The Growth of PC Performance - Ending?

Hi, my name is Josh and this is my first post on CNET. As you may have guessed, I have joined because I am a PC Enthusiast, have been since I was 10, and I like to discuss PC topics. I have a genuinely interesting topic I would like to discuss. I truly believe PC performance has reached a tipping point, and that soon, we wont see enough growth in hardware speeds to justify upgrades but once a decade or so.

What leads me to believe this? I have a very old system, and while it may not keep up with todays Technology, it is a great system, and performs very well. Why dont I have a modern system? Simple, I dont have $1500-$2000 to drop on a gaming rig worth the money to justify its purchase.

How old is my system? Well its an AM3 (NOT AM3+) system running a Phenom II X4 970 Black Edition CPU, so its from 2010 or so. I bought it used off craigslist for $200, then threw in a used EVGA FTW 670 GTX I won off ebay for $50 and a $50 SSD for the OS. So for $300 I have a rig that runs AAA games at 1920x1080 on High settings.

So its a decent system, and 1080p HD resolution was only very recently outdated, and the majority of people still have 1080p TVs and Monitors, so its still current in a way, although surpassed.

So my 6 year old rig destroys my Xbox One in gaming performance (Sorry Microsoft, as much as I love everything you guys do, it must be embarrasing...) So whats the point of me saying this? Despite not having a modern rig, I keep up to date on all the latest PC technologies, and I have seen how fast a modern Intil i7-6700K on a modern platform can be. The fact of the matter is though, in terms of playability and fun, my rig isnt that far off his. I enjoy my experience on my rig, especially with my overclocking. 50 FPS is a breeze on High, and it never drops below 45.

However, I did see how good his rig really is. Its insanity... And Im sorry, but the insanity is going to be hard to be beaten, realistically, ever. Companies have just now begun discussing the possibility of DDR5 prototype memory, with first prototypes coming out in 2020, market availability could be as far as 2040. Why? Cost-to-performance Ratio. DDR4 already does exceptionally well, and is already future-proof. Companies have admitted that no game or software really utilizes even 8GB of RAM and they cant think of anything that ever will, and that 3000+ MHz is more than fast enough for any application or game, even Virtual Reality at 4K resolution. The idea of even beginning to work on DDR5 in the next 10 years is a silly prospect, at best. On top of this, enthusiasts who know their memory is enough, are not going to want to shell out money for something that wont help performance hardly at all. Software wont be ready to demand DDR5 technology for at least a decade, and even then it will only be RAM-Specific demanding applications that will even gain a benifit.

Still dont believe me? Look at the smartphone/portible device market. I have a OnePlus 2, featuring the same SnapDragon 810 Octa-Core as the Samsung Galaxy S6, and yet both the Galaxy S7 and OnePlus 3 have quad cores, why? Backwards? Yes, because Portible Device Manufactures realized their mistake - they pushed hardware too far, and were spending billions to manufacturer these models, when really, software for Portable Devices dont even utilize four cores at top speed, it never has, and they also realize no software on a portable device will need more than 4 cores for at least a decade or more. All I do with 4 of my cores is drain battery while they do little or nothing, sitting idle.

Then theres Gaming. What about GPUs? Well theres a bit of room for imporvement there, but not much, a single GTX 1080 handles 4K Like my Volkswagen GTI handles a 1980's Geo Metro. It doesnt even break a sweat, and does VR quite well. Once true 4K VR has been mastered, there wont be any technology made more demanding for... well who knows how long. Maybe Never, no companies are even really interested in going further, because 4K TVs are already so expensive and hardly sell.

So, if you have a decent CPU now (I would say 6 Threads of processing power should be good for awhile) at a decent clock speed (4.0+ GHz), it should theoretically be enough CPU power for 20 years or so (thats when software will finally catch up). The only thing stopping this is if, to keep production rolling, they purpusefully outdate motherboards and CPUs and RAM to FORCE us to purchase new ones.

Anyways, these are just my personal thoughs. PCs these days are instintanious loading and extremely powerful with a good 6-thread CPU, some DDR4 2800+ RAM, a Modern Motherboard, A GTX 1080 or dual RX 480's, and a good PSU. We all know its hard to imagine PCs getting any faster. My rig is plenty fast enough, and its 6 years old.

My personal recommended time to buy a new Rig? Q2 2017. AMD Zen will be around, and we all know how awesome that is going to be, they will finally put bully Intel in their place, with a 6 Core/12 Thread CPU projected to cost around $250. I like Intel CPUs, but we all know they are a coorporate bully, charging outrageous prices for their technology because they know they can, and they know people will spend it anyways, with AMD being so far behind. DDR3, in 2016? Please, my mothers computer had DDR3. Its that bad. But the value kings are about to take Intels face, place it on a curb, and run it over with a frieght truck. Oh, and AMD's Radeon Vega 10-Based GPUs roll out just after mid 2017. So you could keep your old 670 GTX for now, deal with it for a year, and buy a card that smashes a GTX 1080 for less than half the price, shortly after, and dominate the value category. I can pretty much guarentee after that point that a $1200 Mid-Price build will destroy a $2500 Intel build today.

Share your thoughts, I honestly wonder if anyone else thinks this way, or if theres a different thought out there.