abfarid

Sure, but we aren't talking about bursts speeds. We are talking about sustained cruising speeds. I've responded to a similar comment of yours in more detail in another branch.

I specifically didn't mention overclocking because then there is no defined top speed. Depending on the binning, a CPU can be pushed arbitrarily far. If you provide proper cooling it can be sustained relatively indefinitely, but you still wouldn't do that all the time because energy efficiency tanks. That 10-20% performance usually isn't worth the added 100% power draw.

This argument hinges on the definition of "top speed". Is top speed what's written on the speedometer and what the device is designed for, or is it the max speed it can go before it explodes? I think, in this context we are talking about is max sustained speed/performance, judging by the fact that neither the human or the Enterprise have died/exploded. While devices are often designed to and perform at their "top speed", people can't for reasons other than inefficiency.

You can't just eat more and work 18 hours a day, 7 days a week. But you can and often do run equipment at it's top rated performance because it doesn't have emotions.

We could stretch the analogy and assume emotions to be a separate kind of fuel reserve, but I don't know if this simplification does justice to the complexity of human nature.

The principle applies to pretty much all equipment. A CPU will happily sit at 100-ish% utilization for years (if there are no thermal constraints), because it can't have an emotional breakdown.
Well, maybe it can, that would certainly explain a couple of cases that I have had...

Warp speeds were clearly modeled to mimick knots. And I'm sure that the lore reason for them not traveling at Enterprise's top speed all the time is again fuel efficiency and not because it would "blow up" (although 9.9 might be above its rated top speed, I don't remember). So it doesn't hold up with people, where you can just eat more and perform at your best all the time, we have additional emotional constraints that don't apply to equipment.

Other than all that... perfect analogy.

I know why ships have max speed, I have a bachelor's degree in maritime navigation.

But also, I honestly don't see how this comment is relevant to the subject. Yes, modern ships are faster than older ships. But they still usually run at half speed or less.

Well, the ship analogy doesn't really hold up. If we draw a parallel with existing maritime ships, they can sustain their rated top speed when necessary. However, this is rarely done primarily due to fuel efficiency. Since there are diminishing returns to pushing speed, it’s only done under serious time constraints.

IMO, that's the wrong direction. The right direction is to apply some good CRT shaders. Those games were designed for CRT and low resolutions and they can never look great when rendered at higher res. Upscaling works much better for PS2 generation and up.

It's spherical!

Really? That's weird.

But then it would just all be Linux? Was that what you were trying to say?

Even if it's not battery powered, I personally would be conscious of the energy inefficiency. But I would be fine with it going to sleep. I suppose it should also be possible to automatically wake it up if a person approaches, using a motion sensor.