Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

PC obsolescence is obsolete

extremetech.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 124 posts

Re: PC obsolescence is obsolete

#111

Post by icefox »

theorique wrote: post #68
podperson wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The irony here is that Microsoft cannibalized the PC gaming market to create the XBox market (and kill its one true enemy at the time: Sony). The result is -- arguably -- stagnation of the desktop PC market which was always -- I contend -- driven largely by gaming. The problem is that the desktop market made Microsoft money whereas consoles... not so much. It seems to me that problem here isn't cannibalization -- if…

the desktop PC market which was always -- I contend -- driven largely by gaming. For the leading edge of the desktop PC market, definitely (advanced graphics cards, fastest possible processor, fastest possible RAM). On the other hand, the broad center of the bell curve of the desktop PC market has been driven by office applications. These have never needed the high performance that the gamers demanded - users simply…

The last half a decade I would say users are not as much driven by office applications, but by network applications, specifically the browser and email

Re: PC obsolescence is obsolete

#112

Post by 6ren »

ZoFreX wrote: post #9

> Now, compare an early Core i7 system (Nehalem) against what’s shipping today (Ivy Bridge). Clock speeds are up a bit, and there are cheaper/lower-end options available, but the Core i7-920 that launched at 2.67GHz with four cores and eight threads is still absolutely capable of powering the latest games and applications. A big, big factor in the slowdown of obsolecense is that the current generation of consoles has…

In the past, as PC's continued to improve past consoles, players switched to PC's, forcing the next generation of consoles. That's not happening this time around. It seems PC's have overshot the demand for power - a typical pattern according to Christensen.

The pressure on consoles will come from tablets (the next generation of Imagination Tech's GPU IP is comparable to xbox360's 7 year old GPU).

Re: PC obsolescence is obsolete

#114

Post by ZoFreX »

scott_s wrote: post #41
quaunaut wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This can't be emphasized enough- the only reason nothing has moved forward is because gaming hasn't paved the way. Most major hardware advancements on the desktop we've had have been a result of devices added for higher requirements in games. And right now, with the death of the B-tier game studio, there's no one pushing PC-only experiences that really has a reason to ignore the consoles. That's it. Now, whether the…

You're putting the cart before the horse. The reason that performance has not improved in the desktop and gaming are due to hitting fundamental limitations in the design of hardware.

But the hardware IS getting faster! Each successive release of GPUs for example still brings big performance improvements, us PC gamers are just going from 100FPS to 120FPS with a new card. People are running games at 5760x1080 resolution across three displays with just one mid-range graphics card, with anti-aliasing (and all the other settings) turned up to the maximum. Current games just don't make current hardware break a sweat.

Re: PC obsolescence is obsolete

#115

Post by ZoFreX »

JamesLeonis wrote: post #47
ZoFreX wrote: post #9

> Now, compare an early Core i7 system (Nehalem) against what’s shipping today (Ivy Bridge). Clock speeds are up a bit, and there are cheaper/lower-end options available, but the Core i7-920 that launched at 2.67GHz with four cores and eight threads is still absolutely capable of powering the latest games and applications. A big, big factor in the slowdown of obsolecense is that the current generation of consoles has…

I would disagree about console gaming. A stretch this long happened before between the original NES and the SNES, as well as the original Gameboy and a more powerful version. From then on there was the 4 year like clockwork release of a new console system from every major manufacturer. In this cycle, none have any definite release date, stretching this generation to 8 or 9 years. While I agree games propel hardware f…

The gap between the NES and SNES was 5 years, the XBox 360 has been out for 7 - I think it's fair to say this is an unusually large wait for the next gen.

I don't know how you can say that this generation of AAA games is the prettiest ever seen, and also say that Crysis is the gold standard - this is kind of my point really, things have stagnated. Games run faster and faster on "current midrange hardware" (however you care to define that) but aren't really looking much better.

Your points on the video game market massively diversifying are extremely valid though, it's true that the disposable income upgrade-chasing 20-something is no longer the most luctrative or important demographic.

Re: PC obsolescence is obsolete

#116

Post by dman »

ZoFreX wrote: post #115
JamesLeonis wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would disagree about console gaming. A stretch this long happened before between the original NES and the SNES, as well as the original Gameboy and a more powerful version. From then on there was the 4 year like clockwork release of a new console system from every major manufacturer. In this cycle, none have any definite release date, stretching this generation to 8 or 9 years. While I agree games propel hardware f…

The gap between the NES and SNES was 5 years, the XBox 360 has been out for 7 - I think it's fair to say this is an unusually large wait for the next gen. I don't know how you can say that this generation of AAA games is the prettiest ever seen, and also say that Crysis is the gold standard - this is kind of my point really, things have stagnated. Games run faster and faster on "current midrange hardware" (however yo…

I think we are bottlenecked by content creation costs

Re: PC obsolescence is obsolete

#117

Post by scott_s »

ZoFreX wrote: post #114
scott_s wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're putting the cart before the horse. The reason that performance has not improved in the desktop and gaming are due to hitting fundamental limitations in the design of hardware.

But the hardware IS getting faster! Each successive release of GPUs for example still brings big performance improvements, us PC gamers are just going from 100FPS to 120FPS with a new card. People are running games at 5760x1080 resolution across three displays with just one mid-range graphics card, with anti-aliasing (and all the other settings) turned up to the maximum. Current games just don't make current hardware…

Graphics cards are getting better, but not at the rate they did, say, a decade ago, and graphics cards are a small driver in the consumer computer market outside of games.

Re: PC obsolescence is obsolete

#118

Post by zanny »

roc wrote: post #77
zanny wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I see it more being about power profiles and Moores Law than anything else in respect to how Desktops are tapering and laptops are still going with tablet / phone going strong. The plateau is around a 2.5ghz dual core that supports the bangs and whistles when appropriate, be they branch prediction or atomic math or layered caches. The laptop space is now getting there, the tablet space is still 2 years out from that,…

I think we're in agreement here. There's plenty of advancement: it just isn't in desktop horsepower because that's not where the demand is. I never meant to imply there was no advancement on the desktop at all. I was just trying to get the gist of "advancement tracking demand" out there.

Same thing I'm saying. Just provinding the examples of how the Desktop is still moving forward :P

Re: PC obsolescence is obsolete

#119

Post by theorique »

icefox wrote: post #111
theorique wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

the desktop PC market which was always -- I contend -- driven largely by gaming. For the leading edge of the desktop PC market, definitely (advanced graphics cards, fastest possible processor, fastest possible RAM). On the other hand, the broad center of the bell curve of the desktop PC market has been driven by office applications. These have never needed the high performance that the gamers demanded - users simply…

The last half a decade I would say users are not as much driven by office applications, but by network applications, specifically the browser and email

Good point - agreed.

Re: PC obsolescence is obsolete

#120

Post by talmand »

meric wrote: post #108
talmand wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have to disagree with the statement no on is pushing PC-only experiences. Epic is pushing UnrealEngine4 as potentially PC-only unless the console makers step up. Then there's Arma 3 just around the corner. From my point of view, as a PC gamer, the reason there's not so much investment in using the PC graphics capability we have cheaply available right now is because of the influence of the console market. Most big…

So what you're saying is, game development is waiting for tools that allow producing high quality graphic games more cheaply.

I would say yes and no.

The tools are there now. You can make an outstandingly impressive looking game with UnrealEngine3 right now if you ignore restraints of mainstream PC and console hardware. Look at the Nvidia and AMD tech demos for their cards to see what they can do.

But that game would be expensive, time consuming, and not worth the investment if you were planning on making money.

I would say it's better to describe it that they are waiting on tools that allow them to do more with the same time and money budgets on current or next-gen hardware. That's where things like UnrealEngine4 make it interesting because it seems that Epic is saying that PCs are under-utilized graphical work horses now and don't want to wait for the consoles to catch up. It's potentially a huge risk for them to take and it'll be fun to see how it plays out.

To me the tools thing isn't just about graphics, it's about development. Proper tools make high quality games cheaper to make in general. As an example, let's say you want to make a big open world game that has hundreds of indoor locations. You have a team of ten to create those indoor locations. If you can use tools that would allow a team of five people to do the same amount of work in the same amount of time as ten on the previous project then you have two choices. You can reduce your team to five to make the same amount of content for lower costs (and probably being better) or you can keep your ten to create more content for the same costs as before.

If you look at the UnrealEngine4 demos they are just as much about content creation tools as it is about graphics in general.

Post reply on HN