3 ms·

I read this on a $149 Chromebook wondering why do I need a faster processor? Sure the servers this ARM processor powered computer is connecting with in the clou

I read this on a $149 Chromebook wondering why do I need a faster processor? Sure the servers this ARM processor powered computer is connecting with in the cloud are powered by Intel processors but the optimizations at this point are in the software.

bognition 11y ago
Bill gates (supposedly) asserted that no one would ever need more than 640K of RAM. Sometimes it's hard to understand the need for newer tech until you have it.
dudul 11y ago
Is it hard to accept that other people use computers differently than you do and may need faster processors?
- coldtea 11y ago
  Yes (it is hard). Since those "other" are not that many -- most people just do web, text processing, Excel, mails, gaming etc, for which cpu power is plenty. Now, even if we take some specialized tasks that need more CPU (but are niche anyway): - For image processing, we had Photoshop doing wonders since at least 2000. And with SSDs, we can view and edit 30+ MP images today faster than we could 8K images back in 2000 (and on 4K displays nowadays). We can very much cover all things web and print just fine. - For video processing, a fast latest box can edit several streams of 4K with live filters. That's beyond what $200,000 professional boxes could do in the early nineties. - For audio processing, a MacBook Pro i7 can run more audio channels and effects than what the consoles used for Thriller or The Wall had in million dollar professional studios. We also need to understand the concept of diminishing returns. E.g. It's not like having an NLE rendering time down from 2 hours to 1 minute will enable us to make more movies. It will just save some editing studios and amateurs some time. Other processes involved in movie making (like just setting the lights appropriately for a shoot) trump this "optimization" many times over. So it's not like people "need" faster processors. It's more like they would be "nice to have". Now, for things like HPC for research etc, could indeed use faster processors -- but that's an even more niche market.
  - dudul 11y ago
    How about all the industries like HFT or AdTech? You mentioned yourself research, there is a dire need for computing power (and I don't think it's that much of a niche). Don't you think all these machine learning oriented start-up would like more CPU? How about big data platform? It's very narrow minded to think that the only market is people using their laptop in their home office.
    - cma 11y ago
      That there is a market doesn't mean there is a need. If HFT were forced into millisecond processing regimes instead of microsecond, what would be the impact to anyone? It wouldn't even affect the HFT guys as long as their competitors were likewise limited.
    - coldtea 11y ago
      >How about all the industries like HFT or AdTech? You mentioned yourself research, there is a dire need for computing power (and I don't think it's that much of a niche). Don't you think all these machine learning oriented start-up would like more CPU? How about big data platform? I don't think society would have any serious issues, in fact we might just be better off, without more efficient HFT and big data. In fact, I'd ask for more regulated and slower-frequency trading, and smarter (rather than "big") data. And especially when it comes to surveillance and consumer behavior analysis (for ads, etc.), the less data those scumbags get, the better.
  - deleted 11y ago
    [deleted]
  - meagain20000 11y ago
    You can never have enough cpu power in gaming. You can always use more. The faster computers get, the more interesting games can get.
    - anon4 11y ago
      Not until content creation tools get smarter. When your level is made of simple tiles in 2D top-down perspective, you can have large levels with lots of sprites, but when each character has to be a fully rigged 3D model and each tree rather than being an 8x8 pixel smudge is instead a fully 3D physical object with leaves that respond realistically to wind... Well, it's hard to make them by hand.
TeMPOraL 11y ago
Fortunately, not everything is on the Web yet, and not everything interesting to do with computers is done on-line. I read this wondering why the CPU prices aren't dropping - my i5 costs as much today as it did exactly 4 years ago, when I bought it - and I'm sad about this, because I could use a faster CPU for Kerbal Space Program, but I'm not going to pay third of a new computer's worth for a marginal improvement in clock speed.
- szatkus 11y ago
  It's just in desktop i5 segment. Intel threw more cores to Xeons and much higher clocks at low TDP CPUs, but that means nothing for desktop user. IPC only improved by about 25% during last few generations. Also AMD has nothing competetive in that segment.
- imtringued 11y ago
  That's because Intel is waiting for AMD to catch up.

bognition 11y ago

Bill gates (supposedly) asserted that no one would ever need more than 640K of RAM. Sometimes it's hard to understand the need for newer tech until you have it.

dudul 11y ago

Is it hard to accept that other people use computers differently than you do and may need faster processors?

coldtea 11y ago
Yes (it is hard). Since those "other" are not that many -- most people just do web, text processing, Excel, mails, gaming etc, for which cpu power is plenty. Now, even if we take some specialized tasks that need more CPU (but are niche anyway): - For image processing, we had Photoshop doing wonders since at least 2000. And with SSDs, we can view and edit 30+ MP images today faster than we could 8K images back in 2000 (and on 4K displays nowadays). We can very much cover all things web and print just fine. - For video processing, a fast latest box can edit several streams of 4K with live filters. That's beyond what $200,000 professional boxes could do in the early nineties. - For audio processing, a MacBook Pro i7 can run more audio channels and effects than what the consoles used for Thriller or The Wall had in million dollar professional studios. We also need to understand the concept of diminishing returns. E.g. It's not like having an NLE rendering time down from 2 hours to 1 minute will enable us to make more movies. It will just save some editing studios and amateurs some time. Other processes involved in movie making (like just setting the lights appropriately for a shoot) trump this "optimization" many times over. So it's not like people "need" faster processors. It's more like they would be "nice to have". Now, for things like HPC for research etc, could indeed use faster processors -- but that's an even more niche market.
- dudul 11y ago
  How about all the industries like HFT or AdTech? You mentioned yourself research, there is a dire need for computing power (and I don't think it's that much of a niche). Don't you think all these machine learning oriented start-up would like more CPU? How about big data platform? It's very narrow minded to think that the only market is people using their laptop in their home office.
  - cma 11y ago
    That there is a market doesn't mean there is a need. If HFT were forced into millisecond processing regimes instead of microsecond, what would be the impact to anyone? It wouldn't even affect the HFT guys as long as their competitors were likewise limited.
  - coldtea 11y ago
    >How about all the industries like HFT or AdTech? You mentioned yourself research, there is a dire need for computing power (and I don't think it's that much of a niche). Don't you think all these machine learning oriented start-up would like more CPU? How about big data platform? I don't think society would have any serious issues, in fact we might just be better off, without more efficient HFT and big data. In fact, I'd ask for more regulated and slower-frequency trading, and smarter (rather than "big") data. And especially when it comes to surveillance and consumer behavior analysis (for ads, etc.), the less data those scumbags get, the better.
- deleted 11y ago
  [deleted]
- meagain20000 11y ago
  You can never have enough cpu power in gaming. You can always use more. The faster computers get, the more interesting games can get.
  - anon4 11y ago
    Not until content creation tools get smarter. When your level is made of simple tiles in 2D top-down perspective, you can have large levels with lots of sprites, but when each character has to be a fully rigged 3D model and each tree rather than being an 8x8 pixel smudge is instead a fully 3D physical object with leaves that respond realistically to wind... Well, it's hard to make them by hand.

TeMPOraL 11y ago

Fortunately, not everything is on the Web yet, and not everything interesting to do with computers is done on-line. I read this wondering why the CPU prices aren't dropping - my i5 costs as much today as it did exactly 4 years ago, when I bought it - and I'm sad about this, because I could use a faster CPU for Kerbal Space Program, but I'm not going to pay third of a new computer's worth for a marginal improvement in clock speed.

szatkus 11y ago
It's just in desktop i5 segment. Intel threw more cores to Xeons and much higher clocks at low TDP CPUs, but that means nothing for desktop user. IPC only improved by about 25% during last few generations. Also AMD has nothing competetive in that segment.
imtringued 11y ago
That's because Intel is waiting for AMD to catch up.