General discussion

Locked

getting ahead of ourselves

By Norehca ·
i dont even know what my thought is on this. id like to hear what others think.

now an application can only run so smooth and use up so many recourses. just because you have 8GB of RAM doesnt mean its gonna make use of it all. So why are we spending so much money on RAM? And why are we buying dual core CPU's when so many applications arent using that second core? What about the 2TB of HDD space....that your not using? for servers yes but why are people buying so much space that there not gonna use. i would think that in the future operating systems and applications are going to take up less space as technology improves, and applications will have lower system requirements.

i dont understand why people are spending so much money on resources that arent being used. i have an AGP based gaming system that runs fine. i dont expect to upgrade to PCI-E or a socket 939 for a while. My socket 754 AGP system has dominated anything ive thrown at it.

so like...whats goin on?

This conversation is currently closed to new comments.

9 total posts (Page 1 of 1)  
| Thread display: Collapse - | Expand +

All Comments

Collapse -

Because the demand for resources by applications is increasing.

by deepsand In reply to getting ahead of ourselve ...

Such has always been, and will continue to be, the case.

Web page files, for example, become larger and larger, requiring more RAM & HD space, CPU power, and I/O speed for their being downloaded, stored, processed and rendered for viewing.

Also, they include more and more client side functions, i.e. functions that are executed by the clien rather than the serve, which place a further burden on the client's resources.

Just as work expands to fill the allotted time, so to do computer applications grow to use all available resources.

Collapse -

yeah but

by Norehca In reply to Because the demand for re ...

when do you think your gonna fill up a TB of space on your home computer?

Collapse -

Depends on how you use the machine.

by CharlieSpencer In reply to yeah but

A lot of people do things with media files, which can be quite large. Some have moved their entire music and video libraries to their hard drive, and also use their computers as video recorders.

Also, right now hardware is as cheap as it's ever been. If you can afford it, and you're buying a new system anyway, why not go for it? I personally think it's overkill, but it's not coming out of my pocket.

Why do U.S. car manufacturers turn out 300hp engines when the legal speed limit isn't over 70 except in a couple of underpopulated states?

Collapse -

300 hp

by Pringles86 In reply to Depends on how you use th ...

The more horsepower you have, the quicker you get to that posted speed limit and the more fun it is.

Collapse -

Quickly

by Pringles86 In reply to yeah but

I could fill up a TB of space quickly if I wanted to.

Right now I only have about 500 GB of used space between my two computers. If I didn't compress the DVDs I have ripped to them, I would have close to 2 TB.

As for the dual core processors. I multi-task a lot, so both cores are used. Running an intensive app on each screen.

Collapse -

I am currently using multiple systems

by w2ktechman In reply to Quickly

with multiple desktops, and multiple monitors.
I have lots of different things going on all of the time, and I run into many slowdowns because of it. If these were dual core systems with more memory, this would be reduced.

Also to note:these notebooks have 80GB HDD's in them, and every MONTH I have to archive or delete 30-40 GB of data because I am running out of space and cannot even defrag.
So I am totally with Pringles86 on this. There are plenty of reasons people want/need more storage and/or faster systems.

Collapse -

i see

by Norehca In reply to I am currently using mult ...

i guess your right. recorded TV takes up alot of space too. and i guess if you do have the money why not? i see now why but...there still are some systems out there that are overkill to the max.

Collapse -

If I run but 1 simple app at a time, never.

by deepsand In reply to yeah but

However, as I run multiple & complex apps simultaneously, I now find 250 GB of HD space, & 2 GB of RAM, to be the minimum needed for my present usage.

Considering the changes that I've seen since my 1958 introduction 1st generation machines, I've little doubt but that tommorow's needs will outstrip today's.

Collapse -

I make use of the resources

by Neon Samurai In reply to getting ahead of ourselve ...

Forgoing any debate about software (or which software) is expanding faster to fill larger available resource limits; I make use of it.

I don't get to upgrade parts regularily but when I do, I buy big off the gamer's shelf. I also explore wht the additional resources can do; for example, the 386 to 486 cpu jump took rendering a 20 frame morph animation from eight hours down to fifteen minutes. Currently I'm hitting the resource limits of my machine running too many VM at the same time; that will go away with the next upgrade after which I want to play with clustering VM to understand how it works. If I can't play with the latest and greatest, how do I expect to know what it can really do?

Games used to be the benchmark for upgrading my machine. It's now VM, if I can build a monster of a machine that can handle the VM I plan to throw at it then playing the latest game won't be any concern.

I can't justify going to a SLI video card setup though. I'm only pushing out too 1280x1024 and while the 8800 is a pretty card, I won't need more than one to max out graphics.

My gripe with modern computers is the lack of PCI slots though; I'm tryin to put more functions into the rigg, they're trying to take them out or include them into the mobo directly.

Back to Networks Forum
9 total posts (Page 1 of 1)  

Related Discussions

Related Forums