This is a split board - You can return to the Split List for other boards.

Why the hell has single core performance advancement been so s***?

  • Topic Archived
You're browsing the GameFAQs Message Boards as a guest. Sign Up for free (or Log In if you already have an account) to be able to post messages, change how messages are displayed, and view media in posts.
  1. Boards
  2. PC
  3. Why the hell has single core performance advancement been so s***?

User Info: Boge

Boge
3 months ago#11
I could be way off because I don't really care about this kind of thing, but I think I heard something about limitations with silicon, which is what these chips are made out of.
Hey, how come my two cents is only worth like a half a cent?

User Info: Kano92

Kano92
3 months ago#12
lightningbugx posted...
To make a CPU faster, you have to make the circuits shorter. Yet, we keep adding more transistors. Well, we are rearranging the circuits to be wider than longer. Unfortunately, you can only improve the circuit so much.

And then there is x86... It is obsolete.


I don't much this either but here's my question... but why can't we just drop x86 completely and just make x64 now ? Dropping x86 wouldn't that free up some room/resources ?
PC-WiiU-PS4

User Info: Lienhart

Lienhart
3 months ago#13
Kano92 posted...
lightningbugx posted...
To make a CPU faster, you have to make the circuits shorter. Yet, we keep adding more transistors. Well, we are rearranging the circuits to be wider than longer. Unfortunately, you can only improve the circuit so much.

And then there is x86... It is obsolete.


I don't much this either but here's my question... but why can't we just drop x86 completely and just make x64 now ? Dropping x86 wouldn't that free up some room/resources ?


Because x86 instructions include both 16 bit and 32 bit applications. If you drop x86 support, you can bet that more than 90% of games will be unplayable.

User Info: lightningbugx

lightningbugx
3 months ago#14
Kano92 posted...
lightningbugx posted...
To make a CPU faster, you have to make the circuits shorter. Yet, we keep adding more transistors. Well, we are rearranging the circuits to be wider than longer. Unfortunately, you can only improve the circuit so much.

And then there is x86... It is obsolete.


I don't much this either but here's my question... but why can't we just drop x86 completely and just make x64 now ? Dropping x86 wouldn't that free up some room/resources ?


x64 is not an instruction set architecture. x64 is only an extension library appended to x86. x64 requires x86.

The slightest change to x86 breaks compatibility with programs compiled to run on an x86-based CPU. In order to introduce a simpler ISA, people have to port the programs and games to CPUs that support it. Otherwise, you are looking at building a PC with the main CPU being the new, better ISA, and a secondary CPU that runs x86 and an OS that can sort the difference out.
Ryzen 1800X, 16GB 3600 MHz CAS15 DDR4, 2x Radeon R9 390X, GA-AX370-Gaming K7
x86 is holding back PCs.

User Info: BrokenMachine85

BrokenMachine85
3 months ago#15
Orestes417 posted...
BrokenMachine85 posted...
Console being lead development platform based on more core computing has meant there's little need for high clocks.


Because gaming is even remotely relevant to what drives performance... oh god that's adorable.

Basically to push higher speeds means going higher on power draw and heat generation which is undesirable and nearing it's limits anyway. So they focus on IPC, efficiency, and mutlithreading instead


It affects R&D budgets and push to market dates, yes.

CPU technology has continued to evolve in server based systems due to growth and demand. Not so much in the mainstream consumer markets for reasons stated.
Ryzen 1600X @4GHz | Palit GTX 1080 OC @2GHz | 16GB 3200MHz DDR4 | HyperX SSD | 28" Acer 4K
Actively Playing: Splatoon 2 | Quake Champions | D&D Online

User Info: tatsuya1221

tatsuya1221
3 months ago#16
Kano92 posted...
lightningbugx posted...
To make a CPU faster, you have to make the circuits shorter. Yet, we keep adding more transistors. Well, we are rearranging the circuits to be wider than longer. Unfortunately, you can only improve the circuit so much.

And then there is x86... It is obsolete.


I don't much this either but here's my question... but why can't we just drop x86 completely and just make x64 now ? Dropping x86 wouldn't that free up some room/resources ?

Besides what has been said before, dropping x86 support for other methods via emulating x86 isn't feasable, specifically x86 emulation would take too much processing power and would essentially render any benefits of dropping x86 meaningless, in all likelihood we'll be using x86 until quantum computers become viable, though i'm no expert.

As for why ipc performance is getting to be less and less, again i'm not an expert, but part of it is probably the fact we're getting close or may actually be at the size threshold wherein going smaller actually will reduce performance on silicon based chips, i believe it has something to do with heat transfer, electrical resistance and the speed of light, but again i'm not expert, that said this is why intel has been kind of taking a beating by amd's ryzen lately even though intel still holds a small ipc lead, since we're nearing the wall, the only way you will be able to get more processing power is through the use of more cores, on which amd has been ahead of intel on for well over a decade, ironically sandy bridge was considered the superior cpu when bulldozer came out, now a average bulldozer cpu will be superior in a good amount of cases outside of gaming and occasionally even in gaming, a good example being in my case, final fantasy 14 runs better on my friend's bulldozer cpu then it does on my i5 2500k.

If i'm wrong someone please correct me, but i'm pretty sure i've gotten everything right on this.
One who does not learn from his mistakes, is doomed to repeat them.

User Info: BrokenMachine85

BrokenMachine85
3 months ago#17
Pretty much the only place to go is more cores.
Ryzen 1600X @4GHz | Palit GTX 1080 OC @2GHz | 16GB 3200MHz DDR4 | HyperX SSD | 28" Acer 4K
Actively Playing: Splatoon 2 | Quake Champions

User Info: SinisterSlay

SinisterSlay
3 months ago#18
We are probably going to get to a time where we have 2 x86 cpus, and the rest of the cpus are something else, like arm. Microsoft is preparing for this and have already made an x86 emulator.
He who stumbles around in darkness with a stick is blind. But he who... sticks out in darkness... is... fluorescent! - Brother Silence

User Info: ArkonBlade

ArkonBlade
3 months ago#19
Intel has had zero competition for far to long.
YouTube Channel https://www.youtube.com/user/ArkonBlade/videos
PSN - ArkonBlade XBL - The Wolf Shadow STEAM - ArkonBlade

User Info: Cpt_Communism

Cpt_Communism
3 months ago#20
I found the video with Nvidia's CEO talking about the problems facing CPU computing today. The highest authority speaking on this subject that I know of.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hpxTSvu1HUQ
You're not obligated to attend every argument.
The ability to walk away from something stupid is a huge boost to daily life.
  1. Boards
  2. PC
  3. Why the hell has single core performance advancement been so s***?

Report Message

Terms of Use Violations:

Etiquette Issues:

Notes (optional; required for "Other"):
Add user to Ignore List after reporting

Topic Sticky

You are not allowed to request a sticky.

  • Topic Archived