Conversation
Notices
-
Embed this notice
the continued focus on cutting edge hardware is extremely foolish. the correct approach to computing in 2025 and beyond is to lock in hardware that's relatively easy to make, and write better software
the west is ignoring the resource we actually have, which is exceptional software engineers, in favor of a resource we don't have and can't get soon, which is TSMC
in general, asking old, giant, inflexible companies to solve problems is also a total waste of time and resources. they're dead players. we need new, small companies to be given the resources and flexibility to design and build new things across the board
none of these things will happen of course because the system is run by leeches. nobody in the west is actually trying to solve problems
- Johnny Peligro likes this.
-
Embed this notice
@professionalbigot69 10 year old hardware is great. it's incredible, it's amazing, it's a dream beyond dreams for developers of the 90s. nobody has even scratched the surface of what 10 year old hardware can do with actually good software
if you're constantly making new shit, it's never stable. it's never refined. the hardware bugs are never resolved. the spec is never codified. engineering cannot happen, because the rules of the universe keep changing with each revision. how do you build a lasting bridge when you don't know what gravity or the tensile strength of steel is going to be in 18 months?
and why would you want your hardware base to be something super difficult to make when the thing that's much easier to make does the job? hardware should be closer to a biplane than an F-35, as a rule
-
Embed this notice
@deprecated_ii @professionalbigot69 This might be a very shallow view, but the hw we have currently is pretty good, and I wonder what'd happen if the same efforts that were made for consoles like the ps3 and ps2 were applied for x86 machines.
-
Embed this notice
@deprecated_ii what's wrong with having both great hardware and great software?
-
Embed this notice
@deprecated_ii we had bulldozer and intel's top spec were quad core in 2015, friendo
it was fucked
-
Embed this notice
@professionalbigot69 I'm old enough to have spent years using an amiga 500 with a single core, simple, 7 MHz processor with a tiny little sliver of RAM and it was a very good experience. not relatively good, objectively good
the first PC I owned myself had a 466 mhz processor. many applications ran better on that than they do on high end systems today. why? because they weren't 99.9% bloat
nobody's gonna tell me it's impossible or even difficult to get software running well on a 4 core 3.5 GHz processor with gigs of RAM available plus a couple dozen on-die hardware accelerators to do the hard stuff for you
-
Embed this notice
@professionalbigot69 @deprecated_ii avx512 has been beeg for emus currently.
-
Embed this notice
@professionalbigot69 🙄 because every piece of software is absolute dogshit. that's the point
-
Embed this notice
@deprecated_ii that's a bit reductive, don't you think?
there's plenty of programs out there that benefit from the latest instruction sets and architectures
-
Embed this notice
@deprecated_ii if all you ever touch is a word processor and a web browser, yeah a quad core's enough
-
Embed this notice
@professionalbigot69 @deprecated_ii having both is obviously ideal
but from a tactical standpoint, we're not getting 0.01nm giganigga processor fabs in the US in the next handful of years
solid software is a lot easier to reach
hell, the govt could make the open document format the official format going forward and just that would do a lot of good
-
Embed this notice
@professionalbigot69 no, I don't think so. if something ran well on hardware that's 1/20th the power of modern hardware and runs like shit now, obviously the software has gotten much worse
every real problem has a lower bound, a minimum, for how much computing power is required to satisfy the requirements. this bound is much, much, much lower than you think it is. anything that requires a tremendous amount of compute is optional, without exception
-
Embed this notice
@deprecated_ii @professionalbigot69 Proof of this is Uis. Linux desktops are magnitudes less demanding than windows 11, and windows 11 doesn't do anything special that excuses its horrible performance. It has fancy glass effects that any gpu of the last 10 years can easily show.
-
Embed this notice
>anything that requires a tremendous amount of compute is optional, without exception
Anything in everyday computing. There are some special purpose algos that do require lots of compute. And servers handling yuge amounts of requests. But in general, for daily computer use by individuals your point stands.
XP had a perfectly serviceable graphic UI in the year 2000 with hardware available at the time. With the exception of high end games a 25 year old PC should be enough to run the UI and Word and whatnot today.
-
Embed this notice
@deprecated_ii @professionalbigot69 that said, man I still want the latest hardware. iGPUs are so cool, and the laptop power efficiency increasing is so nice.
-
Embed this notice
@deprecated_ii Part of the problem is we would be asking the $200k/each diploma farm we have set up to stop printing money. If we prioritize people capable of programming to the level you're talking about, meaningful STEM (which is 90% comp-sci, let's be honest) enrollment drops to a fraction and the promise of a high paying career getting men into college goes away. That's already going away with the jeets, but corps get slave labor, so they'll take the hit.
This, like everything we tend to push for over here in Chudland, would be good for man and country, but it's something the money worshipers and loan sharks will fight tooth and nail against and the right wing refuses to harm corporate profit lines.
In my opinion, the solution to any of these problems requires laws and regulations and those aren't coming from the Right and they'd be anti-White on the Left so we're somewhat stuck until something bends far enough to break.
-
Embed this notice
@Witch_Hunter_Siegfried @deprecated_ii UE5 I bet.
-
Embed this notice
@deprecated_ii Take MGSV vs MGS Delta, V is optimized like a dream and still looks good while Delta runs awfully despite being a remake of a 20 year old game with much smaller environments, while Delta looks better it's not by THAT much. This is in part due to V running on it's own Engine while Delta runs on UE5.
-
Embed this notice
@Homosoypiens @deprecated_ii @Witch_Hunter_Siegfried i didnt see the video but a dude on YT that attacked UE5, said that even COE33, which is the best optimized ue5 game, is still bad. IDK how true that is.
-
Embed this notice
@Witch_Hunter_Siegfried @deprecated_ii eh, even UE5 can run fine if done correctly
Everything is just coded by people with double digit IQ's who have 0 incentive to optimize anything because gamers are cattle who eat shit daily and consider paying $5000 to run AAA games to be a badge of honor
-
Embed this notice
@mischievoustomato @deprecated_ii @Witch_Hunter_Siegfried It can work if you don't push the fidelity of your game too hard but that's not how AAA studios opperate
They keep shoveling as much ray tracing and other garbage into their game to appease the manchildren that even people with 5070's have to rely on AI frames and upscaling
d
Johnny Peligro
Ulysses
JoshuaSlocum
BroDrillard
snap
Witch Hunter Siegfried
Homosoypiens
All GNU social JP content and data are available under the