Understanding GPU longevity - to aid upgrade planning

[ChillaxedUpgrader]

Hi all

In January I purchased the Zotac 760 AMP - because of its price and clock speed. I must point out that it's performed brilliantly so far. However, something I didn't consider at the time was what might be sacrificed to achieve this kind of product. Are such cards likely to use lower-binned chips? Is the card likely to fail sooner than, for example, something at the Sapphire price level?

My reason for asking this is that I would like my next upgrade to be 2 way SLI. However, I've realised that if my card is a relatively short-lived one, then this would need a re-think.

Please could anyone provide informed comments about my concerns?

Cheers in advance,
Chillx

 

[Rammy]

Some manufacturers will hand pick higher binned chips for their "super performance" cards, so they can justify charging a premium, but if you search threads you'll find plenty of the "more money than sense" models not overclocking as well as people thought they would - it still comes down to luck of the draw.

If you are using a card at stock speeds (in this case, the factory overclock) then you shouldn't have any issues for the foreseeable future as pretty much all of these cards have increased cooling over a reference model. There is an argument against pushing chips too far in the interests of longevity, but it really depends what you are expecting. Graphics cards generally have a lifespan of around 2-3years before they become obsolete, with around the first year only keeping up with the standard that you expected on new - ie. high settings at X resolution. This however is totally different to how long a card can actually last. I've owned/bought at least 12 cards over the years, and only one died (and I think that was just a cooler failure) meaning any of the rest I have lying around should still work regardless of age, and most had reasonably tough lives playing games.

My advice with SLI in general is not to bother unless you find a really cheap combo, or are doing a really high end setup where you actually need two cards as a single one won't cut it. A planned SLI setup from the outset can work, but in my experience the "I'll buy one now and when it starts to struggle I'll get another" logic, that you see very often on these forums, just doesn't work. There's a few reasons for this, but it basically comes down to the way in which graphics cards get refreshed every year, meaning getting hold of a 1-2year old identical model can be tricky and expensive, not to mention new technology making certainly things obsolete. There's also additional costs (PSU/motherboard etc) and cooling concerns, as well as greater dependence on driver support for performance.

 

[clau_aclx]

hi,
The longevity of an stock overclocked card should still be longer than the technology lifecycle. That means that if a card at the safest clock would last for example 20 years (physical integrity), the technological average lifespan is around 5 years. Almost any 5 years old card is struggling with current gaming requirements. A stock OC card would probably last 1-5 % less time, so still way longer than its technological life cycle.
However, by overclocking yourself, more than the producers intended, by doing a bad OC you could harm the cip and destroy it in far less time, or if you OC well you can still have it working for many years to come.
In my experience cards that are well cooled and taken care of, last more than twice they warranty, but by that time you can only play on low settings any new games.

 

[ChillaxedUpgrader]

Some manufacturers will hand pick higher binned chips for their "super performance" cards, so they can justify charging a premium, but if you search threads you'll find plenty of the "more money than sense" models not overclocking as well as people thought they would - it still comes down to luck of the draw.

If you are using a card at stock speeds (in this case, the factory overclock) then you shouldn't have any issues for the foreseeable future as pretty much all of these cards have increased cooling over a reference model. There is an argument against pushing chips too far in the interests of longevity, but it really depends what you are expecting. Graphics cards generally have a lifespan of around 2-3years before they become obsolete, with around the first year only keeping up with the standard that you expected on new - ie. high settings at X resolution. This however is totally different to how long a card can actually last. I've owned/bought at least 12 cards over the years, and only one died (and I think that was just a cooler failure) meaning any of the rest I have lying around should still work regardless of age, and most had reasonably tough lives playing games.

My advice with SLI in general is not to bother unless you find a really cheap combo, or are doing a really high end setup where you actually need two cards as a single one won't cut it. A planned SLI setup from the outset can work, but in my experience the "I'll buy one now and when it starts to struggle I'll get another" logic, that you see very often on these forums, just doesn't work. There's a few reasons for this, but it basically comes down to the way in which graphics cards get refreshed every year, meaning getting hold of a 1-2year old identical model can be tricky and expensive, not to mention new technology making certainly things obsolete. There's also additional costs (PSU/motherboard etc) and cooling concerns, as well as greater dependence on driver support for performance.

Thanks for your response. I know what you mean about SLI. Thing is, this rig is a long term project due to funds! So rather than being "I'll get a second card once I'm struggling" it's more like "I'd like more GPU power overall but I also want a decent working machine now". So the SLI route seems more affordable when there isn't £300+ at any one time to get my desired performance! However, I must thank you as you reminded me of what I realised ages ago, which is that my PSU would need upgrading too. Yeah, perhaps it's not the best economy once that's in the mix.

Interesting answer otherwise too.
Thanks again
Chillx

 

[ChillaxedUpgrader]

hi,
The longevity of an stock overclocked card should still be longer than the technology lifecycle. That means that if a card at the safest clock would last for example 20 years (physical integrity), the technological average lifespan is around 5 years. Almost any 5 years old card is struggling with current gaming requirements. A stock OC card would probably last 1-5 % less time, so still way longer than its technological life cycle.
However, by overclocking yourself, more than the producers intended, by doing a bad OC you could harm the cip and destroy it in far less time, or if you OC well you can still have it working for many years to come.
In my experience cards that are well cooled and taken care of, last more than twice they warranty, but by that time you can only play on low settings any new games.

I completely agree. I figure that unless I'm sure I can do a really stable overclock and keep the temperatures down, it's not worth it. Particularly with factory overclock. Thanks.