When do you think PC building and PC in general will die?

[LazyLand]

13 minutes ago, Mark Kaine said:

you forgot to put "objectively" somewhere to make this highly subjective and environmental issues ignoring opinion somehow seem more valid than it it really is...

I have spent at least 7 minutes reading the comment and didn't manage to understand it yet

I really need a few english lessons damn

[Helpful Tech Witch]

When pigs can fly and apple willing allows sideloading.

That is when a gaming pc will die.

[Moonzy]

7 minutes ago, HelpfulTechWizard said:

When pigs can fly and apple willing allows sideloading.

That is when a gaming pc will die.

That's one thing down, I suppose

Spoiler

 

[dizmo]

I see where you're coming from, it's just poorly worded. You're basically saying you think SoCs like the M1 and Snapdragon chips are going to take over the market, yes? That will likely be the case, eventually, and it could very well happen in 25 years. It'll be interesting to see how it holds up though; I don't think people would be that eager to have something where everything is embedded. It'd basically mean that PC gaming as a whole would die, and we'd move to something more akin to consoles, where every few years you replace the entire device since pretty much everything would be embedded. By then everything could be streamed, so we wouldn't really have to have large amounts of storage, or even compute on a gaming PC; it could all be handled by the server. Realistically by then most of us will probably be computing on devices much different than we are now. I can only imagine what phones will be like, not to mention how much they manage to shrink down VR. We could easily see a pair of glasses that have the entire gaming system built into them.

 

It's interesting, initially I would have disagreed with you based on how you'd written it. Saying that people would go from gaming PCs to laptops just because chips use less power doesn't make much sense, since they're different form factors.

 

Something for everyone to keep in mind: Doom, which I'd consider the first real mainstream PC game, came out in 1992. 28 years ago. A lot can change in 25 years.

 

3 hours ago, ragnarok0273 said:

I see one possible flaw with this:

AMD, Intel, and Nvidia will probably make chips for people to build with. Without PC building, they won't make as much.

They'd probably make more money having integrated solutions, instead of something you can easily swap out.

3 hours ago, Fasauceome said:

We've got new computing technology on the horizon, look at quantum. Do you think quantum can manage to develop and shrink into mobile-only relevance in 25 years? What about if we discover yet another method of computation that required a new technology?

The rate at which technology improves, it honestly wouldn't surprise me. 25 years is a long time.

2 hours ago, ezsteev said:

You are watching too many youtube bros.

Normal people have 20 hard drives in their computers.

Multiple PCIe expansion cards

Multiple monitors

And they lay down their towers horizontally because they don't need to show it for any camera.

I can't tell if you're joking or not

2 hours ago, Aereldor said:

The year 100,000,000,002,020. 

A trillion years from now, when the approximate heat death of the universe takes place

By then humans will have moved on from the existence we have now. Hell in 1,000 years we'll likely no longer be in flesh bodies at the rate we're going.

[Aereldor]

3 minutes ago, dizmo said:

By then humans will have moved on from the existence we have now. Hell in 1,000 years we'll likely no longer be in flesh bodies at the rate we're going.

And you bet your ass my great¹⁰⁰ grandson is going to drag his fat cyborg ass down to space market to buy a value oriented gaming computer.

[dizmo]

2 minutes ago, Aereldor said:

And you bet your ass my great¹⁰⁰ grandson is going to drag his fat cyborg ass down to space market to buy a value oriented gaming computer.

Why would he need to buy anything I doubt currency would exist. Really, I doubt physical bodies would exist, we'd just be uploaded to a neural net. Seems to be the direction we're headed in.

[whm1974]

49 minutes ago, dizmo said:

Why would he need to buy anything I doubt currency would exist. Really, I doubt physical bodies would exist, we'd just be uploaded to a neural net. Seems to be the direction we're headed in.

Where is your Evidence that indicate Physical Bodies will not exist for Humans? A Neural Net Still requires Hardware to store and run said Net.

 

There be many people will outright refuse to give up Biological Bodies that are still Human. The Amish are one such group for example.

[TehDwonz]

4 hours ago, LazyLand said:

No, this is not one of the annoying stupid websites claiming pcs are dead or something. But I think we will need to accept that in the near future, pcs will die due to the much lower power consumption chips we will use. There will be no need for pcs anymore, only laptops and mini pcs like the mac mini.
What do you guys think ? I bet we don't have more than 25 years left. 


EDIT: I MEANT GAMING/EDITING PCS, NOT INCLUDING SUPER COMPUTERS OR HUGE SERVERS!

Yes, electronics always gets smaller and more efficient. But you know what people always do when that happens? They wonder how much faster it can go if you combine more of them in a single device...

It's a never ending cycle, and it's not driven much by "need", but by "want" and "but can it go faster, just because?".

[Mark Kaine]

56 minutes ago, TehDwonz said:

Yes, electronics always gets smaller and more efficient

that is debatable though, just because it's been like that the last 50 years or so doesn't mean there aren't physical limits and it will just continue forever. for example you can see this in desktop CPU's already, I got the feeling they're currently getting bigger not smaller as we approach the end of Moore's law shrinking process... 

 

58 minutes ago, TehDwonz said:

It's a never ending cycle

yeah, well hopefully not, likely there will be laws in place that simply don't allow using up power and pollute the planet "just because" in the foreseeable future because that's a cycle that has to end, on this planet at least. 

[unsorted]

6 hours ago, LazyLand said:

But I think we will need to accept that in the near future, pcs will die due to the much lower power consumption chips we will use.

 

Desktops and larger cases and higher airflow designs will always be needed to push performance, no matter the efficiency level reached in CPUs.

 

There will always be demand for more performance on the desktop. Content-creation and gamers push envelopes. Some of these guys would sell their grandma for a tiny improvement in performance.

 

There is always a performance difference between higher-airflow bigger-box designs and smaller ones. I think there always will be. Bigger designs typically allow for more thermal management, and therefore allow for more performance.

 

 

[Badger906]

"pcs are dying' has been thrown around since mid to late 2000s when smart phones and tablets came about.. tablets have all but died, and smartphones haven't become powerful enough for the tasks where a powerful pc is required. 

I mean.. consoles have bought up, showing the stagnation of pcs. anyone aiming to game at 1080p shouldn't bother with a pc these days. console will do a better job and cheaper. hell even 1440p is at risk...

[whm1974]

10 minutes ago, Mark Kaine said:

that is debatable though, just because it's been like that the last 50 years or so doesn't mean there aren't physical limits and it will just continue forever. for example you can see this in desktop CPU's already, I got the feeling they're currently getting bigger not smaller as we approach the end of Moore's law shrinking process... 

 

yeah, well hopefully not, likely there will be laws in place that simply don't allow using up power and pollute the planet "just because" in the foreseeable future because that's a cycle that has to end, on this planet at least. 

Technological Development itself is a fairly never ending cycle for Human Beings. Aside from Physical Limitations imposed by Nature.

[G0dSpeed]

I think Computers will forever be in a kind of Cold War Arms (or Space) Race kind of position where people will always want better graphics, more complex AI, Etc. And if No Mans Sky proved anything is that Procedural development can be pushed even further. Not to mention the possibility of different interfaces such as VR and eventually something like NeuraLink will likely take a crazy amount of computing power.

[Mooshi]

6 hours ago, LazyLand said:

No, this is not one of the annoying stupid websites claiming pcs are dead or something. But I think we will need to accept that in the near future, pcs will die due to the much lower power consumption chips we will use. There will be no need for pcs anymore, only laptops and mini pcs like the mac mini.
What do you guys think ? I bet we don't have more than 25 years left. 


EDIT: I MEANT GAMING/EDITING PCS, NOT INCLUDING SUPER COMPUTERS OR HUGE SERVERS!

It makes absolutely zero sense why pc building will go away in favor of laptops. If that were the case, basic users would all have Intel Nucs or Raspberry Pis even though you can build a budget oriented pc today let alone gaming/workstations.

[whm1974]

I do wondering if 6" Cell Phone screens should be considered to be the Usable Minimal Size?

[abc_123]

6 hours ago, LazyLand said:

Look, I'm not saying 3 years, but sooner or later.. it's going to happen. My bet is 25 years max, so I asked u guys that's all 

 

This myth has been touted for over two decades now and PC's still haven't gone anywhere. There's this article from 1999 that mentions the concept: https://firstmonday.org/ojs/index.php/fm/article/view/688/598

 

I guess that means in total they will have been 'dying' for around half a century by 2045.

[Mark Kaine]

1 hour ago, G0dSpeed said:

I think Computers will forever be in a kind of Cold War Arms (or Space) Race kind of position where people will always want better graphics, more complex AI, Etc

I tend to agree, however despite that, I see a lot of stagnation in the foreseeable future as we're approaching the end of what can be done with current, outdated tech fast due to physical constraints. 

 

yes, I fully expect companies like Intel, Microsoft, nvidia, AMD to try to drag the inevitable end out as long as possible, which in the end, still means a lot of stagnation, sadly

 

 

52 minutes ago, Emily123 said:

There's this article from 1999 that mentions the concept 

 

what concept? I didn't read it fully, I kinda stopped at "invisible computer"... but I think they maybe got some good ideas, though it really seems very theoretical and not really saying much in the end...? 

 

However I don't think the "personal computer" is going anywhere, especially not as long Microsoft exists, but I do believe it will change its forms more or less drastically - as for a time frame that is really impossible to say, I think certain parties (ie  pc hardware manufacturers) will be able to drag out the inevitable for at least another 10-30 years though, unless... they secretly got some aces up their sleeves (ie more modern chip designs) then it might be faster. 

 

point is things won't stay forever like they're now because there are several physical constraints forbidding that idea (see my other reply above for one example) 

[abc_123]

8 minutes ago, Mark Kaine said:

what concept? I didn't read it fully

 

In the introduction it says "The PC is dead. Technology gurus assure us that the PC is passe, and we are entering a new era of computing" the article isn't so much about how desktop computers are dying but the fact that it mentions it shows that PCs being dead / dying is something people thought back then.

There's a more obvious article detailing and refuting a claim saying how mobile devices will soon replace PCs and that's from 2005 too: http://web.archive.org/web/20051120081107/http://weblogs.jupiterresearch.com/analysts/gartenberg/archives/007749.html

This isn't a new idea and people have been saying PCs are dying for years now so I'm skeptical every time people suggest its finally going to happen.

[Mark Kaine]

1 minute ago, Emily123 said:

 

In the introduction it says "The PC is dead. Technology gurus assure us that the PC is passe, and we are entering a new era of computing" the article isn't so much about how desktop computers are dying but the fact that it mentions it shows that PCs being dead / dying is something people thought back then.

There's a more obvious article from 2005 too: http://web.archive.org/web/20051120081107/http://weblogs.jupiterresearch.com/analysts/gartenberg/archives/007749.html

This isn't a new idea and people have been saying PCs are dying for years now so I'm skeptical every time people suggest its finally going to happen.

oh, I see now, yeah I don't think pcs will "die"... just change their form and hopefully the ways they work, I'm not quite sure why we still use keyboards to type and communicate with a machine for example (tho as I said there are certainly forces holding advances back, in my opinion) 

 

Btw interesting quote / fact from what I linked above 

 

Quote

Likewise, the fabs that make the most advanced chips are becoming prohibitively pricey. The cost of a fab is rising at around 13% a year, and is expected to reach $16 billion or more by 2022. Not coincidentally, the number of companies with plans to make the next generation of chips has now shrunk to only three, down from eight in 2010 and 25 in 2002.

 

idk what to make out of it either tbh, but I definitely got the feeling hardware manufacturers are really just trying to ride out the inevitable at the moment, instead of innovating (I do believe they have some things up there sleeves though, hopefully!) 

[2plash6]

Gaming PCs and home gaming systems will be up for a while, because for the next few decades(or even further) people will always enjoy to sit down, take a break, and play a game.

[dizmo]

4 hours ago, whm1974 said:

Where is your Evidence that indicate Physical Bodies will not exist for Humans? A Neural Net Still requires Hardware to store and run said Net.

 

There be many people will outright refuse to give up Biological Bodies that are still Human. The Amish are one such group for example.

You're thinking in terms of now. I'm talking in 1,000 years. The difference is enormous.

[whm1974]

Just now, dizmo said:

You're thinking in terms of now. I'm talking in 1,000 years. The difference is enormous.

Even that No Person will still be Living in 1,000 Years?

[dizmo]

1 minute ago, whm1974 said:

Even that No Person will still be Living in 1,000 Years?

If you look at even one generation of human, the differences in acceptance of implanted tech is extreme, to virtually no one saying they'd accept it for the older generation, and the younger generation having a quite considerable percentage of acceptance. Elon has also talked about it in depth.

[straight_stewie]

11 hours ago, NineEyeRon said:

Cloud gaming is the future but it’s still going to be a long time before you can run an raytracing game at 4K/120Hz on a client device.

That will not be true at least until we decide whether we think the No-Communication Theorem is true or not. We cannot do real time graphics rendering non-locally until we can roundtrip data without any non-negligible latency.

[Kisai]

21 hours ago, LazyLand said:

No, this is not one of the annoying stupid websites claiming pcs are dead or something. But I think we will need to accept that in the near future, pcs will die due to the much lower power consumption chips we will use. There will be no need for pcs anymore, only laptops and mini pcs like the mac mini.
What do you guys think ? I bet we don't have more than 25 years left. 


EDIT: I MEANT GAMING/EDITING PCS, NOT INCLUDING SUPER COMPUTERS OR HUGE SERVERS!

 

Ultimately the "middle" will keep getting hollowed out of the market until there's only all-in-one devices (eg an iphone that can be plugged into dock for a standard keyboard-mouse-monitor setup) and high-end devices (eg i9/Ryzen 9 devices) for consumers.

 

If you ask "who is the target customer" of desktop celeron, pentium, i3, and AMD's APU parts, it's basically all rubbish-tier parts that nobody should be using as a desktop. There are certainly applications where they are useable, still (eg IoT devices) but when I see these things being marketed as "developing world" hardware, I immediately ask "if you're trying to sell to the developing world, what they need are energy-efficient devices, of which desktops are not that." Likewise, when they're promoted as being used in education/chromebooks, again you have the problem of giving kids these poor-performing devices, which then hinders their ability to work with their peers in other schools who might have better, or even different devices.