A Two-Decade Look at PC Hardware summary
My 2008 Main Rig (by psicofxp.com Forum Signature)
Athlon64 3200+ Venice s.754
MSI K8N V v2.0 (nForce3 250)
Sapphire Radeon 9550 @ 472 / 472
Markvision + Spectek DDR-400 2x512MB
Creative Audigy 7.1 24-bit
WD 40GB ATA100 7200 RPM
Euro case with LEDs and window
"550W" generic PSU (soon to be replaced)
15" generic CRT @ 1152x864
Aiwa NSX-500 mini component system
🖥️ The Story of The PC Cartuja: A Secondary Build
The build centered around an ASUS A7S8X-MX (Socket A) motherboard, acquired for ~ 15 USD after a tense bidding war. Initial attempts with an (apparently non-functional) Sempron processor failed, leading to a swap for an Athlon XP 2000+ Thoroughbred. Thanks to the motherboard’s 333 MHz Front-Side Bus (FSB) support, this processor was successfully overclocked to the performance level of a 2600+. The memory configuration was mismatched—128 MB and 256 MB DDR—which was acceptable due to the SiS chipset's lack of dual-channel support, and one stick even featured a salvaged heatsink. Storage was managed by a 40 GB Western Digital IDE drive, and power came from a generic PSU that had been preemptively repaired by replacing its electrolytic capacitors. The system was housed in a cardboard box, explaining its unusual name.
Despite its humble assembly, it delivered surprising utility running Windows XP SP3. It contributed processing time to the Folding@home project and was part of a DIY audio experiment, using a salvaged 2 W-per-channel amplifier connected to passive speakers, with a 15-inch CRT serving as the display. While it struggled unexpectedly with simple browser tasks like FarmVille, its gaming performance was noteworthy for its specifications. It comfortably handled Counter-Strike 1.6, and successfully ran graphically demanding games like Neverwinter Nights and NFS Most Wanted after adjusting graphics settings. Although synthetic performance metrics from 3DMark 03, 05, and 06 were low, the system completed them "proudly."
Ultimately, the PC Cartuja served as a tangible example of value extracted from discarded parts. Though aesthetically unorthodox, electrically questionable, and relying entirely on improvised components, it offered an excellent cost-to-benefit ratio and delivered genuine functionality. The experience underscored the principle that, with patience and lowered expectations, obsolete hardware can still be leveraged to produce practical value.
About GPU Specs Comparison
| Component | 2003: Radeon 9550 | 2004: X850 XT | 2007: HD 2600 Pro | 2013: R9 270X | 2017: RX 560 | 2021: Radeon 6600 XT |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Architecture | RV350 (DX9b) | R480 (DX9c) | RV630 (DX10.1) | Pitcairn XT | Polaris 21 | Navi 23 (RDNA2) |
| Process | 130nm | 130nm | 65nm | 28nm | 14nm | 7nm |
| VRAM | 128–256MB DDR | 256MB GDDR3 | 512MB DDR2 | 2GB GDDR5 | 4GB GDDR5 | 8GB GDDR6 |
| Bus width | 128-bit | 256-bit | 128-bit | 256-bit | 128-bit | 128-bit |
| Clock (MHz) | ~250 | ~520 | ~600 | ~1000 | ~1176 | ~2359 (boost) |
| GFLOPS | ~4.4 | ~83 | ~200 | ~1971 | ~2600 | ~10,600 |
| TDP (watts) | ~30W | ~75W | ~45W | ~180W | ~80W | 160W |
| ~0.15 | ~1.1 | ~4.4 | ~10.9 | ~32.5 | ~66 | |
| MSRP (launch) | ~$90 | ~$499 | ~$149 | ~$199 | ~$130 | ~$379 |
| ~0.05 | ~0.16 | ~1.34 | ~7.65 | ~10.0 | ~28 |
Note: These values are approximations based on reference models and typical clock speeds. Values can vary by SKU and manufacturer.
The Fast Decay of Old Hardware
Some parts of that rig are still usable. Others aged out due to:
- Instruction set deprecation
- Graphics APIs
- Storage protocols
- Secure boot and TPM
These are not all examples of planned obsolescence. Some are the result of:
- Physics and economics (Moore’s Law, thermals)
- Software complexity
- Developer productivity vs. backward compatibility
Planned obsolescence
means designing something to break, the flaws being introduced in the
design by intention. That’s not the same as aging. Some will say, “Oh,
my Athlon XP 2000+ with 512MB DDR ran Windows XP more smoothly than this
bloated phone runs Android, even with 8 ARM cores and 6GB of RAM. I'm
sure it has something like if(rand()%2==0) sleep(1);buried somewhere inside.
I'm not here to defend all software choices (because I'm sure there’s bloat) but hardware really has improved. Here's a look at raw performance per dollar over time. The numbers speak for themselves:
So, it’s worth distinguishing between “not supported” and “made to break”.
Something similar happens about performance per dollar. Without considering the USD inflation rate:
Normalized IPC of AMD processors
Just to show why Bulldozer (💀) needed higher clocks than K8 (♥)
Conclusion: A System’s Value Over Time
That Athlon 64 gave me 4+ years of usable computing + Internet + gaming. It booted fast and taught me BIOS editing, hardware modding, a bit of electronics, what not to do. I definitely learned more from that build than I have from some modern plug-and-play systems. Today’s hardware could be faster, but maybe not as personal (?).
That's why I'm not upgrading every generation. It isn’t about resisting progress but it’s about timing (?) In areas like GPUs, CPUs, and SSDs, waiting a few months can improve performance per dollar. Prices drop, new generations emerge, and a lower-tier model from a newer family might outperform a mid-range part from the previous one with better efficiency. For instance, trading a RX 560 for a RX 6400 gets you more performance at lower power and MSRP.
So, you want to compare your old GPU against your current one? That doesn't sound fair, you should start by measuring performance and power consumption, then divide.
Next steps: I’ll add screenshots of the X850 XT and HD 2600 Pro, maybe include a gallery/ folder in the repo with captured BIOS dumps or tray tool screenshots.