4 ms·
yeah. it is very entertaining/annoying to see carbon zealots bark at high-end PCs, as if they run under 100% CPU+GPU load 24x7
by throwaway0x7E6 4y ago
yeah. it is very entertaining/annoying to see carbon zealots bark at high-end PCs, as if they run under 100% CPU+GPU load 24x7
- BenjiWiebe 4y agoMaybe the zealots actually bring up this point as well... To me a high end computer looks wasteful because it was recently built and caused another computer to hit the landfill (usually). It would be more efficient to replace a computer on a 5 or 10 year cycle rather than a 1 or 2 year cycle, but then you'd have a high end computer for a much lower percentage of the time.
- throwaway0x7E6 4y agothey might, and like always, they'd be wrong. high end hardware doesn't go to landfills until it's dead for example, 4790K + GTX 980 is a 8 year old computer. a high end PC from 6 years ago has a GTX 1080 in it, look up how much that costs still you'd be crazy to throw something like that away instead of selling it for about 400$ or giving it away to friends or family >It would be more efficient to replace a computer on a 5 or 10 year cycle if you only use it to check emails and procrastinate on the internet, then yeah. but people who buy 2000$+ worth of hardware usually do something more productive or entertaining than that. and like I said, when they do buy it, whatever they had before is usually sold off to recoup part of the new hardware cost. that's how it worked with hardware for as long as I can remember you know what does go into landfills? disposable garbage phones, designed to be resistant to repair and maintenance, and made unbearably slow by forced software updates when it's time for you to consume the new product. and I find it very ironic that these zealots we're talking about have a great affinity for the products from that particular company