The PC is not dead, we just don't need new ones

#1

Post by firefoxd » Thu, Oct 24, 2013, 4:12 PM UTC

The PC is not dead, we just don't need new ones
idiallo.com

Re: The PC is not dead, we just don't need new ones

#2

Post by dkarl » Thu, Oct 24, 2013, 4:37 PM UTC

I was ticked off that my 2007 Mac Mini couldn't be upgraded to Mountain Lion, until I realized Snow Leopard ran all the software I needed on that box. I think I'm happy with the hardware and form factor of my phone, too, so I've got all the electronics I need for years to come. Good thing, too, because my rent just went up, and I need a new couch.

Re: The PC is not dead, we just don't need new ones

#3

Post by mhurron » Thu, Oct 24, 2013, 4:37 PM UTC

Basically this, computers hit good enough a while ago, now you just have to replace parts when they die.

Yes, on paper, the latest processor is faster than the one released two years ago but you have to be doing specific types of workloads with it to really make a big difference.

Re: The PC is not dead, we just don't need new ones

#4

Post by dankoss » Thu, Oct 24, 2013, 4:37 PM UTC

> When your processor is too slow, buy a new CPU, or you get a new heat sink and over clock it

The motherboards for PCs built 5 years ago are completely different from those built today, and the CPU sockets have changed every other year. New processors from Intel will be soldered on.

The performance of a PC from five years ago is probably adequate for web browsing and office tasks. For anything more demanding, the advances in power consumption, execution efficiency and process node are huge leaps from five years ago.

Re: The PC is not dead, we just don't need new ones

#5

Post by FrankenPC » Thu, Oct 24, 2013, 4:38 PM UTC

Well, the CPU/RAM/HDD systems do last a very long time. It's the GPU that needs periodic upgrading. Robert Space Industries for instance will be leveraging the Cryengine 3 with nearly 10 times as many polygons as with the average 3D FPS. Also, Microsoft keeps adding rendering features to the latest OS's which require hardware updates on the GPU level. I guess what I'm saying is: Nvidia will continue to be a sound stock to add to your portfolio.

Re: The PC is not dead, we just don't need new ones

#6

Post by jseliger » Thu, Oct 24, 2013, 4:39 PM UTC

This reminds me of a piece I wrote a couple years ago: http://jseliger.wordpress.com/2011/10/09/desktop-pcs-arent-g... , which makes a similar point. Both articles are less screechy and less likely to get readers than screaming headlines about OMG DEATH!!!

Re: The PC is not dead, we just don't need new ones

#7

Post by drill_sarge » Thu, Oct 24, 2013, 4:39 PM UTC

mhurron wrote: post #3

Basically this, computers hit good enough a while ago, now you just have to replace parts when they die. Yes, on paper, the latest processor is faster than the one released two years ago but you have to be doing specific types of workloads with it to really make a big difference.

Yeah. The last major thing for PCs in the past couple years were probably SSDs.

Re: The PC is not dead, we just don't need new ones

#8

Post by gtaylor » Thu, Oct 24, 2013, 4:40 PM UTC

I built a dev/gaming machine back in early 2010. It's stout, but not a ridiculously expensive (~$1,000) behemoth. The only thing I've done since then is toss some more RAM in so I could have two sets of triple channel DDR3 instead of one. I can still run just about any modern AAA game at the highest settings.

The only time I felt like I've needed an upgrade is while playing Planetside 2, which is/was very CPU bound for my setup. However, when it was initially released, Planetside 2 ran like a three-legged dog even on some higher end rigs. It's much better after a few rounds of optimizations by the developers, with more scheduled for the next month or two.

I dual boot Linux boot on the same machine for my day job, 5 days a week all year. For this purpose it has actually been getting faster with time as the environment I run matures and gets optimized.

As good as it is now, I remember struggling to keep up with a two year old machine in 2003.

Re: The PC is not dead, we just don't need new ones

#9

Post by sdfjkl » Thu, Oct 24, 2013, 4:41 PM UTC

Mainly we don't need new ones because the 3 year old one is still doing the job. That wasn't the case a decade ago - your 3 year old PC was seriously out of date and couldn't run most games released that year and probably not install the latest OS release. This rapid progress has flattened out considerably. Now people upgrade to get nice features such as retina displays or SSD drives, but that's optional (so you don't do it if you don't have spare money laying around) and the benefit is much smaller than going from a 90 MHz Pentium to a 450 MHz Pentium III.

Re: The PC is not dead, we just don't need new ones

#10

Post by gtaylor » Thu, Oct 24, 2013, 4:43 PM UTC

dankoss wrote: post #4

> When your processor is too slow, buy a new CPU, or you get a new heat sink and over clock it The motherboards for PCs built 5 years ago are completely different from those built today, and the CPU sockets have changed every other year. New processors from Intel will be soldered on. The performance of a PC from five years ago is probably adequate for web browsing and office tasks. For anything more demanding, the ad…

> The performance of a PC from five years ago is probably adequate for web browsing and office tasks. For anything more demanding, the advances in power consumption, execution efficiency and process node are huge leaps from five years ago.

Anecdotally, my machine is approaching four years old and I can still run just about every new game on the highest settings. At just under $1,000 at the time, this isn't a luxury yacht type rig, either.