Sup Forums beat the fuck out?

Sup Forums beat the fuck out?

Other urls found in this thread:

valid.x86.fr/records.html
warosu.org/g/thread/S62139153#p62152106
twitter.com/SFWRedditImages

No. If it wasn't for the concept of a REPL then every frame in that comic would have the guy feeding punch cards into his computer.

>> 200mhz and 24 mb ram
wut?
That when the pentium 4 existed. You could totally get a 1.5 ghz and 256mb computer back then.

Not to mention that in 1980 most computers had around 64k of ram.

The guy who makes the comics is a tech illiterate, no need to be surprised

*blownst

CLI is a GUI.

this

The best OS uses terminal, this point is moot

>command line interface
>==
>guided user interface
Wrong

I am willing to bet we wont have higher than 7.5ghz while OCed in 2034

Oh my god nobody cares NERD

GUI= graphical user interface

What the fuck is a 'Mhz' Mega-hour-ounces?

>Mhz
>Ghz
>not MHz GHz

>1980
>literary uses a supercomputer for the time

>too poor and using a computer from 1996 in 2001

>muh GUI and CLI farts

We won't even have 7.5GHz

valid.x86.fr/records.html
We exceeded those 6 years ago.

Using liquid nitrogen doesnt count

>while OCed

>2017 8GB
What a ramlet!

>touchscreen
>future
Literally the worst idea for desktop computing

We won't have 7.5GHz with water cooling in 2034.
Changing goal post from OC to muh benchmark liquid nitrogen OC won't work.

I wish we stuck with 80x24 text displays.

Images were a mistake.

You still can configure xterm to be 80x24 with your current screen resolution.

You realize you can hook up a hardware terminal to your shitty retarded chinkpad?

This. I was on a 1.6 GHz and 1.5 GB RAM rig in 2001.
Fucking revisionist newfags.

>but muh accurate specs for 2001
>doesn't even realize the 1980 specs

>1.5 GB
ebin

>2034
>a need for ram

>Ubuntu

>Guided user interface
Wtf user

Pic related must have burned all his cash in 1980 and by 2001 he was a poorfag. He probably bought an Apple Lisa.

>terminal
>more efficient than the GUI
This is what Linux users actually believe.

>using clicky buttons
>developing software requires a license
>retarded posts
This in your brain on winblows.

get back to banging rocks together

There's a command for that

Yes. Yes it is.

>2034
>using hands

wut? Did you accuse me of moving the goal post while claiming ln2 doesn't count and posting this ? Both of which are wrong.

Anyway, there is no arguing, just stating facts, World record was set back in 2012.


>>doesn't even realize the 1980 specs
Tandy and the vic 20 were popular then, neither had 1mb of space even with modding, 5mhz is correct though. also this:

>Not to mention that in 1980 most computers had around 64k of ram.

>5mhz is correct though
nope

IBM PC came out in 1981 and used the 4.77MHz 8088

pedantic

>Anyway, there is no arguing, just stating facts, World record was set back in 2012.
Yet we won't have people casually overclocking their CPUs to 7.5GHz even in that year. Keep trying.

>I'm factually correct everyone!
>stop being factually correct....
pathetic you mean

I doubt most computer users in 1981 had an IBM PC.

that's unironically almost my post from a while ago (the guy who you're replying to)
warosu.org/g/thread/S62139153#p62152106

It's only inefficient at first then it becomes more efficient than gooey once you learn they keywords and keybinds

The fuck is a 3,2 Ghz processor? That sure isn't a 3.2 GHz processor

big/little cores.

if you worked in a office behind a computer, you probably did
how many people had computers at home anyways

>150GHz
>implying

Its not silicon based.

Found the Windows user.

Protip: Don't jugde the concept of CLI as useless just because cmd is is the only variant you've seen. cmd is literally completely fucking useless. It's so crap that using a GUI based tool will often solve the problem faster. That's how unbelievably fucking useless it is. Can you imagine?

I work in a Windows shop but use Linux for a lot of the technical stuff (both in VMs and WSL) and leave my GUI-clicking colleagues in awe whenever I help them.

In 1980 you'd use an Apple ][ running Visicalc

Dude, are you seriously arguing that OCing is casual? You know why they call them Enthusiast right?

You didn't know about the world record nor did you limit your statement to specific cooling methods. Just say you meant on air at stock and leave it at that.

>winlets

Why are you implying so much? You're wrong about everything in that post. You said that we will have MORE than 7.5GHz OC by then like it's nothing. But nope, keep trying.

>OCing is casual?
Casually =/= casual. It's about context. You either have severe problems understand the english language or are otherwise just dumb.
There are people who can casually pull of advanced moves in a fighter jet, that does not mean casual people fly fighter jets.

>You know why they call them Enthusiast right?
No, OC is pretty normal these days, every Sup Forumsermin who got a PeeCee from their mommy and daddy turns up their clock these days. Turbo is also a factory set thing.

O U

well in 1980 we didn't even have IBM PCs

>guided user interface

>You said that we will have MORE than 7.5GHz
No i didn't, I said we already have that, the record is 8ghz


Lets run over how many times you moved the goal post.

First guy said:
>I am willing to bet we wont have higher than 7.5ghz while OCed in 2034

You said:
>We won't even have 7.5GHz
Implying 7.5ghz at OC was not possible.

I said
>We exceeded those 6 years ago.


You decided ln2 doesn't count. AKA moving the goal post.
>Using liquid nitrogen doesnt count

Suddenly water cooling is the only valid OCing. Moving the goal post again
>We won't have 7.5GHz with water cooling in 2034.


Now it has to be causally done. Moving the goal post yet again

>Yet we won't have people casually overclocking their CPUs to 7.5GHz even in that year.


3 times bro, you moved it 3 times.

I don't think many offices had them back then either.

I don't think you understand the limitations of light speed.

Computation is the change in a pattern, not the motion of an object

() is right though. At 150ghz the CPU would need to be smaller than 2mm on each side.

>tfw no linux in 1980
what a terrible time to be alive

In the 1980s we didn't need it.

Not missing the hyperbole, but propagation stages have been a thing since the P4 era. Clock speed is only loosely limited by the speed of light. Asynchronous blocks can also flout this limit easily.

...

>moot
literally who?

What if I told you that the command line really is more efficient for certain tasks?

why is it *nixes traditionally use 80x24 and DOS traditionally uses 80x25? does it have any real impact on how things are displayed, beyond taking up a slightly different amount of memory?

>>guided user interface

>Asynchronous blocks can also flout this limit easily.
I wish we had a consumer grade fully asynchronous cpu. Reading up on it back in college made me feel like clockless CPUs were the future.

buttdevastated samefag tripfag mad he got btfo

If that terminal was implemented with Electron all of the resources would've been put to use anyway.

We've seen a ludicrous amount of change over the last 40 years of computing. The unix shell paradigm endures for a reason.

Probably something to do with the terminal and messages or something.

I'm not a 4chanfag who tells >>>/reddit/ (I browse reddit too), but god damn, this formatting is utter shit.

Your average user had a PC around 100-800mhz processors and anywhere from 32mb-around 512mb of ram in around 2001. Not everybody had the latest and greatest hardware. In fact a very small amount of people did.

I knew people in 2008 that were still using 300mhz Pentium II era machines.

Using a mix of cli and gui at the same time is the master race.

>2034
>wrecking your eyes with such a bright color scheme

Pajeethub btfo

>8.5GHz Celeron D
Fuck me.

Huh, its been a while I remember back in ~1996 I got a pentium with 32mb ram and ~2002 I got a pentium 4 with 256mb.

Not totally sure what was typical at the time.

Question:
How reliable is that? Does floating point arithmetic still work? Does addition still take one cycle? Does L1 cache keep up? How many errors per million cycles?

I just check my old gateway solo 2500 from 1999, it had 96mb.

GUI is so shit for anything involving low-level shit that easily boils down to binary flags on a command line or maybe a flag with a numerical argument. Wincucks don't even know.

Agreed

Pajeet please..

>sudo bang rocks

>1980
>IBM PC that was released 1 year later
Woah
>5MHz
Never been a thing on PCs
>1MB or RAM
The 1981 IBM PC nor the '83 PC-XT could address that much memory. 256kB at best for the 5150 (usually came with 16kB), 640kB for the XT.
>2001
>200MHz
>24MB or RAM
Well if you were a poorfag stuck in '97 yes.
Look like the dude just spewed numbers out of his ass to feel credible.

>200MHz 24MB ram
Dreamcast?

>actually using ubongo

morelike garbage user interface amirite