Is it time to upgrade the fleet of endpoints across your organization? The answer to that question may well have once come from a simple check of the calendar. In 2026, however, the concept of a three-to-four-year refresh cycle feels like something from a bygone era, like looking back on the charm of an old sitcom.

Life was simpler then; prices were more stable, and the improvements between hardware generations were more predictable. In the age of mobile computing, AI PCs, a components (specifically memory) supply crisis, and Microsoft’s Windows OS proclamations, among other factors, the conventional hardware refresh cycle has shifted, experts tell ITPro.

In its place is a complex picture of different and dynamic cycles that vary based on not just the type of device in question, but its role within the business and how friendly any upgrade can be on IT budgets. In 2026 and beyond, organizations will be considering multiple angles – not just the calendar – when opting into an upgrade program.

Which factors are affecting the refresh cycle?

The cycle is dead, or maybe it isn’t – perhaps it’s somewhere in between. Nobody can agree on a consensus, least of all the experts that ITPro consulted with.

Michael Rosholt, SVP at M&A specialist and IT industry investment bank martinwolf, falls into the former camp but adds certain caveats: “It depends on the type of technology,” he says, adding: “Rather than one universal refresh cycle, we’re seeing the market increasingly segmented by technology and use case.”

It might not even be describable as a cycle, says Adam Bowles, who runs the managed IT services company Act360 in Canada, telling ITPro that it’s split by role and device type – where employees with less intensive performance requirements are hanging onto hardware for longer to save on budget – while ‘power users’ may see a new device every couple of years due to the recent acceleration in functionality.

So how did we get here? The earliest factors that drove some of the shifts we are seeing today first emerged with Microsoft and its Windows 11 hardware requirements, “forcing replacements on OS support grounds, not performance,” as Bowles phrases it. The migration pressure was compounded with the end of support for Windows 10, which triggered a rush of new purchases at the time.

Then there’s the components crisis. Memory prices have surged due to the AI infrastructure buildout, which has carried seemingly permanent ramifications for the cost of devices and the memory powering those systems. Low-budget devices have been a major casualty, amid a general decline in PC shipments and a projected 20% year-on-year fall in sales, according to IDC analysis. Interestingly, PC manufacturers are struggling to maintain full product portfolios, the report highlighted.

Then there’s the question of AI PCs, divided between the initial marketing push and newer systems that boast actually useful on-device capabilities. The expectation in the latter camp is that power users want to tap into the most powerful systems, like AI agents, without necessarily requiring a constant connection to a cloud server to churn through expensive and scarce tokens. Ole Bülow, director of business development at Egiss, poses the question: “Which capabilities will employees actually use during the device’s lifecycle?”

“This requires understanding applications and processing locations, rather than using an AI label as a universal refresh trigger,” adds Bülow, whose experience lies in advising enterprises, including one instance supporting the transition of a 120,000-strong global enterprise from a three-year device refresh cycle to a four-year cycle.

How is the refresh cycle changing?

While experts can’t agree on the ‘death’ of the conventional cycle, they all agree that it’s both shortening and lengthening at the same time, depending on a few different factors, including the technology itself and the user.

“A hybrid lifecycle, supported by signals such as DEX, is recommended,” Bülow continues. “A supported device used for predictable tasks may remain productive longer. Employees with increasing demands may require earlier replacement. The original device can then be redeployed to another user after secure recovery and preparation.

He continues: “An employee may require an upgrade before the device reaches end of life. Mini PCs or thin clients should not be assumed to be underpowered. Suitability depends on the specific work requirements. For thin clients, the business case should consider the remote computing environment, connectivity, licensing, support, and endpoint price.

That’s certainly true across the equipment landscape that organizations of any size may conventionally seek to upgrade, from business smartphones to on-premises servers and everything in between. The challenge, as Rosholt sees it, is that much of this is now ad hoc rather than following a single schedule.

“IT leaders are looking more closely at how equipment is being used and whether an upgrade delivers a meaningful benefit,” he explains.

“Employees with heavier workloads or a clear need for AI capabilities may receive newer machines sooner, while regular users can often keep their existing devices longer. Refurbished equipment is also becoming a more important part of the equation, particularly for users who don’t require the latest hardware.”

How can businesses navigate being pulled in multiple directions?

Greater flexibility seems like a broad solution for navigating this new, complex, mixed picture. Bowles says his company tiers hardware by role instead of buying the same laptops for everyone. That includes cheaper thin clients or refurbished units for lighter roles and newer machines for finance or development teams.

Bülow also seeks to understand how an employee is likely to use the device based on data and what the existing device estate can support in terms of functionality.

“Combine performance and employee experience data with repair history, battery condition, warranty and security requirements,” he advises, adding: “Determine whether poor performance requires a new device, a repair or a software adjustment. Define clear criteria for retaining, repairing, redeploying or replacing equipment. Assign responsibility for reviewing exceptions.”

How manufacturers are responding to the new market conditions may also inform what businesses do. The OEMs are pushing to replace PCs with newer models, but enterprises are being far more disciplined about how much they spend due to the components crisis.

One of the fixes they’re employing is actually trimming configurations of memory to, at the very least, maintain price levels. It may well be, Rosholt says, that organizations now choose to take them up on the offer of financing options and leasing.

Long gone are the days of fixed refresh cycles for every device across an organization. Many factors are temporarily affecting the decisions that businesses make on a day-to-day basis, including price volatility and Windows support. But still, the increased complexity across the suite of enterprise hardware is also a sign of technological progress and diversity in the systems that end users will rely on as AI becomes more useful and prevalent.