in the past, and seeing my friends who spent half lasting almost as long with their builds :/.

.

 

[Epix]

Lets put it like this.

You buy DDR2 ram now.

I buy DDR3 ram now.

In three years when you need to upgrade, because your CPU, motherboard, chipset, and the entire LGA775 boards are no longer supported. You will be buying DDR5 ram.

When I upgrade in three years because my CPU, Motherboard, chipset and entire LGA775 board is not supported, I will be buying DDR5 ram. Spending over $100.

Tell me what makes more sense.

fixed.

*Slowly backing out of thread...*

 

[Kabouter]

Lets put it like this.

You buy DDR2 ram now.

I buy DDR3 ram now.

In two years when you need to upgrade, because your CPU, motherboard, chipset, and the entire LGA775 boards are no longer supported. You will be buying DDR3 ram.

When I upgrade in two years because my CPU, Motherboard, chipset and entire LGA775 board is not supported, I WON'T be buying ram. Saving over $100.

Well, given that the price gap between good DDR2 and good DDR3 RAM right now seems to be around 100-120 euros, I think spending that even two years from now will see a lot more benefit than spending the extra stuff now . Not to mention, those motherboards/CPU's won't be in quite the same price bracket I'm buying in now . So the discussion really isn't very relevant .

 

[Blackface]

I'm not sure if you're understanding me.

What you're describing:

Buy 4GB DDR3 for $100 premium, use it for 4 years (maybe have it not be enough,) then use it in the new build

What I'm saying 1):

Buy 4GB DDR2, use it for 4 years (maybe have it not be enough,) then buy faster DDR3 RAM (faster than 1333 MHz) and use it in the new build.


What I'm saying 2):

Buy 8GB DDR2, use it for 4 years (unless something strange happens, should be adequate,) then buy faster DDR3 RAM and use it in the new build.

EDIT: Whoa whoa, do you think DDR3 prices will stay stagnant for 2 years?

DDR3 prices are already dropping. Last year finding a 4gb kit of DDR3 ram for $200, was harder then finding a Unicorn.

What you said would make sense, if it was the start of DDR2.

It isn't.

NOBODY will be using DDR2 for four years. People have ALREADY been using it for 4 years.

You are tell me DDR2 will be used for 8 years?

new motherboards won't even support DDR2 this time next year.

DDR3 is the new ram. It's just a fact.

Just like socket 939 motherboards don't exist, or new motherboards for high end rigss that support DDR ram.

It just won't work that way.

 

[Blackface]

Well, given that the price gap between good DDR2 and good DDR3 RAM right now seems to be around 100-120 euros, I think spending that even two years from now will see a lot more benefit than spending the extra stuff now . Not to mention, those motherboards/CPU's won't be in quite the same price bracket I'm buying in now . So the discussion really isn't very relevant .

$132 For OCZ Reapers. DDR2 1066

Vs

$210 for 4gb of DDR3 Gskill DDR3 1333


The DDR2 ram won't be usable in new boards in a year.

The DDR3 will be usable for half a decade.

I don't get where this "faster ram in a couple years" shit comes from.

There are two speeds of DDR2 ram that have existed in five years.

When you buy DDR2 1066 it's PC6400 that is under warrenty if you OVERCLOCK it to 1066.

It's not 1066 when you put it in the motherboard. It's still PC6400 ram.

It's just RAM that the company knows can be overclocked to a certain extent, and keeps it under warranty.

If you are overclocking your system, Ram makes a huge difference, as you need to keep timings in the same range.

Considering the I7 has an on die memory controller, which means you can't UNLINK the ram in your BIOS, having 1333 means you can overclock higher, without worrying about FSB issues.

 

[otake]

Looked at this:
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/nvidia-gtx-280,1953.html

Sounds like the latest nVidia chips don't compare so favorably with ATI. I really would rather get nVidia due to Linux drivers and stuff like X-Plane that's designed with it in mind.

ati just released a new binary driver for linux that enables crossfire and overdrive. been using the previous driver with my 4870 for a few weeks now. it's great.

 

[Kabouter]

$132 For OCZ Reapers. DDR2 1066

1066MHz memory here: €100
Edit: Sorry, that was more expensive Corsair RAM. It's €90

$210 for 4gb of DDR3 Gskill DDR3 1333

€200

The DDR2 ram won't be usable in new boards in a year.

That's why I spent very little on both the board and the RAM. Not to mention the CPU. That would be very different with the I7.

The DDR3 will be usable for half a decade.

And will be like DDR2 PC2-4200 is now.

 

[zoku88]

DDR3 prices are already dropping. Last year finding a 4gb kit of DDR3 ram for $200, was harder then finding a Unicorn.

What you said would make sense, if it was the start of DDR2.

It isn't.

NOBODY will be using DDR2 for four years. People have ALREADY been using it for 4 years.

You are tell me DDR2 will be used for 8 years?

new motherboards won't even support DDR2 this time next year.

DDR3 is the new ram. It's just a fact.

Just like socket 939 motherboards don't exist, or new motherboards for high end rigss that support DDR ram.

It just won't work that way.

It doesn't matter what everyone else uses.

This is about future proofing his current computer. When he's done with this one, he's most likely getting a totally new computer. New RAM (faster than 1333MHz for sure,) new gfx card, new CPU, everything. And by that time DDR3 will be cheap.

I'm not sure how you think that your suggestion is saving him money. At best, it's probably costing him the same amount for worse RAM at the very end.

 

[Jirotrom]

Hey guys, just wondering as to how high I can overclock my e8400, w/o upping the voltage? SAme goes for my 4870.... I have that up to max in the catylyst control center. I have a Freezer 7 pro on my CPU.

 

[Epix]

Hey guys, just wondering as to how high I can overclock my e8400, w/o upping the voltage? SAme goes for my 4870.... I have that up to max in the catylyst control center. I have a Freezer 7 pro on my CPU.

It's going to be different for each person as it depends on the physical properties of the components involved. You'll know you're there when you OC to the point where it's not stable until you up the voltage.

 

[Blackface]

It doesn't matter what everyone else uses.

This is about future proofing his current computer. When he's done with this one, he's most likely getting a totally new computer. New RAM (faster than 1333MHz for sure,) new gfx card, new CPU, everything. And by that time DDR3 will be cheap.

I'm not sure how you think that your suggestion is saving him money. At best, it's probably costing him the same amount for worse RAM at the very end.

The one I built him will be able to play games fore years and years to come at high resolutions.

Buying on a budget is great if you want to rebuild every-year. Many people don't want to.

A $900 computer will be fucking garbage by the time a $1800 becomes mid-range.

We are at the end of a generation.

 

[Epix]

The one I built him will be able to play games fore years and years to come at high resolutions.

A computer for $900 will be great for a year. Thats about it. Thats $900 spent not including Vista or a monitor.

We are at the end of a generation.

I built a $900 comp 2 months ago that will last me probably 3 years.

 

[zoku88]

The one I built him will be able to play games fore years and years to come at high resolutions.

A computer for $900 will be great for a year. Thats about it. Thats $900 spent not including Vista or a monitor.

We are at the end of a generation.

The computer you recommended, switched from DDR3 to DDR2 RAM will last exactly the same length.

EDIT: And you're kidding yourself with the 'high resolution' thing. He'll have to decrease his resolution eventually, just like everyone eventually has to....

 

[Jirotrom]

It's going to be different for each person as it depends on the physical properties of the components involved. You'll know you're there when you OC to the point where it's not stable until you up the voltage.

well my CPU is a 3.6 and its just fine... my GPU is at 790/1100 and its fine...

 

[Kabouter]

The one I built him will be able to play games fore years and years to come at high resolutions.

A computer for $900 will be great for a year. Thats about it. Thats $900 spent not including Vista or a monitor.

We are at the end of a generation.

A year? Come on, get out :lol
You think starting from fall 2009 games will suck running on an HD4870 or HD4850?
The developers that put out games like that, really aren't going to be selling very many copies of their games :lol
http://www.steampowered.com/status/survey.html < This is who they develop for, shocker, it's not the super high-end quad core /w crossfire graphics cards crowd!

 

[Blackface]

I built a $900 comp 2 months ago that will last me probably 3 years.

Can you play Crysis on Very high at 1080p? If not, it will last 3 years, playing games on low settings by the second.

Much like your not playing games with everything maxed out on a 7900 256mb card.

 

[Blackface]

A year? Come on, get out :lol
You think starting from fall 2009 games will suck running on an HD4870 or HD4850?
The developers that put out games like that, really aren't going to be selling very many copies of their games :lol

Considering a 4870 can't play a game that game out in 2007 on max settings. It's not a far stretch of the imagination.

The 4870 will play games. Just not at fantastic settings, or high resolutions.

 

[Epix]

Can you play Crysis on Very high at 1080p? If not, it will last 3 years, playing games on low settings by the second.

Much like your not playing games with everything maxed out and a 7900 256mb card.

Haven't tried Crysis. Getting 150fps in WoW (max settings 1920x1080), 120fps HL2:ep2 (max setting 1920x1080), 95 fps in Bioshock (max settings 1920x1080) yada yada.

 

[Blackface]

Haven't tried Crysis. Getting 150fps in WoW (max settings 1920x1080), 120fps HL2:ep2 (max setting 1920x1080), 95 fps in Bioshock (max settings 1920x1080) yada yada.

Those are all older games. Wow is 4 years old. Half life 2 is using an engine as old as Wow.

These aren't games that are out in a year, or two. Obviously a $900 computer now will play games at high settings. Especially older games.

Also, the answer to you playing 1080p Crysis with max settings is no. Only one card can do this.

 

[zoku88]

Can you play Crysis on Very high at 1080p? If not, it will last 3 years, playing games on low settings by the second.

Much like your not playing games with everything maxed out and a 7900 256mb card.

1080p? Who does 16x9 with a computer? ;P

How does the 4870X2 do on very high?

oh....

 

[Kabouter]

1080p? Who does 16x9 with a computer? ;P

How does the 4870X2 do on very high?

oh....

You need to put those beasts in crossfire. Then you're futureproofed.
I'm not seeing the "512MB is useless on high resolutions right now" thing from those benches either btw.

 

[Blackface]

1080p? Who does 16x9 with a computer? ;P

How does the 4870X2 do on very high?

oh....

You mean beats every single card on the market?

Also who games at 1080p? Tons of people. People who use monitor proven HDTV's for high resolutions. Also, in 2 years 1900X1200 will be the standard. Not 1680X1050. Good luck with 512mb of video memory on that.

 

[Nemo]

Okay, after a big hiatus (four years) from my hardcore PC gaming. I'm finally coming back. Just making final preparations and buying the following rig in a month or so. What I got:

Graphic card - Sapphire HD 4850 512MB GDDR3 PCI-E
Processor - Intel Core 2 Duo E8400
Motherboard - Asus P5Q-E
RAM - Corsair XMS2 TWIN2X4096-6400C5 4GB
PSU - Corsair CMPSU-650TX

Total comes on about 600 euros. Not bad methinks. Few question though.

1. Is the 4870 (or GT260? What's this about Physx I keep reading?) worth the extra 50 bucks? I'm not planning on playing on high resolutions. x1050 is probably good enough.
2. Should I change anything? Quad isn't important for gaming in the next 2/3 years right?
3. Is any of the above hardware going to drop in price anytime soon?

Thanks in advance!

 

[Epix]

Those are all older games. Wow is 4 years old. Half life 2 is using an engine as old as Wow.

These aren't games that are out in a year, or two. Obviously a $900 computer now will play games at high settings. Especially older games.

Also, the answer to you playing 1080p Crysis with max settings is no. Only one card can do this.

You act like everyone wants to play Crysis. And didn't Bioshock come out less than a year ago?

 

[Kabouter]

You mean beats every single card on the market?

You mean less than 30fps average?
I'd order two Trax, I mean, how futureproofed is your build if you can't even run a game released in 2007 at max settings? And hell, that isn't even with any AA on!

 

[TheHeretic]

27 average FPS isn't even playable. You'll easily spike down into the teens.

 

[Kabouter]

27 average FPS isn't even playable. You'll easily spike down into the teens.

Doesn't fps go down too as you progress through the game? As in, the game gets more demanding?

 

[Epix]

You mean less than 30fps average?
I'd order two Trax, I mean, how futureproofed is your build if you can't even run a game released in 2007 at max settings? And hell, that isn't even with any AA on!

No shit. Sounds like his build is already outdated.

IMO Crysis needs to be thrown out as ammunition for these discussions. It's in it's own unique category being that no computer out within the same calendar year as it's release is going to be handle it at max settings. I wouldn't classify a build as poor if it can't handle Crysis if it's able to tear threw everything else.

 

[Blackface]

You mean less than 30fps average?

X2's mature drivers aren't out.

http://www.driverheaven.net/reviews.php?reviewid=607&pageid=10

39 FPS average.

People need to learn about computers before talking.

ATI doesn't have it's mature drivers out yet. which will boost performance.

AS it is, 4870X2 is the best card money can buy.

 

[zoku88]

Trax, you know that part of the definition of average = x means that half of the stats are equal or below x. 24 fps is the bare minimum to recognize as motion. That means, there are a lot of sections during that test that were under what would be recognized as motion.

 

[Blackface]

You act like everyone wants to play Crysis. And didn't Bioshock come out less than a year ago?

Nobody is arguing your 900 computer can't play games that came out before you built it. :lol

 

[VictimOfGrief]

I find the bickering between you two quite entertaining.


Let's try and break this down in to "smaller" terms.

If you spend more up front now, you offset the cost later.

If you spend less up front now, you increase the cost for later.


The point being:

You buy $200+ dollar DDR3 ram now on a X series board now and be able to use it for the next-generation of motherboards.

You buy $75-100 dollar DDR2 ram, you're stuck in this generation and end up having to buy more RAM and eating the cost of your DDR2 RAM in favor of DDR3 memory which by then will be the norm.


If by chance there's any question to what I just typed above..... take the evening off.

 

[Blackface]

Trax, you know that part of the definition of average = x means that half of the stats are equal or below x. 24 fps is the bare minimum to recognize as motion. That means, there are a lot of sections during that test that were under what would be recognized as motion.

You obviously didn't read this thread, as I talked about how Min FPS is what you go by when looking at cards.

It averages 39FPS. The max fps is 54. at 1900X1200.

This is with old drivers. Not new drivers that increase performance.

Did you just start getting into computers? Do you not remember the 3870X2?

 

[Broktune]

First off. I know shit compared to you guys about pc's. I don't know how to build one and I don't know anyone that does. I just want to go in and buy a decent computer that will play the new games on a high setting. I was looking at this one. It's that Gateway FX model they have at Best Buy for 1100 bucks. Is this a decent deal/computer? Or is there a better option out there besides this one for the money? Thanks for any response

Intel® Core™2 Quad processor Q9300 with 4 processing cores, 1333MHz frontside bus, 2 x 3MB L2 cache and 2.5GHz processor speed per core

6GB PC2-5300 DDR2 memory for multitasking power; expandable to 8GB
Multiformat DVD±RW/CD-RW drive with double-layer support records up to 8.5GB of data or 4 hours of video using compatible DVD+R DL and DVD-R DL media; supports DVD-RAM; also supports Labelflash direct-disc labels using compatible Labelflash media

The Intel® Core™2 Quad processor delivers 4 complete execution cores in 1 processor for better multitasking and multithreaded performance; Intel® Smart Memory Access optimizes data bandwidth to accelerate and improve instruction throughput
Intel® Advanced Digital Media Boost accelerates the execution of Streaming SIMD Extension (SSE) instructions to significantly improve the Media Boost performance on a broad range of applications, including video, audio, image and photo processing

640GB Serial ATA II hard drive (7200 rpm); eSATA port

NVIDIA GeForce 9800 GT over-clocked graphics with 512MB on-board memory and DirectX 10 support; S-video output, HDMI and 2 DVI interfaces; high-definition audio (8-speaker support)

 

[Blackface]

I find the bickering between you two quite entertaining.


Let's try and break this down in to "smaller" terms.

If you spend more up front now, you offset the cost later.

If you spend less up front now, you increase the cost for later.


The point being:

You buy $200+ dollar DDR3 ram now on a X series board now and be able to use it for the next-generation of motherboards.

You buy $75-100 dollar DDR2 ram, you're stuck in this generation and end up having to buy more RAM and eating the cost of your DDR2 RAM in favor of DDR3 memory which by then will be the norm.

If by chance there's any question to what I just typed above..... take the evening off.

Exactly. It's not a hard concept. Seriously.....

 

[zoku88]

You obviously didn't read this thread, as I talked about how Min FPS is what you go by when looking at cards.

So basically, you say that with that one benchmark you showed us, you discredit both of the two previous benchmarks (one of which you posted.) That doesn't make sense to me...

Exactly. It's not a hard concept. Seriously.....

Of course, that's not including that when you buy the DDR3 RAM later, it will most likely be faster...with lower latency...

 

[TheHeretic]

I find the bickering between you two quite entertaining.

Let's try and break this down in to "smaller" terms.

If you sphttp://www.neogaf.com/forum/usercp.phpend more up front now, you offset the cost later.

If you spend less up front now, you increase the cost for later.

The point being:

You buy $200+ dollar DDR3 ram now on a X series board now and be able to use it for the next-generation of motherboards.

You buy $75-100 dollar DDR2 ram, you're stuck in this generation and end up having to buy more RAM and eating the cost of your DDR2 RAM in favor of DDR3 memory which by then will be the norm.

If by chance there's any question to what I just typed above..... take the evening off.

Its still wrong. Theres no reason to think newer boards won't support DDR2, nor is there any reason to think DDR3 with shit timings will be good enough 4 years form now.

Sorry, no. DDR3 is shit and theres no good reason to buy it. It doesn't offer performance increases now, theres no reason to think it will 4 years from now.

 

[Epix]

I find the bickering between you two quite entertaining.


Let's try and break this down in to "smaller" terms.

If you spend more up front now, you offset the cost later.

If you spend less up front now, you increase the cost for later.

Typically, this is true but you're going to hit a wall of diminishing returns when it comes to electronics very quickly.

If a typical modern day computer costs $1000 dollars and lasts 3 yrs, you can't decide to build a $3000 dollar computer and expect it to last 9 years. Jus don't work dat way.

 

[Blackface]

First off. I know shit compared to you guys about pc's. I don't know how to build one and I don't know anyone that does. I just want to go in and buy a decent computer that will play the new games on a high setting. I was looking at this one. It's that Gateway FX model they have at Best Buy for 1100 bucks. Is this a decent deal/computer? Or is there a better option out there besides this one for the money? Thanks for any response

Intel® Core™2 Quad processor Q9300 with 4 processing cores, 1333MHz frontside bus, 2 x 3MB L2 cache and 2.5GHz processor speed per core

6GB PC2-5300 DDR2 memory for multitasking power; expandable to 8GB
Multiformat DVD±RW/CD-RW drive with double-layer support records up to 8.5GB of data or 4 hours of video using compatible DVD+R DL and DVD-R DL media; supports DVD-RAM; also supports Labelflash direct-disc labels using compatible Labelflash media

The Intel® Core™2 Quad processor delivers 4 complete execution cores in 1 processor for better multitasking and multithreaded performance; Intel® Smart Memory Access optimizes data bandwidth to accelerate and improve instruction throughput
Intel® Advanced Digital Media Boost accelerates the execution of Streaming SIMD Extension (SSE) instructions to significantly improve the Media Boost performance on a broad range of applications, including video, audio, image and photo processing

640GB Serial ATA II hard drive (7200 rpm); eSATA port

NVIDIA GeForce 9800 GT over-clocked graphics with 512MB on-board memory and DirectX 10 support; S-video output, HDMI and 2 DVI interfaces; high-definition audio (8-speaker support)

You are overpaying by a ton.

 

[Blackface]

Typically, this is true but you're going to hit a wall of diminishing returns when it comes to electronics very quickly.

If a typical modern day computer costs $1000 dollars and lasts 3 yrs, you can't decide to build a $3000 dollar computer and expect it to last 9 years. Jus don't work dat way.

Everyhting I bought him was modest, outside of the Ram, Graphic card, and PSU.

The PSU he can use for half a decade.

The DDR3 he can use for many years. It will be cheaper in the long run then 8gb of DDR2 ram that give him no performance boost right now and cost AS MUCH as the DDR3 ram.

The graphic card will still be fantastic even 2 years from now. It also works well with high resolution, and does not take AA hits.

 

[Epix]

Nobody is arguing your 900 computer can't play games that came out before you built it. :lol

Ok now you're starting to act like a fuck douche. HL2:Ep2 is less than a year old. Bioshock is less than a year old. My comp tears through both. You're trying to convince some guy to spend upwards of 2k for a build that runs Crysis at 30fps if you're lucky. He needs to seek a second opinion. :lol

 

[Kabouter]

I find the bickering between you two quite entertaining.

Haha, I was just having some fun, I don't even really play the type of games you'd buy a 4870X2 for anymore :lol

 

[TheHeretic]

Everyhting I bought him was modest, outside of the Ram, Graphic card, and PSU.

The PSU he can use for half a decade.

The DDR3 he can use for many years. It will be cheaper in the long run then 8gb of DDR2 ram that give him no performance boost right now and cost AS MUCH as the DDR3 ram.

The graphic card will still be fantastic even 2 years from now. It also works well with high resolution, and does not take AA hits.

So magically the same RAM that does nothing today will start doing something 4 years from now. Thats the crux of your argument and its retarded.

 

[VictimOfGrief]

Its still wrong. Theres no reason to think newer boards won't support DDR2, nor is there any reason to think DDR3 with shit timings will be good enough 4 years form now.

Sorry, no. DDR3 is shit and theres no good reason to buy it. It doesn't offer performance increases now, theres no reason to think it will 4 years from now.

You're joking right?

I bet you said the same thing about DDR2 huh? :lol

 

[Blackface]

Ok now you're starting to act like a fuck douche. HL2:Ep2 is less than a year old. Bioshock is less than a year old. My comp tears through both. You're trying to convince some guy to spend upwards of 2k for a build that runs Crysis at 30fps if you're lucky. :lol

I am not convincing him. he said his budget was $2200. So I built him a computer for $1880.

HL2: Ep2 is less then a year old, running on a four year old engine.

Maybe I should brag about how awesome my computer is because I can play Quake Live at 300FPS. I mean, the game ISN'T EVEN OUT YET.

The point is, I said your computer will be shit in two years. It will be considered low end in two years. Lower then budget.

This is a fact. Go look at low end PC's now, and some of them are better the computers created 2 years ago.

These are facts. You can think otherwise, but you are wrong. My computer, the one I am using now, that can play everything maxed out, will be a crappy Low end system by this time next year.

 

[zoku88]

You're joking right?

I bet you said the same thing about DDR2 huh? :lol

In context, it's pretty obvious that he's talking about the DDR3 kits available now, which offer very little performance increase in games...

Trax: I think you're a full. Just look at the past generation. 1.5 years. 8800 GTX (I'm not mentioning the Ultra...) was more or less the top dog. It can still play games on high.

 

[Blackface]

So magically the same RAM that does nothing today will start doing something 4 years from now. Thats the crux of your argument and its retarded.

It DOES do something today. Not only is it faster, but it allows you to OVERCLOCK higher and LINK your memory with your FSB giving you increased performance.

I am starting to think I am arguing with people from tomshardware.

The point is DDR2 will be found in the garbage at wal-mart a year from now.

The DDR3 ram I linked him, will be the standard. Everyone will be using it.

 

[TheHeretic]

You're joking right?

I bet you said the same thing about DDR2 huh? :lol

God these threads get annoying. The DDR3 you can buy now is shit. Whatever DDR3 RAM you can buy in the future is completely irrelevant.

Anyway what do I care. Go buy DDR3, who gives a shit. I certainly don't.

 

[Blackface]

God these threads get annoying. The DDR3 you can buy now is shit. Whatever DDR3 RAM you can buy in the future is completely irrelevant.

You should be banned for coming into a thread, not knowing anything you are talking about, and de-railing everything.

The DDR3 I linked is second generation ram.

DDR2 had only three generations in 5 years.

The computer the guy just linked above is worth $1100 and using DDR25300.

Do you not understand how ram works?

Most ram is the same, with slightly different timings. The PC6400 ram offered today, is the same shit offered 3 fucking YEARS ago.

There is no "faster ram". It's more overclockable ram with different chips.

I bet you are one of those people who buys PC8500 ram, and doesn't realize it's running at PC2-6400 speeds unless you manually go in and overclock it.

 

[zoku88]

The DDR3 ram I linked him, will be the standard. Everyone will be using it.

You don' seriously think DDR3 1333 MHz will be the standard configuration 4 YEARS from now. That's just silly.

Futhermore, the timings now will obviously be a lot worse than those in 4 years...

Trax: you're too simple. The Hz actually means something... you should look it up.