- Jan 2, 2001
- 6,399
- 0
- 25,810
I was reading a bit about newer CPU that are on their way. While it is good, there is something that I thing it is wrong.
Right now, unless specialized task in real time simulation needs, we can all agree that modern CPUs are fast enough for current task. But all the others major components are lagging behind miserably. Maybe the exception being video card. But chipset, RAM and storage devices are really showing their age.
No matter how fast is the CPU, having to wait for data from RAM and storage devices kill the performance badly. Why do we still have to use slow IDE drives. This technology is old, slow and inefficient. Isnt about time to set a new storage technology that will be faster, and much more efficient? Something that will go beyong SCSI. And that could be used for high end server as well as low end desktop computer. This could even help to lower the cost. The SATA interface is able to go way faster that it is used now. And it could be way faster coupled with a newer controller and drive technology. But nothing is in the talk seriously as far as I know.
Why? because the hype is all about the CPU now. So, there is no pressure for improvement in that area. What if, instead of increase the level of detail in a game graphics, developpers would increase the level of detail in game, period. That would means much more object and texture to be loaded for each level and and during game play. This can simply not be achieved with current motherboard technology.
Current motherboard and storage devices for desktop users can only, on an averagge, transfer data at about 55-60 MB/s. To get something decent, we need at least 10 time that speed to keep up with current CPU processing speed. This kind of performance will put a lot of pressure to RAM, as it will be asked much more as it is asked now. So will be the motherboard chipset. And the whole system too.
I have to say that, while some are excited at newer dual core performance, I'm a bit dissapointed seeing all that performance some kind of wasted by sub par component. I cannot imagine having fast CPU being run on some obsolete technology. But this is the case right now. Just like video card. While they give us high FPS, I'm still waiting for maybe less FPS (hey, 50 is enough...) but awsome detail and image realism.. No more blocky characters, or look alike textured object. Or entrance blocked by a small stone that can be climbed on by a 5 years child but not by a hero that is going to save the world.. I want to be able to get lost in a game, because I took the bad road, just like it can be achievied in real life. Do current technology allow that? no. because people still buy FPS that are benchmarked in such low res that nobody even use. But that give high number. An that what it take to sell a product.
Until something really new hjappen, you wont see me exited here. Some are raving about ATI newer chipset. So what? It is still a simple chipset that do the same thing that the other do, whitout being signyfically faster or slower. Oh... it allow for some good overclocking!! Why dont they make it running this fast stock? Because a board that could be running at .. let say, 280 FSB stock, wont overclock well, and will look like a looser if it can achieve only a 20 MHz FSB overclock compared to a 200 that can achieve an amazing 80 MHz overclock... WOW.. but at the end, which one will be faster.. It is all about number. Big number. Quiz question: Which bus will make the processor perform better: The 1000MHz HTT bus or the 1 GHz HTT bus that is found on AMD 64 motherboard???
<font color=red>Sig space for rent. make your offer.</font color=red>
Right now, unless specialized task in real time simulation needs, we can all agree that modern CPUs are fast enough for current task. But all the others major components are lagging behind miserably. Maybe the exception being video card. But chipset, RAM and storage devices are really showing their age.
No matter how fast is the CPU, having to wait for data from RAM and storage devices kill the performance badly. Why do we still have to use slow IDE drives. This technology is old, slow and inefficient. Isnt about time to set a new storage technology that will be faster, and much more efficient? Something that will go beyong SCSI. And that could be used for high end server as well as low end desktop computer. This could even help to lower the cost. The SATA interface is able to go way faster that it is used now. And it could be way faster coupled with a newer controller and drive technology. But nothing is in the talk seriously as far as I know.
Why? because the hype is all about the CPU now. So, there is no pressure for improvement in that area. What if, instead of increase the level of detail in a game graphics, developpers would increase the level of detail in game, period. That would means much more object and texture to be loaded for each level and and during game play. This can simply not be achieved with current motherboard technology.
Current motherboard and storage devices for desktop users can only, on an averagge, transfer data at about 55-60 MB/s. To get something decent, we need at least 10 time that speed to keep up with current CPU processing speed. This kind of performance will put a lot of pressure to RAM, as it will be asked much more as it is asked now. So will be the motherboard chipset. And the whole system too.
I have to say that, while some are excited at newer dual core performance, I'm a bit dissapointed seeing all that performance some kind of wasted by sub par component. I cannot imagine having fast CPU being run on some obsolete technology. But this is the case right now. Just like video card. While they give us high FPS, I'm still waiting for maybe less FPS (hey, 50 is enough...) but awsome detail and image realism.. No more blocky characters, or look alike textured object. Or entrance blocked by a small stone that can be climbed on by a 5 years child but not by a hero that is going to save the world.. I want to be able to get lost in a game, because I took the bad road, just like it can be achievied in real life. Do current technology allow that? no. because people still buy FPS that are benchmarked in such low res that nobody even use. But that give high number. An that what it take to sell a product.
Until something really new hjappen, you wont see me exited here. Some are raving about ATI newer chipset. So what? It is still a simple chipset that do the same thing that the other do, whitout being signyfically faster or slower. Oh... it allow for some good overclocking!! Why dont they make it running this fast stock? Because a board that could be running at .. let say, 280 FSB stock, wont overclock well, and will look like a looser if it can achieve only a 20 MHz FSB overclock compared to a 200 that can achieve an amazing 80 MHz overclock... WOW.. but at the end, which one will be faster.. It is all about number. Big number. Quiz question: Which bus will make the processor perform better: The 1000MHz HTT bus or the 1 GHz HTT bus that is found on AMD 64 motherboard???
<font color=red>Sig space for rent. make your offer.</font color=red>
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram