What's the max???

[jollyrancher]

Just curious what you think the legitimate max is on a PC... gfx and cpu... I just think it's absurd how people are spending $2000 on PC's these days when 95% of that is on email/web.... I'm thinking 5ghz and a current high-end video is all people will ever need.... beyond that just seems way beyond the needs of any future "normal" computer user... sure some crazy gamer might need it 10 years from now for some super-realistic gfx game, but consoles will be much cheaper...

 

[Trotterwatch]

It's all reletive really, go ask someone back when the ZX81 was king what the theoretical maximum was, I bet you the Ghz mark would never have been uttered Now it is commonplace.

5GHZ now would be a lot, come 10 years? most likely not.

 

[jollyrancher]

True, but even back then when people were "surprised" about 2D CGA gfx, you could always imagine the computer being better.... so once you've got TV-quality gfx, web-TV stuff (i.e., direct downloading of videos instead of going to Blockbuster, good streaming web-video stuff), easy video editing.... what else do you need it for????

Maybe it's just me, but I always knew the computers would do more and stuff... it's just now that I'm starting to think that they're' doing more than people need them to do and soon you'll have consoles doing advanced gaming stuff and there won't be much more for PC's to do.

Like for example... I can see your Cartman jumping around and swearing and stuff in the future (3D and what have you).... the web will get much better... I just don't see things that a 5ghz PC + good gfx won't eventually be able to handle. I mean just name some theoretical thing that will take a 20ghz computer to handle in everyday life. In other words, I believe that "TV-quality" is really the end-all of PC's... barring some 3-D "babes in your own home" type stuff.... and even that wouldn't be a PC.... totally separate device... 20 GHZ likely... just not a PC anymore

 

[pj64er]

Since you put this in gaming, I can tell you that there will always be use for faster and better processors/gfx cards. No matter how advance you think our games are now, they can ALWAYS get more realistic. Reality is infinitely detailed, do you think we'll hit that limit so easily?

 

[Gorxon]

Well, actually I dont find games today realistic at all. Sure they are good, but its kinda sad to see all the pretty FMV's and then get thrown back into some not-that-good gfx. The day a computer can do the Final Fantasy movie, or a war3 movie realtime I'll be satisfied.

Oh, and don't get me wrong, Im no gfx whore...actually I prefer SNES and NES games over todays games. That's why I don't think PSP is going to do the market any good in my twisted eyes
The GBA has snes gfx, which is perfect as developers concentrate much more on gameplay (advance wars being a prime example).

Also, normal desktop pc's will soon need more power as your normal desktop will also be in 3D in the future. Longhorn is already introducing some 3d effects in the os...

 

[joel_029]

It's not just about gaming either. Think about compiling times. 3D programs such as 3DS Max takes a pretty fast system. I can't even get v5 to hardly run on my current rig. So although games in the near future won't be demanding real fast machines, compiling programs, creating graphics, encoding video, each will need a fast system because of the progress in the quality that those programs are now producing.

 

[jollyrancher]

Reality is infinitely detailed, do you think we'll hit that limit so easily?

I agree that games will always improve and require better systems, I just think that besides games, you won't need a 10ghz PC for a non-gaming user. It wasn't too long ago that PCs were too slow to burn CDs, watch DVDs, do DVD-quality editing and other things you would want in a PC. You'll always be able to play the best games on the consoles, so people won't have any reason to upgrade their PC in the future when they can just get a cheaper console to play games on. And I can't imagine these applications that will require require purchasing a 10ghz computer for business users and non-gamers. Even today tons of people are buying 3ghz $2000 computers that they only use for email, word processing and other stuff they could do fine on a used $200 P2.

 

[mightyrocket]

The newest technology:

- Dual AMD MP 2800+
- 3 GB DDR2RAM (6x 512 mb)
- 72 speed cd-rom speed (removed out the stores due the high explosion-count)
- 16x dvd (?)
- 4x 250 gb hdd
- Geforce FX 5900 256mb DDR2RAM

 

[Remote]

Quite simple actually, evolution won't stall. Perhaps we won't be sitting on +25 ghz boxes in ten years but tec will have taken a huge step in that time. And hopefully speed wont be an issue any longer so that they can focus on making their products better, not just faster.

 

[smegforbrain]

All I can say is that 10 years ago I had a 25mhz computer.

5 years ago it was 233mhz.

Now my new comp is 2600mhz (or do ghz also work on the 1024 format?

10 years ago my hdd was 40meg, and that was compressed!

Now it's 60gig, and by the time the first gig hdds were coming around, they had actually started talking about the terabyte.

I don't think any of us can really predict what i'll be like in 10 years.

 

[Remote]

Perhaps not us as induvidials but a lot of people with the know how can, as we are approaching, not sure about this, the end of what and where silicon can take us the current formula for how fast cpu's and other electrics evolve will be outdated. At the moment I'm too tired to recall the name of the law / rule of even what it states but I'm pretty sure most of you have heard it... Anyways, apply that rule all the way to the end of sillicione and we ought to have a pretty good estimate of where we'll be in the next couple of years. Perhaps not then though...

 

[jollyrancher]

There's no question that they will be able to make them faster, I'm just asking if there will be any NON-GAMING reason to upgrade from a 5ghz to a 10 ghz. With cars, they could make 800 hp sedans if they wanted to, it's just not necessary. I think the avg HP of cars in America a couple decades ago (that whole "muscle car" phase) was higher than it is today. So anyway, if you take away gaming reasons, why will some random non-gamer need to spend $2000 to upgrade from a 5ghz to 10ghz? Is Microsoft Word 2007 too slow? Can they not get their video emails? I think that 10 years from now people will have 2 main devices: a normal PC that won't need to be that fast to do homework, email, internet, burn DVDs, etc. And then there will be set-top boxes hooked to the TV for video phones, web-TV (won't have to go to Blockbuster) and gaming. Some of these things might be 10ghz, but they won't be PCs.

Now I'm starting to babble, but PCs will probably always be faster because it won't cost more to make a 10ghz than a 5ghz. But still, I think there will be little reason to upgrade in a few years.

 

[EdgeBlade]

Untill everything on a computer happens instantly, I believe we will always try to make faster computers.

 

[AlphaWolf]

Just wait until games are rendered in holographic displays, your 1.25Thz Pentium XXIV computer wont seem so fast anymore

 

[Hexidecimal]

Scientifically, technology has double in speed or size every 18 months for the last few years. I just read and article yesterday where intel said they won't be changing from thr P4 line because it has so far to go, they believe it will top out between 10 and 15 gigahertz before the move to a different chip medium. Technology is limitless really, because by the time you max out one means, another has already been developed.

Terabyte drives arent far off either, there a place in pittsburgh that already has one about finished, it's a great time to be a tech nerd.