Computers how much faster can they go?

Yeah, my desktop is a P4 2.4Ghz w/2GB ram, works OK for now... but slow I am sure.

Bought a notebook in Dec to take back and forth to work, $2,000 got me an HP dv9000t, T7200 Duo, 2GB ram, 17" UltraBrite screen (wow, like that!), couple HD's, Bluetooth, Gigabit Ethernet, Wireless, LightScribe, MS Office and XP Pro (QuickBooks Premier 2006 won't run on Vista). Way too much money... why aren't computers cheaper. Geeez.

Memory is a little cheaper though! I got a really good deal in 1995. 4MB for $700.00 OUCH! 4,000MB (4GB) is cheaper than that now. I see Crucial has 2GB sticks for $250 each.

Maybe next year I will upgrade to a faster desktop... maybe. Running programs just don't seem to run that much faster, and I think the manufacturers are having a harder time selling us "this is WAY/LOTS faster than last years" ... blah blah blah.

It does seem that software lags behind the hardware, but gets to be more bloated with new graphics and features no one uses. Is it just the gaming community keeping things going forward? Where would microsoft be to day if computers were still only able to run DOS. Would we notice if they got rid of all the extras we never knew were there? I hadly use any of the special features, why can't we have a slimmed down version of windows not Vista bloat version?

"why can't we have a slimmed down version of windows not Vista bloat version?"

I asked myself the same question (because I have two old computers with no real networking ability with their old versions of windows and one WinX64 machine...I wanted to get the older machines set up for my kids to fool around on instead of using the new machine)...and started using linux. My old Dell Latitude CP (w/ a whoppin' 200MHz process or 128MB ram) began a second life with Xubuntu linux (www.xubuntu.org). A modern OS, all the drivers (no fooling around trying to download them all like with windows), and a boot time under 3 min (Win 2000 too about 10 to really get everything done and settle down) was all I needed to experience to make the switch permanent. Now I'm using Fedora Core 6 on my new laptop and loving it. The guys at work keep asking if it's Vista or if it's a Mac, several comments on things being "very pretty" and multiple desktops generates a bit of envy among the multitaskers.

If anyone has an old machine that just isn't doing well with the new(er) versions of windows, I'd highly suggest giving linux a shot. It's really changed a lot in the last few years and you can do virtually everything through a GUI. I picked Xubuntu for my old laptop because it's optimised for older machines with less than 192MB RAM, Fedora Core 6 because it came recommended from a friend. I still use windows on my workstation at work at Windows X64 on my machine at home but only because I like to play games.

A good friend of mine now maintains a myriad of computers. One for his DOS programs and several others for different programming requirements.

The amount of bloatware is, of course, directly related to the lack of skill of the average user. Many users are still at a point where they are at a loss as to where to find the button to start their PC.

The bloatware may indirectly be a good thing as it in fact drives the need for faster computers.

Wal-Mart and Circuit City has USB sticks with 4 GB for less than $50!

~~Chad~~

Not the same as RAM sticks

Well I just brought a new computer to replace my old one. 2.4GhZ twin core Pentium, 2GB ram, 8800GTS video card, Running Vista 32bit. Replaces my original 400MHz 256MB ram, Nvidia GTX (something) video card, 6GB (ish) hard drive. I don't know how many generations have passed, but I believe the absolute top of the line processor was in the 600MHz range, and yes, I still classify it as a computer (yes it still runs many games). I believe it has run at some point in time Windows 95, 98, NT and XP operating systems (and three video card upgrades). Now I wouldn't recommend waiting as long as I have to upgrade (unless you have the patience of a saint ), but I see no point in upgrading every 6 months. Buy quality and plan ahead for the new technologies and upgrade options and you wont go wrong. And yes, technology is primarily being driven by gaming.

It certainly was a challenge to custom design my own new system, with all the new technologies that I have not had much experience with (especially the twin core processor, 800MHz ram, LCD monitors, graphics card, etc). Took about 1.5 months to research and read reviews but hell, that's half the fun for an engineer.

Current processor developments are now moving to twin and quad core rather than a single super fast single core processor. This will mean that although the processor speed won't change much (they have started to get close to the limit of economical processor speed) there will just be more of them. How fast are they, well my 2.4GHz twin core is quite cheap compared to the last ever 4GHz (ish) single core processor, and runs about 25-50% faster.

Put simply 64 bit will be the way to go BUT it is not worth going to until a few generations have passed. I believe Vista is the way forward now (even thou I am having some teething issues).

How did I ever survive before 22" wide screen LCD's.

Yes AMD just anounced their latest quad core processors. Intel have said their latest version comes out in September. Many of theser are aimed at the big servers market or the high end gamers marklet. The only thing is the software people lag about a year behind the hardware. I will stick with what I have until either it breaks down or some really important software comes my way. Vista not yet, who knows maybe when the first three sevice packs have been released or a better version comes to light. Perhaps an Apple Mac next time! Linux who knows.

The lag is MUCH greater then a year! MS still doesn't have the 32 bit OS optimized for dual core execution let along a quad core. And 64 bit applications with quad cores with optimized execution is years away. Computers can go much faster by clock speed and distributed processing (more cores) but the software from good old MS is killing the performance that could be.

To speed up an old computer:

If running XP SP2 have at least 1GBytes of memory!

If running Vista have a least 2GBytes of memory!

Get the fastest and smallest hard drive you and afford and store everything on with a little room to spare.

Get a fast video card.

Set the System Properties Options in Windows for the best performance.

Keep all your docs, videos and sound files on an external drive. The outer tracks on your boot hard drive allows much faster data rates to the CPU.

Use a program like Advanced Windows Care Pro (cheap) to clean the registry, delete temp files and turn off programs running in the background that you can start as needed. Most people have hoards of $hit running in the background that can be launched as needed.

A cable speed internet connection.

About hard drives, never go over 120GB if possible. Keep a duplicate backup drive in the wings and ready in case of failure. 10,000 and 15,000 RPM drives run hot. I mount a liquid cooler on those drives. Guess what? They don't fail as often. On my SATA fast drives I have external drives with small low noise fans to keep them from adding heat to my tower.

You can make an old computer last for quite awhile with these suggestions but if you want to get much faster don't look at the hardware as much as the software. But if you go to the newer software you will usually need to significantly upgrade the hardware too. As for Vista, the AMD 3200 32 bit Athlon mentioned in this thread should not be running Vista. That is a bad move.

In 10 years the clock speeds will be a least 5x what they are now and there will be octal core processors. There is a clock speed limit and a core limit. Clock speed limit is determined by signal speeds across a half inch square silicon die. Even if you could put 64 cores in one piece of silicon today the software issues would be unwielding.

So as silicon is concerned there is a sign post up ahead labeled "The End" but there are other atomic, biological and nano technologies that will be developed that will take computers to reaches that will boggle the mind.

I was born in 1944. No computers basically and look where we are now. So in another 60 years what will be available is not even predictable but if you knew it would not be believeable today. My grandmother born in 1890 never did believe there was a moon landing nor did she understand what a computer does. When the kids of today reach 60 years of age they will be the same as my poor old Grandma, Clueless!!!

If it's any indication at all (which I personally doubt), there is now a typical higher demand for Intel shares, an opposite trend which was reversed some two months ago.

Anyone interested couldn't help but notice, that clock-speeds settled around 3 Ghz some two years ago, then RAM speeds went up from 400 Mhz to 800 which was that of the typical intel FSB (AMD was set at 2 Ghz a year ago).

Anyone interested couldn't help but notice, that Pentium 4 was the last brand used by Intel some six years ago.

- A fierce competition in an over-saturated market?

- Looking for the lost coin under the lantern's circle of light?

Doesn't depend upon the speed of the CPU, I think, so much as the ease of access to information storage.

If the information storage is tight up against the CPU (in terms of instant availability) and infinitely accessible, then access speed can only be limited by the speed of light.

Bottlenecks will be in exterior applications, such as internet access time and visual output.

Mark

With a bit of luck they will soon be fast enough to cope with the cumbersome ever-growing, never de-bugged operating system we are saddled with.

Or to put it another way, the operating system uses so much power we can still only do simple tasks at the same speed as an old 286 based system!

Ok so I'm just a grumpy old man...

Now where did I put my ZX81?

The One Laptop Per Child program. Whatever happened to that? I think that will slow down the industry's insatiable lust for quick dinero.

How FAST?

About 90 mph should do it...a decent Trebuchet? or maybe just straight down off a cliff.

What is the terminal velocity of a PC?

I saw a village fete advertising a Laptop throwing contest last week...makes a change from wellie throwing!

Although there is probaly some speed left in current technology that could be wrung out with careful designing, I feel that the CPU producers are showing the way with more processors working in parallel. Eventually there will probably be several dozen processors each sharing some part of the whole workload on a PC mainboard.

I also believe that solid state disks will become more widespread (they have been around for over 20 years in the industry) and of course much much bigger in terms of storage, no long waits for the disk drive to power up and supply data.

Sadly software seems to be very bloated as someone pointed out and these fast processors just allow programs to be developed in relatively slow high level languages, instead of being compiled directly into machine code to all the CPUs to reach far higher speeds of production.

20 years ago, most programs had to be written in as concise a format as possible, some of these programs will still run on a modern PC, but now at mind boggling speeds! But you need a mainboard that will still run MS-DOS and not many will I believe!!

I still use an old 386 laptop and an even older PC board layout program that was originally written for the first PCs....it works fine, but what will I do if something ever breaks??? The program is faster than most modern equivalents on modern PCs....

Have agreat day Guys.

Single core processors are more and more becoming unpopular with the adoption of the dual-core processors by computer companies worldwide. Notebooks and desktops are now mostly fitted with dual-core processors. No doubt, the computers nowadays are really fast and will continue to become faster. But software development still lags behind the advances in processors design.

Having said that, computer performance is still limited by the speed of the computer sub-system components and peripherals, the speed and size of the RAM, the size, speed and type of hard drive – its interface (i.e. IDE, EIDE, SATA, ULTRA SATA), Video-RAM size and speed, DVD/CD drive speed, etc, etc. As a rule that can be simply stated regardless of the speed of the processor, "A computer (system) is just as fast as its slowest component or any other peripheral connected to it".

Transputer anyone?

Or was that just another British invention sidelined?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atari_Transputer_Workstation ?

Ta!

What goes around, comes around!

The only constant thing is change!

And a thousand other platitudes!

As with all tools the computer should suit the task you are involved with. I use an old Dell P90 with Win95 as an Automatic Test Station - it only runs the one test program and its speed suits the older circuit boards which tend to throw up faults if operated too fast! It also has ancient parts lists written in Amipro which are very handy but too long a job to transfer to Excel.

My second PC is a Pentium 2 which is crammed with 8 years worth of programs, files and emails which I can network access but don't want to load onto my new dual processor PC and slow it up. It is also a safe storage area in case I ever get hacked on the new PC which is alway on the internet.

The new PC uses AMD64 dual processor with the latest peripherals and gadgets and its perfect for searching the net and CAD drawing, etc - very fast and you can run several programs at the same time and hop back and forth.

So thats three, very useful machines, all earning their keep.

Things to bear in mind with ownership of any PC are:

1. Two hard drives are much better than one for back-ups. You do take regular back- ups???

2. Fit as much RAM as possible - at least 1Gb, 4Gb is better

3. Don't get massive hard drives they take ages to defrag and you never fill them. If you have a lot of video, etc get an external drive - I use a Maxtor 4Gb drive which cost me £79 from Maplin.

4. Get a good quality, fast video board to drive your LCD Display- 'your eyes are worth it'!

Finally, a laptop is a good investment if your 'other half' gives you ear-ache about spending more time on the computer than with her(him). You can at least sit in the same room and 'grunt' answers occasionally!

"Finally, a laptop is a good investment if your 'other half' gives you ear-ache about spending more time on the computer than with her(him). You can at least sit in the same room and 'grunt' answers occasionally!"

Well said! But on that note, may I add:

The best combo I know of is: Good CPU, lots of RAM, a laptop and some "Remote Desktop" software! The best of both worlds unless you do CAD or need the high-end graphics...then I don't know if remote desktop software would really work that well.

I don't have the link handy, but have you guys read about Intel's 8 core processor the unveiled in Feb? They didn't have any I/O on it at that time, but the thing will do a teraflop!

It wasn't that long ago that you needed a room full of supercomputers cooled by massive air conditioners to hit teraflop speeds, soon you'll have it on your desktop.

Just think how big Microsoft can make the OS for that. It will take up half of your terabyte RAID!

Isn't it true that the PC will eventually have to be liquid or gel cooled for more speed? Cray acquired lightning fast speeds when they developed a liquid jacket that sinked the heat away from their microprocessors. Perhaps a gel filled jacket would be appropriate for the future PC?

Lower power consumption!

I tend to use my computers till they bust at the seams, but only because I cannot afford to keep updating!

Regarding faster processors, I think it was the great race car driver Richard Petty who said, "Too much speed is almost enough". So until we have instantaneous responses, yes, I think we'll keep getting faster.

Robert Heinlein said it (I think?)"The future is not only stranger than we imagine, it is stranger that we can imagine". There are several things in the pipeline (quantum computing, trinary logic, crystal matrix, man machine interfaces amoung others) that will change the computer into something we cannot even begin to imagine today. The first computer I ever worked with filled a room and had 4000 bytes of memory (around 1967 that was). It came from IBM and was called a System 360 model 20. Today a hand calculator has more power and is faster! I think the only limit on computers is the ability of the human mind to conceive new and better machines. So far, we haven't even begun to reach that limit.

Hey SixSigma

I remember the 360, and all the time I spent punching cards to make a deck and find out the NEXT day I missed a slash in the JCL and printed a 10" thick core dump. Then spent half a day looking for the error! Ah... those were ther days!

Hi Six,

"Today a hand calculator has more power and is faster! "

True, true but it's just really hard to get that 2000 line/minute printer hooked up to it.

Regards,

John

Believe it or not, I was a specialist at one time for a 5000 line a minute impact printer that weighed in at slightly more that 400 kilograms.....it was considered to be lightweight at the time!!!......those were the days!!!

Hi Andy,

I remember them well.

I too have supported those heavyweight machines. Well I didn't actually hold them up... but uh I have worked on many different kinds of 70's & 80's DP machines. Some of them were truly amazing, like the one you mention.

John