Has tech advancement slowed right down?

Soootylad

Soootylad

Soootylad

Associate
Joined
5 May 2014
Posts
256
Location
Staffordshire
So I used to be really into the whole performance scene, every new upgrade was met with a barrage of benchmarks and overclocking absorbed days of my time.

But then I became a laptop person! I've had my Macbook Pro (this is a generic hardware question though nothing Apple specific) for nearly 5 years, and its spec is:

• 2.6GHz Quad-core i7
• 16GB RAM
• 256GB SSD
• NVIDIA GeForce GT 650M 1024 MB

So...

I'm now pondering the new version, of which the top model offers:

• 2.7GHz Quad-core i7
• 16GB RAM
• 256GB SSD
• ATI Radeon Pro 455 2048 MB

Do you see why I'm a bit confused as to where 5 years of development has gone? Back in the day every year would see leaps and bounds, is it just that we've hit a wall so now advancements are more about the gimmicky addons?
 
edscdk said:
lack of competition.. lack of need...
Click to expand...

Pretty much this, and it just goes to show with the amount of people who are still rocking with their Sandy Bridge builds because of how well it still performs when overclocked to the max in comparison to today's latest stock specs... even the used prices of these parts still go for a bit on the likes of eBay too.

Liam.
 
Sure, in the PC space maybe, though i would argue that the new i7 is leaps and bounds ahead on energy efficiency and that SSD is probably faster due to improved controllers. But then look at the phone in your pocket and think how that has improved over the last 5 years... you now probably own something that's as fast (for example an iPhone 7 encodes a movie as fast as an MBP sorry it's the iPad pro actually that is as fast, not the iphone) for most tasks as your old MBP, last longer and is pocket sized.
 
Last edited:
If there were 'easy' gains to be made by Intel etc they'd do it... especially AMD! But a lot of marketing money is spent now persuading us that the latest tweak is worth having. Which is fine, otherwise Overclockers would be out of business and we'd all be hanging out on Mumsnet.

Tech has plateaued at the top end, thanks to the laws of physics, so all the real effort is chasing the real money in mobile. Premium end hardware (ie gaming, let's be honest) is probably a shrinking market, at least partially because of folk like myself with 2500k desktops that refuse to grow old. The good news is that soon my toaster will be able to play Crysis3... even if it's only by printing it out at 60 slices a second thanks to cheap lasers.
 
yep. the money is in mobile and sticking silicon in everything under the sun, as well as extracting as much utility out of something for the lowest input of energy.
 
Soootylad said:
So I used to be really into the whole performance scene, every new upgrade was met with a barrage of benchmarks and overclocking absorbed days of my time.

But then I became a laptop person! I've had my Macbook Pro (this is a generic hardware question though nothing Apple specific) for nearly 5 years, and its spec is:

• 2.6GHz Quad-core i7
• 16GB RAM
• 256GB SSD
• NVIDIA GeForce GT 650M 1024 MB

So...

I'm now pondering the new version, of which the top model offers:

• 2.7GHz Quad-core i7
• 16GB RAM
• 256GB SSD
• ATI Radeon Pro 455 2048 MB

Do you see why I'm a bit confused as to where 5 years of development has gone? Back in the day every year would see leaps and bounds, is it just that we've hit a wall so now advancements are more about the gimmicky addons?
Click to expand...

Although i can't be bothered to look, are you comparing apples with apples, your current laptop might have been high-end when you purchased it, are you comparing this with the current high-end models - regardless of whether the price may have jumped an extra $1,000.

topgun06 said:
I've still got a 920 i7 and 6GB of RAM. Coupled with a GTX970 its absolutely fine. There has been no need to do a full upgrade for years.
Click to expand...

I'm still running my 930 with a 6950 and still performs very well. Granted i'm not playing games in Ultra mode, but i've rarely been gaming the last 6 months so not too much of a concern to me. I built this machine in 2010, and excluding drives, the only core component i've had to replace is the PSU. I'm hoping to squeeze another 2-3 years out of it before considering an upgrade.
 
I've upgraded the PSU due to the original going bang, added an SSD and upgraded the GPU a few times. It seems to have kept me in a position to play games on high settings. The core system is still there.

Same, I'd expect the system to last a few more years if needed. I've had it since the start of 2009, so its coming up to 8 years with no need for an upgrade. Pretty pleased with that :)
 
Last edited:
Listing the basic name of the component is not a fair comparison...

16GB RAM 5 years old is not equal to 16GB of todays modules. SSD configuration differing read and write speed, the architecture of the CPUs is probably markedly different, modern programs are written specifically to take advantage of that and the top configuration is not the same its higher with much greater boost clocks i'd wager. GPU is using DDR5, again faster with more VRAM, 4GB if you want it.

So yeah its not a fair comparison if you just put the base number on a bit of paper and its the same... but also keep in mind for laptops its more suited to the role of the kit which is to try and balance power with power consumption to prolong battery and minimise heat.
 
Smffy said:
Listing the basic name of the component is not a fair comparison...

16GB RAM 5 years old is not equal to 16GB of todays modules. SSD configuration differing read and write speed, the architecture of the CPUs is probably markedly different, modern programs are written specifically to take advantage of that and the top configuration is not the same its higher with much greater boost clocks i'd wager. GPU is using DDR5, again faster with more VRAM, 4GB if you want it.

So yeah its not a fair comparison if you just put the base number on a bit of paper and its the same... but also keep in mind for laptops its more suited to the role of the kit which is to try and balance power with power consumption to prolong battery and minimise heat.
Click to expand...

Even looking at it running with various software, you'll GENUINELY not find difference. I'd challenge folks to show a difference between 16GB of DDR3 and 16GB of DDR4.

When benchmarks, anecdotal evidence and other peoples personal experience says there's little difference, I think you need to consider who's likely incorrect.

I'm one sat on a sandy with a decent overclock. There is literally ZERO tangible benefit from a move to Skylake+DDR4 even the likes of NVMe SSD's are a bios flash and an adapter card away. Personally waiting for kaby vs zen to go into full throw-down mud wrestling mode and see which comes out best for my money. May consider an upgrade then.

The only thing that HAS moved on a decent bit is graphics cards. That said, with 1080p still about the most common setup there's little need for crazy cards at the moment either.
 
Last edited:
No, companies have just realised that they can drip feed us while maximising their existing tech and we will continue to lap it up and keep buying. Witness the sheer number of graphics card 'rebrands' that have happened over the last ten years and how long it takes for each new chipset to appear.
 
It all depends heavily on the programs you use and what you are doing... There is a big difference in some but in end of the day its a Macbook so don't expect it to blow your mind with innovation vs. what is possible.

Not really sure why you are posting about a Macbook but talking about some overclocked sandy rig but never mind. There is a difference between the innovation in technology vs. what you perceive is 'worth it' but if you see no reason to update then save your money.
 
Apples to apples

Not a fair comparison

You can get:
I7-6700hq
16gb DDR4
512gb PCI-E m.2 SSD
GTX 1060

Laptop for £1,500

Performance wise, it crushes a £3,000 desktop from only a year or so ago..
 
terley said:
Apples to apples

Not a fair comparison

You can get:
I7-6700hq
16gb DDR4
512gb PCI-E m.2 SSD
GTX 1060

Laptop for £1,500

Performance wise, it crushes a £3,000 desktop from only a year or so ago..
Click to expand...

That spec crushes a £3000 1 year old desktop? I find it hard to believe...

For that cash you could have SLI 980TI's...
 
The biggest movement laptop wise really has been GPU tech - the i7 3610QM in my laptop combined with 16GB still holds up well but the 675m GPU not so much - sadly a bit of a convoluted mess to upgrade the GPU in this laptop :(
 
terley said:
Apples to apples

Not a fair comparison

You can get:
I7-6700hq
16gb DDR4
512gb PCI-E m.2 SSD
GTX 1060

Laptop for £1,500

Performance wise, it crushes a £3,000 desktop from only a year or so ago..
Click to expand...

Crushes in what way?! Think about what you're saying a bit.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom