Yes but they release at different levels of speed some slower and some faster every year .A linear growth would be 2013 CPU's cannot be slower or same has 2012 CPU's no better X % faster.

The fact some 2008 CPU;s are faster than 2012 CPU;s and some 2012 CPU;s are oly 20% faster and other 2012 CPU;s 3 or 4 times faster means it is not linear growth .

Again, you can not compare 2012 30$ CPUs with 2008 300$ (or more) CPUs that doesn't make sense at all.

You answer does not answer the above post .

Also if there was linear growth that say new CPU every year is 20% faster that means that 2008 300$ will be so old no one will want it .Has 2012 CPU would than be 100% faster .

But I think part problem that not forcing linear growth is every year intel and AMD brings out CPU in price range of $20 to $4,000 and that may explain why the speed levels are all over the place every year than say no we do linear growth and new CPU cost $500 and we do not have any thing cheaper than that.

This is no problem, this is called marketing. There are tasks that don't need a 500$ CPU. No one would buy a 500$ CPU for office tasks or a HTPC. It doesn't make sense at all to just have one 500$ CPU from so many points of view that I just don't know how to answer to this nonsense.

So CPU speed is all over place do to price problem than engineering problems .So if everyone was rich than it be linear growth .

If intel and AMD was like apple with mac with their marketing plan than it be linear growth forcing people with linear growth . Like with Apple there model is to take old computer out of store ASAP and give you new one . If apple had intel and AMD marketing plan than anyone can go to apple store and get old conputer one year old for $500.

So in other words intel and AMD marketing is not about linear growth and doing away with older CPU speeds but giving people option of speed and price they pay for older CPU.

So intel today like AMD still sale today these old 2008 and 2009 CPU for poor people but re-sale it with new box and cheaper than doing away with it and say to the people you have no choice ?

Sorry but I think it is intel and AMD marketing I'm confused about.

No. Even rich people don't need 500$ CPUs in their office PCs. And they don't want them in their netbooks if they want to achieve long battery runtimes.

No. Apple has different computers in different price classes. A Mac mini is about 600€ here in Germany, the Mac Pros begin with 2600€. Even Apple knows that different price classes are necessary.

Partly. You do not have to buy an older CPU. You can go for cheap AMD FX4000 or Intel Core i3 CPUs or for more expensive AMD FX8000 or Intel Core i7 CPUs. The CPUs do not have to be older to be cheaper, they are just made for a difference performance-class (and therefore price-class).

Again no. As stated above, the current Core i3 and AMD FX4000 CPUs are state of the art, not old CPUs for poor people.
Of course you can still buy older CPUs, but they a) do not necessarily have to be cheaper and b) are not sold by AMD/Intel (and not part of their marketing plan), but by retailers that have them still in stock.

I don't think so. I think what you don't get is that there are different CPUs for different purposes in different price classes. It doesn't make sense to put a 500$ high performance CPU in a netbook, you wouldn't be able to cool that thing and the battery would last only 10 minutes. Besides the fact that nobody would buy such an overpriced and useless thing. You also wouldn't put a 20$ netbook CPU in a high performance computer that is used for number-crunching.

Fine than if e-mail and internet is there thing use computer from 1992. I want fast computer for my money even I'm going use it or not.

I don't want old computer even if all thing is for e-mail and internet.


---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Quote No. Apple has different computers in different price classes. A Mac mini is about 600€ here in Germany, the Mac Pros begin with 2600€. Even Apple knows that different price classes are necessary.Quote
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------


No apple buys in bulk and locks the price to new pruduct line rolls out and take old computers out of the store ASAP when new one rolls out.



---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Quote Partly. You do not have to buy an older CPU. You can go for cheap AMD FX4000 or Intel Core i3 CPUs or for more expensive AMD FX8000 or Intel Core i7 CPUs. The CPUs do not have to be older to be cheaper, they are just made for a difference performance-class (and therefore price-class). Quote
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

You mean telling me to get mid range CPU?




---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Quote Again no. As stated above, the current Core i3 and AMD FX4000 CPUs are state of the art, not old CPUs for poor people.
Of course you can still buy older CPUs, but they a) do not necessarily have to be cheaper and b) are not sold by AMD/Intel (and not part of their marketing plan), but by retailers that have them still in stock.Quote
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Than this is what I do not understand intel is not just in businesses of making fast CPU they are in businesses making new CPU for people tight on money.



---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Quote I don't think so. I think what you don't get is that there are different CPUs for different purposes in different price classes. It doesn't make sense to put a 500$ high performance CPU in a netbook, you wouldn't be able to cool that thing and the battery would last only 10 minutes. Besides the fact that nobody would buy such an overpriced and useless thing. You also wouldn't put a 20$ netbook CPU in a high performance computer that is used for number-crunching.Quote
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------


I think it do I;m thinking some think like moore's law that is linear growth that goes every 2 years but does not been it going be 2 times faster every 2 years .

Where in fact it is not in intel or AMD marketing plan at all that it going to be linear growth with CPU every year but in businesses of making very high, high,low and mid range CPU's every year

Please read this loud and carefully, before I answer to the post above:
A low cost CPU does not have to be old. The Atom N2600 is from 2012, nonetheless is it a low cost CPU. IT IS NOT OLD. BUT IT IS CHEAP.
Also, please use the quote function of the forum, that makes your posts much more readable.

Now to your post:
You still don't get it. You want a fast CPU in a netbook? Fine, if you want to shut it down every two minutes because it overheats then build something like that. Also, you will have a battery life of about 10 minutes. But at least it are fast 10 minutes (if you don't count the time were the machine shuts down because it overheats).
Again, cheap is not the same as old.

Again, cheap is not old. A Mac mini for 600€ does not have to be older than a 2600€ Mac Pro, they have different purposes and therefore different price classes. A Mac mini with the CPU from the Mac Pro would shut down after a few minutes because of overheating.

No, I don't. All I wanted to say with that was: Cheap is not the same as old. There are cheap new CPUs on the market.

Exactly, Intel makes CPUs for all price classes and for different purposes. And that has nothing to do with people being tight on money. If someone buys a netbook he wants small size and low power consumption, so that the battery lasts long. Such low power CPUs can be produced very cheap. Therefore netbooks are cheap.

Moore's law has nothing to do with speed. And it doesn't apply at all here. My 2010 Phenom II six core CPU will outperform any 2012 Core i3 CPU. Because they have different performance classes. Age and Moore's law doesn't play any role in that.

Forget about the linear growth. there is no such thing. Even if you look at Moore's law, it talks about the number of transistors. Complexity, not speed.

Good grief!!!

Let's change the subject: What is the definition of "resolution" in a digital camera? Will a 16MP camera make a picture twice as good as an 8MP model?

Does Moore's law apply to digital cameras?

Why do cars not improve fuel efficiency by a set amount every year?
Why do farmers not increase crop yields by a set amount every year?
Why does my favourite rugby team not increase the number of points they score by a set amount every year?

Give one example of any piece of technology that is improved by an arbitrary amount in an arbitrary time span each and every time. Improvements are made when they can be, not according to a calendar. I have no idea from where you get the idea that people can decide exactly how much something will be improved and how often. Either your perception of how the universe works is grossly skewed or this thread is feeding time in the troll's lair. You are lucky TobiSGD has the patience for this.

That's weird, some other members here call me ill-tempered.

Ill-tempered? Your patience in this thread has been amazing. I would have given up after the OP's second or third post.

Okay you have a point here.






Bingo so that the problem I was not understanding there are CPUs for all price classes that is why there so many CPU's a different speeds and thus start thread with out comparing models you not going get a proper reply thus is no rule a CPU from 2012 from 2008 is 3 times faster.




Yes but this where me and some other posters do not understand it. It is Moore's law the number of transistors count go up every 2 years and it was intel CEO that said every 18 months transistors count and faster . And the media not understand it .


That the thing my head was was wrapped up thinking CPU growth was linear growth some thing like Moore's law not understanding there are CPUs for all price classes and heat and battery issues that is why there so many CPU's a different speeds and thus start thread can not get proper reply do to you have to be comparing models .

I think now you got it.

Most people get a clue from the fact that different computer models have different processor speeds (faster = more expensive), different size hard drives (larger = more expensive), different CPUs (some expensive and some cheap).