This is something I've been wondering since I started to build my own computers. Is it better to make your systems future-proof (i.e. having the best/ top of the line hardware), or upgrade when it's really necessary (buying only the necessary hardware to "survive")? I'm trying to find a rule of thumb here for upgrading, considering the aspect of cost vs performance vs necessity. I am finding more and more that I don't need to buy all the latest/ current hardware to enjoy my computing experience. Hell, I'm writing this on an Athlon XP with 512 MB RAM, and I would only upgrade if, say, I couldn't run the latest version of Photoshop. I realize, though, that what you use the computer plays a significant part. It would be different, say, if you were using it to play current games, so I guess it's subjective in this sense.
I upgrade mine to be futureproof, but doing so is more expensive. It means I don't upgrade as often though. Mainly it depends on your budget and what you use the computer for.
actually u should try again lol my laptop spec is not much diffrent from yours 512ram duol core 1.6.it is still possible to run software like photoshop cs3 but it will start up very slow and possible lag since the recommended ram usage is 1gb.And upgrading from time to time is better in my opinion since technology changes i mean back then there weren't any core 2 or quad right lol well you can argue that not all program know how to use the duo core unless certain games that specifically said so basically you are just running one core what i am trying to say is for example my friend bought a gigabyte motherboard the best he can afford during his time when he bought it and i am just using a cheap intel dg35ec motherboard not much diffrence unless you are a hardcore gamer he can has dual bios and twin turbo fan and a lot more neat stuff to his motherboard but he can only support till pentium d get what i am saying now^_^
He sure does, read his sig. Upgrading a computer is not as expensive as buying one, so that's a thumbs up right here. You can get much more powerful computers by upgrading/building your computer than by buying one, so that's another thumbs up right there. However, it's like Loonylion said, you need a nice budget if you want a cutting edge computer. As for a common question: why is building cheaper than buying? Simple: when you buy one, you pay for the OS (usually Vista now). That's some outrageous 100€ or something right over... there. When you build one, you have an empty HDD, meaning you don't pay for the OS. But, it can get annoying: when you only want to update a certain part (say, the RAM, or the GFX card) you will sometimes need to buy a new motherboard too, because the older one can't keep up with what you want. However, to get a new motherboard, you might need some other parts, like a processor, because the one you have is too old to work on your new motherboard. This can be verified with me. I need more RAM on my computer, however, I need a new motherboard if I want to put more than 1GB of RAM. However, I have a Pentium IV processor, and the new motherboard won't support such an old piece, meaning I also need a new processor. And this can happen with other parts. Upgrading can also mean spending money that you didn't need to, so that's a thumbs down right over... somewhere. But you need to make your choices. I would go for upgrading.
cost vs performance vs necessity it'll be according to your needs. if you just surf the net, then a cheap computer is more then enough. if you do a bit of gaming here and there, a little photoshopping here and there and so and so, then somewhere you should keep focus on should be on the processor and ram. video cards shouldn't be a concern other then to get the modest performance for running your games as well as to meet it's necessary requirements. however, if you're not into gaming but perform multimedia editing, the one thing you need to ask yourself is rather you can bare or not the speed of the performance of your machine. if you're running photoshop or virtualdub on a single core and know that you're speeds aren't great and can live with it, then an upgrade isn't necessary. however, if it's the opposite, then an upgrade maybe necessary to satisfy those needs. last but not least is when your os is too old, that is when a necessary upgrade is needed. or when the os operators and software vendors are no longer making support for the software you run. if ms and other software companies are still supporting windows 98, i'm more then certain that an upgrade isn't necessary for most people.
