4 ms·

For reference, it offers about half the performance of a Snapdragon 845... It's honestly a garbage chip for disposable devices, which is just bad for everythin

by jotm 4y ago

For reference, it offers about half the performance of a Snapdragon 845... It's honestly a garbage chip for disposable devices, which is just bad for everything. I'd rather use one $300 device than 3x $100 devices over the same timespan.

sokoloff 4y ago
Also for reference, it's about double the performance of a 3.7 GHz Pentium 4, which was a perfectly usable desktop CPU.
- ChuckNorris89 4y ago
  Pentium 4 stopped being a benchmark for desktop usability a long time ago. Any JS website will bring it to its knees.
  - KronisLV 4y ago
    > Any JS website will bring it to its knees. Maybe that's a problem in of itself? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wirth%27s_law https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wirth%27s_law There is nothing intrinsically different about computing from, say, 10 years ago. You might still want to read some text on a webpage, click on a few buttons and have them do something, maybe fill out some text fields, or even upload/download a few files. Instead, you get "visual experiences" with overcomplicated UIs with similarly overcomplicated underlying technologies (edit: not to say that there aren't benefits to technologies like Vue/Angular/React, however they aren't "necessary" to get things done most of the time, in many cases even server side rendering without JS would be enough), all of which waste all of the resources that you'll give them, especially if you don't have ad-blockers on which means that you'd get bogged down with dozens if not hundreds of malicious scripts. Of course, this is a bit akin to shouting at the cloud, but nobody should be too proud about the state the modern web is in and use it to justify wasteful hardware and software requirements: https://idlewords.com/talks/website_obesity.htm https://idlewords.com/talks/website_obesity.htm
  - hedora 4y ago
    With an ad blocker, I've found the next bottleneck for web browsers is the GPU. I'd guess a pentium 4 with the equivalent of a five year old, well-supported integrated Intel GPU would be fine.
- jotm 4y ago
  The Pentium MMX was also a perfectly usable desktop CPU, ran Windows XP and stuff.
Wowfunhappy 4y ago
> I'd rather use one $300 device than 3x $100 devices over the same timespan. I agree, but do consider how many Chromebooks are purchased by schools. The calculus there might be different, because kids drop things. Note that ethically, I'm not convinced this need outweighs the environmental concerns.
hedora 4y ago
I'd rather they put the extra $200 into the keyboard, display, passive cooling, audio and webcam. Even "garbage" arm CPUs are fine these days. All my real work happens when I remote into a machine that's faster than a $3500 workstation laptop. The remaining heavy workload is the web browser (and, perhaps, corporate email client / other crapware)
simlevesque 4y ago
It is important to remember that the market is not just you.

by jotm 4y ago

sokoloff 4y ago

Also for reference, it's about double the performance of a 3.7 GHz Pentium 4, which was a perfectly usable desktop CPU.

ChuckNorris89 4y ago
Pentium 4 stopped being a benchmark for desktop usability a long time ago. Any JS website will bring it to its knees.
- KronisLV 4y ago
  > Any JS website will bring it to its knees. Maybe that's a problem in of itself? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wirth%27s_law https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wirth%27s_law There is nothing intrinsically different about computing from, say, 10 years ago. You might still want to read some text on a webpage, click on a few buttons and have them do something, maybe fill out some text fields, or even upload/download a few files. Instead, you get "visual experiences" with overcomplicated UIs with similarly overcomplicated underlying technologies (edit: not to say that there aren't benefits to technologies like Vue/Angular/React, however they aren't "necessary" to get things done most of the time, in many cases even server side rendering without JS would be enough), all of which waste all of the resources that you'll give them, especially if you don't have ad-blockers on which means that you'd get bogged down with dozens if not hundreds of malicious scripts. Of course, this is a bit akin to shouting at the cloud, but nobody should be too proud about the state the modern web is in and use it to justify wasteful hardware and software requirements: https://idlewords.com/talks/website_obesity.htm https://idlewords.com/talks/website_obesity.htm
- hedora 4y ago
  With an ad blocker, I've found the next bottleneck for web browsers is the GPU. I'd guess a pentium 4 with the equivalent of a five year old, well-supported integrated Intel GPU would be fine.
jotm 4y ago
The Pentium MMX was also a perfectly usable desktop CPU, ran Windows XP and stuff.

Wowfunhappy 4y ago

> I'd rather use one $300 device than 3x $100 devices over the same timespan. I agree, but do consider how many Chromebooks are purchased by schools. The calculus there might be different, because kids drop things. Note that ethically, I'm not convinced this need outweighs the environmental concerns.

hedora 4y ago

I'd rather they put the extra $200 into the keyboard, display, passive cooling, audio and webcam. Even "garbage" arm CPUs are fine these days. All my real work happens when I remote into a machine that's faster than a $3500 workstation laptop. The remaining heavy workload is the web browser (and, perhaps, corporate email client / other crapware)

simlevesque 4y ago

It is important to remember that the market is not just you.