6 replies to this topic

[eafkuor]

It's been quite a few years now. Computer hardware seems to last longer and longer.

I bought my first computer in 2000, and after a few months it was already stuff for archeologists. The same thing happened with the pc I bought in 2002; by late 2003 it was VERY outdated, but it lasted honorably untill 2007.
This is when I got the pc I still have now. It's equipped with an Intel q6600 cpu, 4gigs of ram (800mhz) and a gtx260 (previously I had a GT8800 installed but it broke and I had to replace it, otherwise I would still have it now).
After 3 and a half years, this pc is still awesome. Sure it's not the best pc you can buy anymore, but I don't even remotely feel the need for a better pc. It can run pretty much all games maxed out on a 24 inch monitor.

Another thing that seems to have reached a stall point is the improvement of graphics in videogames. After the incredible step forward of Crysis in 2007, no game came out able to match it.
Once again, in the old days it was so different: one game came out, had "incredible" visuals, and after 3 months there was something much better.

Why do you think this is happening? Have we reached the limits of silicon? Do we need to reengineer computers?

[sam_coder]

eafkuor said:

Do we need to reengineer computers?

It's kinda nice to be able to stay in the game =)

Although it does seem that less comes out hardware wise that get's me really excited any more. I think the last time I got really excited about something was with the release of the VooDoo2. Though that may have more to do with growing up, having kids, and more interests than just computers. =)

[Alexander]

Moore's law applies to this as well, for example what you may be seeing is exponential growth -- why you feel no need to upgrade for a greater period of time. This is said to be true until around 2015, because the transistors we are using are getting to be around 22nm (nanometres), an ion radius of silicon is 0.12nm.

[eafkuor]

Nullw0rm said:

Moore's law applies to this as well, for example what you may be seeing is exponential growth -- why you feel no need to upgrade for a greater period of time.

Excuse me but if the growth is still exponential, wouldn't that mean that hardware still gets old at the same pace? Or maybe we (or at least I) can't tell the difference between a 2008 pc and a 2010 one just because software still isn't able to exploit a more powerful machine?

[WingedPanther]

The problem is they've switched from faster processors to more cores, which developers are having a hard time exploiting with the same effectiveness. To me, it's no biggie. I get to keep my computer and just let it ride.

[Alexander]

eafkuor said:

Excuse me but if the growth is still exponential, wouldn't that mean that hardware still gets old at the same pace? Or maybe we (or at least I) can't tell the difference between a 2008 pc and a 2010 one just because software still isn't able to exploit a more powerful machine?

Exponential I said, meaning computers get old faster each time a new one is released, I mean today you buy a computer and it is already obsolete!

[sam_coder]

it's not just more cores over speed, we're seeing a definite push toward more efficient, and more portable.

I have several computers, my desktop is adequate for whatever I can throw at it (mostly work), but when I'm just acting like a normal user (not working), the computer I use most of the time is a netbook.

one of my co-workers actually uses an iPad for most of his personal browsing. (which is great, I just can't get my head around not having a physical keyboard, it would irritate me to sin...)