![[H]ard|Forum](/styles/hardforum/xenforo/logo_dark.png){kind=logo}
- Joined
- Jul 27, 2006
- Messages
- 9,484
Why don't they take some of the hardware that is 10-20 years old, and completely remake them using today's technology and efficiencies?
I would love to be able to buy a 500MHz processor that only pulls 1W and has 2MB L2 Cache (or perhaps even some L3 Cache). How about a 500MHz quadcore? Might not even need heatsinks for them! These things could perhaps easily cost around $5-$15.
The cheapest motherboard of popular brands might even be overkill and high-end for these things.. so they could possibly make motherboards that are more suited to the super low-end <1GHz specs for even less overall power draw.
I feel like one of the main objectives, 10-20 years ago, was to improve efficiency, design, and technology, and utilize the newfound knowledge to rebuild old hardware (with the same specs). Instead, it's all about faster and faster and more and more. The thing is, for many applications and uses, it's such a waste of money to buy even the cheapest CPU of new technology -- as that CPU would still be way overkill for simple tasks, and would use more energy than desired.
Anyone feel the same way?
EDIT: For every generation, they all utilize about the same amount of power and generate roughly about the same amount of heat; the only difference is the amount of horsepower that can be output. Why not just lock the lock at a set frequency, and effectively result in a non-embedded processor with that much less power usage and heat generation?
I'm probably overdescribing what I am wanting to say.
I would love to be able to buy a 500MHz processor that only pulls 1W and has 2MB L2 Cache (or perhaps even some L3 Cache). How about a 500MHz quadcore? Might not even need heatsinks for them! These things could perhaps easily cost around $5-$15.
The cheapest motherboard of popular brands might even be overkill and high-end for these things.. so they could possibly make motherboards that are more suited to the super low-end <1GHz specs for even less overall power draw.
I feel like one of the main objectives, 10-20 years ago, was to improve efficiency, design, and technology, and utilize the newfound knowledge to rebuild old hardware (with the same specs). Instead, it's all about faster and faster and more and more. The thing is, for many applications and uses, it's such a waste of money to buy even the cheapest CPU of new technology -- as that CPU would still be way overkill for simple tasks, and would use more energy than desired.
Anyone feel the same way?
EDIT: For every generation, they all utilize about the same amount of power and generate roughly about the same amount of heat; the only difference is the amount of horsepower that can be output. Why not just lock the lock at a set frequency, and effectively result in a non-embedded processor with that much less power usage and heat generation?
I'm probably overdescribing what I am wanting to say.