- Apr 23, 2014
- 537
- 1
- 11,015
As of recently, I have heard of Intel's plans to sacrifice processing power for the sake of power efficiency in their CPUs beyond 2021. Now frequencies haven't changed much since the Pentium 4 @ 3.8 GHz. About the highest I've seen at stock speed from Intel is turbo boost up to 4.4 GHz. The main differences has been with the microarchitecture, etc, etc.
My point is, for a while now, GPUs have been advancing faster than CPUs, but even so, both are slowing down quickly. Eventually we may hit a brick wall. And if we start making CPUs slower, what does that say for emulators such as the likes of Higan, CEN64, Dolphin, and such others?
Emulators need all the single/dual-core processing power than can get, and do not benefit from additional cores. In fact, more cores causes more problems. The reason I'm concerned with emulators is preservation. Eventually the consoles, cartridges, discs, etc, will no longer work. What happens then when they're no longer available on the market? This is why emulation is so great. But if CPUs hardly ever advance, and forbid they get slower, emulators may suffer greatly in terms of becoming more accurate due to the processing requirements.
The same goes for high-processing-requirement software such as virtual machines, and video encoding/editing. Though while these types of applications could benefit from more cores, they can still suffer if CPUs start becoming slower.
I can understand the need to be more power-efficient, especially in a workplace environment, power consumption is a problem, and so is global warming and the atmosphere. I also understand the need to dissipate heat better.
We seem to be leaning more in the direction of ultra-portable mobile devices and the like, I understand the demand for this. But, at the same time, I don't care as much for mobility and portability as I do power and performance for desktop-class CPUs. I like big-bulky-heavy machines. I'm not all into slim and light. Sometimes it's nice, sure, but not when I need the power.
Heck, I still have a Galaxy S III. Mobile devices have become boring, and I just don't give a flip about them anymore. (Though the removal of Micro SD in the S6 really bugged me. Hopefully it does return as claimed in the S7, even though I may not get it.)
The point of my post is this. Where is the future of the CPU headed? Must we make them slower? And if we have to, will they eventually regain the performance of current high-end CPUs? And perhaps eventually bypass the current performance, while maintaining better power efficiency?
This is a real concern for me, and I hope CPUs, GPUs, and the like, continue to advance in speed and power efficiency, not just sacrificing speed for power.
I know eventually we may hit that wall were we can't physically make CPUs more powerful by current means and materials. But hopefully, we may find a way around it.
And don't get me started on cloud-based processing. To me, this is a terrible idea. Most of the time, I have my internet disabled, unless I need to surf, download something, or want to watch a video. I hate the idea of cloud-processing, I prefer everything to be local. (I download YouTube videos to watch them offline.) Heck, if cloud processing becomes a thing, I want to build my own server and use it at home to do it locally. Thus, if the internet ever goes out, I still have the power.
What is your opinion and your hopes for the future? What are your ideas and theories? Do you prefer speed, performance, power, cloud, and what are your reasons? Please post them below.
My point is, for a while now, GPUs have been advancing faster than CPUs, but even so, both are slowing down quickly. Eventually we may hit a brick wall. And if we start making CPUs slower, what does that say for emulators such as the likes of Higan, CEN64, Dolphin, and such others?
Emulators need all the single/dual-core processing power than can get, and do not benefit from additional cores. In fact, more cores causes more problems. The reason I'm concerned with emulators is preservation. Eventually the consoles, cartridges, discs, etc, will no longer work. What happens then when they're no longer available on the market? This is why emulation is so great. But if CPUs hardly ever advance, and forbid they get slower, emulators may suffer greatly in terms of becoming more accurate due to the processing requirements.
The same goes for high-processing-requirement software such as virtual machines, and video encoding/editing. Though while these types of applications could benefit from more cores, they can still suffer if CPUs start becoming slower.
I can understand the need to be more power-efficient, especially in a workplace environment, power consumption is a problem, and so is global warming and the atmosphere. I also understand the need to dissipate heat better.
We seem to be leaning more in the direction of ultra-portable mobile devices and the like, I understand the demand for this. But, at the same time, I don't care as much for mobility and portability as I do power and performance for desktop-class CPUs. I like big-bulky-heavy machines. I'm not all into slim and light. Sometimes it's nice, sure, but not when I need the power.
Heck, I still have a Galaxy S III. Mobile devices have become boring, and I just don't give a flip about them anymore. (Though the removal of Micro SD in the S6 really bugged me. Hopefully it does return as claimed in the S7, even though I may not get it.)
The point of my post is this. Where is the future of the CPU headed? Must we make them slower? And if we have to, will they eventually regain the performance of current high-end CPUs? And perhaps eventually bypass the current performance, while maintaining better power efficiency?
This is a real concern for me, and I hope CPUs, GPUs, and the like, continue to advance in speed and power efficiency, not just sacrificing speed for power.
I know eventually we may hit that wall were we can't physically make CPUs more powerful by current means and materials. But hopefully, we may find a way around it.
And don't get me started on cloud-based processing. To me, this is a terrible idea. Most of the time, I have my internet disabled, unless I need to surf, download something, or want to watch a video. I hate the idea of cloud-processing, I prefer everything to be local. (I download YouTube videos to watch them offline.) Heck, if cloud processing becomes a thing, I want to build my own server and use it at home to do it locally. Thus, if the internet ever goes out, I still have the power.
What is your opinion and your hopes for the future? What are your ideas and theories? Do you prefer speed, performance, power, cloud, and what are your reasons? Please post them below.
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram