I guess the counter argument for games is load times have dramatically improved, though that’s less about software development than hardware improvements.
If we put consoles in the same bracket as computers, the literally instant quick-resume feature on an Xbox (for example) feels like sci-fi.
Yeah, you kinda defeated your own argument there, but you do seem to recognize that.
You can instant resume on a Steam Deck, basically.
You can alt tab on a PC, at least with a stable game that is well made and not memory leaking.
Yeah, better RAM / SSDs does mean lower loading times, higher streaming speeds/bus bandwidths, but literally, at what cost?
You could just actually take the time to optimize things, find non insanely computationally expensive ways to do things that are more clever, instead of just saying throw more/faster ram at it.
RAM and SSD costs per gig are going up now.
Moore’s Law is not only dead, it has inverted.
Constantly cheaper memory going forward turned out to not the best assumption to make.
With respect to OP’s post, they say “you can’t even tell the computers we are on are 15x faster…”, and I reckon that quick resume etc, is an example of “you absolutely can tell that we now have extremely fast hardware” when compared to what came before, irrespective of the quality of the software.
I’m not disagreeing with you, I’m just picking apart the blanket “computers feel the same as they did a decade ago”. Some computers might feel the same, and a lot of software might be unoptimised, but there’s a good selection of examples where that’s not the case.
PC games are software.
Unfortunately many PC games are also like this, astoundingly poorly optimized, just assume everyone has a $750 GPU.
Proton can only do so much.
… and Metal basically can’t do that that much.
Look at Metal Gear Solid 5 or TitanFall 2, and tell me realtime video game graphics have dramatically increased in visual fidelity in the last decade.
They haven’t really.
They shifted to a poorly optimized, more expensive paradigm for literally everyone involved; publisher, developer, player.
Everything relating to realtime raytracing and temporal antialiasing is essentially a scam, in the vast majority of actual implementations of it.
I guess the counter argument for games is load times have dramatically improved, though that’s less about software development than hardware improvements.
If we put consoles in the same bracket as computers, the literally instant quick-resume feature on an Xbox (for example) feels like sci-fi.
Yeah, you kinda defeated your own argument there, but you do seem to recognize that.
You can instant resume on a Steam Deck, basically.
You can alt tab on a PC, at least with a stable game that is well made and not memory leaking.
Yeah, better RAM / SSDs does mean lower loading times, higher streaming speeds/bus bandwidths, but literally, at what cost?
You could just actually take the time to optimize things, find non insanely computationally expensive ways to do things that are more clever, instead of just saying throw more/faster ram at it.
RAM and SSD costs per gig are going up now.
Moore’s Law is not only dead, it has inverted.
Constantly cheaper memory going forward turned out to not the best assumption to make.
With respect to OP’s post, they say “you can’t even tell the computers we are on are 15x faster…”, and I reckon that quick resume etc, is an example of “you absolutely can tell that we now have extremely fast hardware” when compared to what came before, irrespective of the quality of the software.
I’m not disagreeing with you, I’m just picking apart the blanket “computers feel the same as they did a decade ago”. Some computers might feel the same, and a lot of software might be unoptimised, but there’s a good selection of examples where that’s not the case.