# Final CPU speed **URL:** \ **Category:** Factual Questions\ **Created:** [February 28, 2003, 12:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/final-cpu-speed/158107 "2003-02-28T12:55:39Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 6\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![Nobody](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/94ad74/32.png) [@Nobody](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Nobody)\ **Post date:** [March 1, 2003, 3:48am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/final-cpu-speed/158107/21 "2003-03-01T03:48:54Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by DreadCthulhu \* > \*\*Computers have been fast enough for basic word processing and web use for years. 300mhz is more than enough for these tasks. Even most photo editing is fast enough on these speed of machine. The only things that are pushing computer power right now in the consumer market are games and video editing. \*\* Yeah, but once CPU’s reach a speed where everyone can connect through the Internet using virtual reality (wouldn’t that be cool) I think CPU speed increases will slow way down, if not stop all togeather. ---
**Author:** ![ftg](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ftg/32/2801_2.png) [@ftg](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ftg)\ **Post date:** [March 1, 2003, 5:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/final-cpu-speed/158107/22 "2003-03-01T17:55:52Z")
(First of all, CPU speeds have very little to do with Internet downloading, Intel ads notwithstanding. A 10MHz ISA bus NIC can keep up with standard broadband/DSL connections speeds.) Keep in mind that not only have clock speeds increased, but the amount of work done during a clock cycle has also increased. We’ve gone from 4 bit microprocessors to 64 bits in 20+ years. Current CPUs can execute several instructions more or less in parallel. The next big thing is true parallel processing for PCs. Dual+ processor boards have never taken off for consumer gear, but that could change in the next few years. (One big holdup is that the OS most people use isn’t designed for massive parallel processing.) But think in terms of 16-256 10 Gigahertz processors and wonder at the processing power that represents. ---
**Author:** ![Nobody](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/94ad74/32.png) [@Nobody](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Nobody)\ **Post date:** [March 1, 2003, 6:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/final-cpu-speed/158107/23 "2003-03-01T18:38:11Z")
Well yes, I wasn’t talking about downloading really, I was talking about ways to connect to the Internet that are so sophisticated compared to todays standards, that it would take a fast and powerfull computer on the users end to do so. ---
**Author:** ![pung](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/ebca7d/32.png) [@pung](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/pung)\ **Post date:** [March 1, 2003, 6:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/final-cpu-speed/158107/24 "2003-03-01T18:43:51Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Joel \* > \*\*I don’t know, I mean, say we make it to 10ghz, you think people will be complaining then? Or say we go to 100ghz. For scientists, mathematicians, and so forth, there’s probably no such thing as a final speed, but for home users, I’d have to think that we’d reach a limit eventually. \*\* You’re assuming that when 100ghz CPUs roll out people will still be using their computers to run word proccessors and send e-mail. I’m convinced that as computers grow faster programmers will grow along with them creating things we can only imagine of now. There will always be a need for faster computers. Just because the applications don’t exist today doesn’t mean they won’t exist tomorrow. > [@](#): > > \*\* > > Hehe, I love that tag line. Very appropriate. > \*\* Thanks, I was hoping someone would notice 🙂 ---
**Author:** ![SPOOFE](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/c5a1d2/32.png) [@SPOOFE](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SPOOFE)\ **Post date:** [March 1, 2003, 8:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/final-cpu-speed/158107/25 "2003-03-01T20:06:34Z")
> [@](#): > > Sure, there are some fancy games which prefer to run on a 3 GHz machine, but have you ever seen one which required more than 500 MHz? Just about any graphics-intensive game coming out this year will require more than 500 Mhz. Plus, most GI games last year (such as Morrowind) may _say_ that their minimum requirement is a 500 Mhz CPU, but take it from me: With a CPU that slow, the game is practically unplayable (unless you have some other ultra-kickass hardware to back it up, like a $400 video card). The trend for massive RPG’s (not even ones that are multiplayer) require humongous processing power to keep track of a gigantic virtual world, along with the hundreds of AI’s that might be in the area at once. The game _Fable_, when it comes to the PC (and it will) will need a monster of a system to run smoothly. ---
**Author:** ![Chronos](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/chronos/32/134_2.png) [@Chronos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chronos)\ **Post date:** [March 1, 2003, 8:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/final-cpu-speed/158107/26 "2003-03-01T20:23:58Z")
> [@](#): > > Plus, most GI games last year (such as Morrowind) may say that their minimum requirement is a 500 Mhz CPU, but take it from me: With a CPU that slow, the game is practically unplayable I’ve had quite the opposite experience: In my experience, most games are quite playable at half or two thirds of the “minumum requirements” (for CPU speed, at least… Memory and hard drive space are a different matter). Sure, you have to turn off the fanciest graphics features, and there are some folks who consider 800x600 without rendered shadows or individual drops of blood to be “unplayable”, but really, there’s a lot of extra stuff in modern games that really isn’t necessary. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/final-cpu-speed/158107.md?page=1)