I'm not much of a tech person and I have no idea if my observations are worth anything, but from where I'm sitting it seems computer technology isn't advancing anywhere near as quickly as it was from the 80s to the early 2010s.
The original Moore's law is dead and has been for a very long time, but the less specific trend of rapidly increasing computational power doesn't seem to hold much water anymore either. The laptop I have now doesn't feel like much of an improvement on the laptop I had four years ago at a similar price point. And the laptop I had six years ago is really only marginally worse.
So for those in the know on the relevant industry, how are things looking in general? What is the expected roadmap for the next 10 to 20 years? Will we ever get to the point where a cheap notebook is capable of running today's most demanding games at the highest settings, 144fps, and 4k resolution? Sort of like how today's notebooks can run the most intensive games of the 90s/early 2000s.
your old processor was clocked literally 60% faster than your new one (1.6ghz vs 1.0ghz).
For most people’s use case the ram and ssd really are the only thing that matter. The new media handling extensions in the tenth gen chip might make video chat or streaming better though.
E: I’m dying. You made a post asking if computer technology is advancing slower and everyone (including me) ran in to explain how it was a broader phenomenon when you just bought a slower computer than the last one! We’ve all been had!
It's my understanding you can't compare CPUs across different generations by clock speed these days. Also, the i5-1035G1 in my laptop is almost literally never at the 1.0ghz base speed. That's only what it does when the battery is nearly dead and I have all the battery saving options turned on. The vast majority of the time it's around 2.4ghz when it's actually working on something.
And it's worth noting the maximum boost speed of the i5-1035G1 is 3.6ghz whereas the i5-8250U only reaches up to 3.4ghz. I think the clock speed metric is irrelevant in this case.
I mean, youre kinda right. intel (and amd) adds so much stuff each generation that you cant just say "more cycles means more faster". it's not always clear how those new instruction sets impact normal stuff people do on computers though.
why not compare them with benchmarks?
the newer chip is a little faster on most stuff and a lot faster on some stuff, but there are also loads where it's slower than the old one, sometimes significantly.