LinuxQuestions.org
LinuxAnswers - the LQ Linux tutorial section.
Go Back   LinuxQuestions.org > Forums > Non-*NIX Forums > General
User Name
Password
General This forum is for non-technical general discussion which can include both Linux and non-Linux topics. Have fun!

Notices

Reply
 
Search this Thread
Old 10-10-2004, 09:10 PM   #1
{O_o}
Member
 
Registered: Mar 2004
Distribution: Slackware 10.0 (mulinux)
Posts: 66

Rep: Reputation: 15
What do you think the average desktop pc hardware will be like in 5 years time?


i was just forming a wish list about elite 4 (when it is released) and top of my list would be a linux native version, but it got me to thinking about the pc i will need to play it on, because this certainly will not cut it. I reckon mr braben is writing a game for hardware that doesnt exist yet (which must be a bit hard). What do you think the average home users pc (hardware) will be like in 5-10 years time?
 
Old 10-10-2004, 10:13 PM   #2
twilli227
Member
 
Registered: May 2003
Location: S.W. Ohio
Distribution: Ubuntu, OS X
Posts: 760

Rep: Reputation: 30
10ghz processor
2gig ram
1 terabyte hd
$599 us

That is if they continue on with the same architecture.
 
Old 10-10-2004, 10:25 PM   #3
nuka_t
Member
 
Registered: Jun 2004
Location: Kalifornia
Distribution: YOPER+KDE
Posts: 263

Rep: Reputation: 30
no, 13ghz processor. were at around 3ghz average today. with moores law being applied twice, we reach 12 and then there are some extra months so 13 seems reasonable.

3 gigs of ram(we have 512mb-1000mb today, 5 years ago they had 64mb. im being conservative)
agreed
agreed
 
Old 10-10-2004, 10:31 PM   #4
rjcrews
Member
 
Registered: Apr 2004
Distribution: Debian
Posts: 193

Rep: Reputation: 30
i think they are gonna start cramming more processors into the boxes they sell the public, sorta like the dual proc macs. as video demands go up, i think bus size will increase drastically at some point. not sure how much a 13 ghz proc would relative to faster and wider buses, and maybe home computers with 16 processors or so.


big numbers sell better though. im thinking multicore processors and the such....the new 16 processor megaslap 1600XXXT, only $1699, plus a free color laser printer!
 
Old 10-10-2004, 11:02 PM   #5
Shade
Senior Member
 
Registered: Mar 2003
Location: Burke, VA
Distribution: RHEL, Slackware, Ubuntu, Fedora
Posts: 1,418
Blog Entries: 1

Rep: Reputation: 46
Let me just look in my crystal ball...


Is it really possible to make an educated guess about this? The rate things move in the IT world, who knows.

--Shade
 
Old 10-10-2004, 11:12 PM   #6
nuka_t
Member
 
Registered: Jun 2004
Location: Kalifornia
Distribution: YOPER+KDE
Posts: 263

Rep: Reputation: 30
speaking of dual procs

i dont think that will ever happen in the pc world. its not cost-effective for the average pc.

however, within the next year, we will see a dramatic increase in performance with dual core cpu's.

the diff between dual core and dual processers is that in dual cores, if you have two 3.2ghz cores, you get 6.4ghz of performance. on the other hand, a dual 2.0ghz G5 is only marginally better than a single 2.0ghz. not all apps take advantage of two cpu's, and since they are so expensive, it will never be widespread.
 
Old 10-10-2004, 11:15 PM   #7
firefly2442
Member
 
Registered: Apr 2003
Location: USA
Distribution: Ubuntu
Posts: 95

Rep: Reputation: 15
What about parallel or quantum computing?
 
Old 10-10-2004, 11:16 PM   #8
nuka_t
Member
 
Registered: Jun 2004
Location: Kalifornia
Distribution: YOPER+KDE
Posts: 263

Rep: Reputation: 30
not for 10-15 years.
 
Old 10-10-2004, 11:17 PM   #9
twilli227
Member
 
Registered: May 2003
Location: S.W. Ohio
Distribution: Ubuntu, OS X
Posts: 760

Rep: Reputation: 30
Quote:
Is it really possible to make an educated guess about this? The rate things move in the IT world, who knows.
I wouldn't say mine was educated. I just took a swipe at it.
 
Old 10-11-2004, 11:12 AM   #10
sh1ft
Member
 
Registered: Feb 2004
Location: Ottawa, Ontario, Can
Distribution: Slackware, ubuntu
Posts: 391

Rep: Reputation: 31
What about distributed computing.. It will be much more efficient because of the insane bandwidth most of us will have in that amount of time. Sympatico is talking about a goal of 15-25mbs. Perhaps in the future we will be one gigantic beowulf cluster!! (been reading lots of slashdot latley..)
 
Old 10-11-2004, 11:16 AM   #11
rjcrews
Member
 
Registered: Apr 2004
Distribution: Debian
Posts: 193

Rep: Reputation: 30
Quote:
Originally posted by nuka_t
speaking of dual procs

i dont think that will ever happen in the pc world. its not cost-effective for the average pc.

however, within the next year, we will see a dramatic increase in performance with dual core cpu's.

the diff between dual core and dual processers is that in dual cores, if you have two 3.2ghz cores, you get 6.4ghz of performance. on the other hand, a dual 2.0ghz G5 is only marginally better than a single 2.0ghz. not all apps take advantage of two cpu's, and since they are so expensive, it will never be widespread.
have you used the new mac yet? i have a sister who is majoring in art, uses macs for all her work done on a computer, etc. gotta check out the new mac, handles large media waaaaaay better than any pc ive used. they are quite expensive though. in fact, i wouldnt be surprised to see pc makers start to selling something similiar and claiming better media performance.


forgot link, http://www.apple.com/powermac/performance/

from the ponies mouth

Last edited by rjcrews; 10-11-2004 at 11:18 AM.
 
Old 10-11-2004, 05:34 PM   #12
nuka_t
Member
 
Registered: Jun 2004
Location: Kalifornia
Distribution: YOPER+KDE
Posts: 263

Rep: Reputation: 30
htats like bush saying he would make a better president not hte most reliable source...

alienware is selling single processor computer with dual bideo cards, im sure that gotta be better than dual procs and a last-gen video card.

which mac are you talking about? the imac?

how does the G5 handle digital media better than a pc runnning linux/windows? is it just software? for video encoding, its all about Ghz, so a cheapo 2.8ghz celeron can outperform a singleproc 1.8ghz G5(would take the g5 over the celeron any day though...).

anyway, i know its a little off topic, but i think taht adobe and the other big graphics companies should port their software into linux. its a better platform than windows in terms of memory management and large files, so i dont see why not. it also can run on a wider range of hardware than OSx because the high performance pc's (dual-opterons with 4 gigs of ram and dual geforce 6800GT's ) and cheaper workstations.
 
Old 10-11-2004, 06:20 PM   #13
rjcrews
Member
 
Registered: Apr 2004
Distribution: Debian
Posts: 193

Rep: Reputation: 30
its hardware, and proc speed doesnt equal preformance. the g5's are dual proc with over 1ghz fsb, etc. it smokes anything single proc ive seen, not sure if the osx and mac software has a lot or little to do with it. they are 64 bit also i think, with 64 bit software. regardless of where the info comes from , the numbers are a lot better, similar to why bush is a better pres than kerry would be, spin doesnt count, results please(kerry has one of the worst, most pathetic records ever documented in congress, not showing up etc. why didnt lieberman win the nomination??) <- best way to ruin thread..

i agree adobe should port to linux, real nice software. removes red eye from all my shoddy photgraphy(when im at home to use my parents copy legit copy )
 
Old 10-11-2004, 06:58 PM   #14
hp46168
Member
 
Registered: Jun 2004
Location: Indiana
Distribution: Suse 9.0
Posts: 120

Rep: Reputation: 15
i've been thinking about this...

I think, as far as laptop computers go, we might be seeing the end of the spindle-era.

Think about it, SD card sizes are increasing all of the time.

My favorite would be a hologram display instead of a flat-panel or CRT. I could only imagine the beefy kind of video card and math coprocessor that would be needed for that.

A lot of people are saying a network-districuted computer, I don't figure that as much as a disposable computer.

Think about it. In the early days of automobiles, they were an expensive hobby. Then came mass-production, they came out for everybody, but still being kind of pricey, they were built to last. Now, I challenge you to buy any car, and run it as long as the cars of 30-40 years ago were meant to be run (assuming you could afford the gasoline.)

I think, that it'll go that way with computers, especially if people stick to wintel architecture, or even; in some cases mac architecture.

the only insurance against this kind of thing I believe is linux. When the operating system isn't commoditized, true source code freedom can exist, and true computer durability may not follow too far behind.
 
Old 10-11-2004, 07:08 PM   #15
{O_o}
Member
 
Registered: Mar 2004
Distribution: Slackware 10.0 (mulinux)
Posts: 66

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 15
i personally hope for a corresponding (and quite dramatic) reduction in price rather than any massive increase in hardware capacity. I know that you can get cheapo hardware quite easily, but the quality is somewhat lacking, and lets face it even a few hundered bucks is a lot when you can barely feed and clothe yourself.

I remember my very first pc, it was a 486dx with a 500mb hard drive. I dreamed of the day when i would have gigabytes of hd space, and ghz processors. Now i have (had) them, i realize that the corresponding increase in both hardware requirements, and disk space requirements for programs pretty much makes the increase redundant for the average pc user. (average install size of an os then was a few hundred mb's, now its pretty much a few gigs) I think that any future increase will quickly be taken up by software makers (elite 4 a prime example), and thats got to be good for more realistic graphics (in games), or for having massive amounts of bandwith to play with (netwise). God i cant wait for elite, until then i wont be upgrading my little ol k6.

I wonder if x86 arch is reaching the end of its lifetime

Quote:
hologram display
i never even thought about that. tha would be very nice

Last edited by {O_o}; 10-11-2004 at 07:10 PM.
 
  


Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
First time in 7 years isn't bad I suppose... fouldsy General 1 10-26-2005 04:13 PM
Load Average, free and hardware sizing JordanH Linux - General 1 02-02-2004 03:10 PM
Average Partitioning Time milnet Mandriva 1 12-25-2003 03:20 PM
Average DNS update time? case1984 Linux - Networking 2 03-27-2003 11:36 PM
The future of Linux -- 5 years time futurist Linux - General 9 03-27-2003 09:39 AM


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:02 AM.

Main Menu
My LQ
Write for LQ
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute content, let us know.
Main Menu
Syndicate
RSS1  Latest Threads
RSS1  LQ News
Twitter: @linuxquestions
identi.ca: @linuxquestions
Facebook: linuxquestions Google+: linuxquestions
Open Source Consulting | Domain Registration