Re:The Great CPU Stagnation
by danielvaughn on Thursday May 18, 2023 @02:07PM
(#35991827)
More like a year - the performance rot runs deep.
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:The Great CPU Stagnation
by MichaelZuo on Thursday May 18, 2023 @03:39PM
(#35993015)
Considering that the NeXTStep OS ran on a 1120 × 832, 12 bit, display in 1990 with 12 MB of memory, I'd say more then a year. Judging by modern app memory usage.
Recently watching a Gamer's Nexus video where they tested a new built Voodoo 6 5000, I was impressed watching them install some ancient edition of Windows in which to do the testing, and how snappy and responsive the interface was.
Re:The Great CPU Stagnation
by danielvaughn on Thursday May 18, 2023 @06:30PM
(#35995095)
My first computer was a 95 Packard Bell. I was 12 years old at the time, so I might be misremembering, but I swear the interface responsiveness felt immediate.
Dan Luu did various tests on keyboard and terminal latency. Its not pretty. However a modern desktop have a compositor (since Vista, Linux since XFree86 -> X.org, and macOS since forever). This is essentially double screen rendering.
Re:The Great CPU Stagnation
by danielvaughn on Thursday May 18, 2023 @06:33PM
(#35995132)
We might need to block all software features for the next decade so we can figure out what's going on.
Re:The Great CPU Stagnation
by infinite8s on Thursday May 18, 2023 @08:46PM
(#35996391)
The C memory model underlying all modern processors does not scale. Most of the time your cpu is sitting idle.
Re:The Great CPU Stagnation
by MichaelZuo on Thursday May 18, 2023 @09:49PM
(#35996823)
My favourite comparison is that the A16 chip can do 1 million times more operations per second compared to the top of the line System 360 mainframe.
That is to say, a theoretically ideal OS running on the A16 could run every mainframe program in existence until the late 1970s, simultaneously.