Looking at CPU benchmarks shows that one being roughly the same performance as this other common CPU that's 8 years older, but uses around 1/20th the power:
I can say that the above was more than sufficient to do native development, audio+video conferencing, watching videos, listening to music, as well as the usual office tasks of email, documents, image editing, IM, and the like. Software inefficiency has simply expanded to fill all available CPU performance.
Comments
Looking at CPU benchmarks shows that one being roughly the same performance as this other common CPU that's 8 years older, but uses around 1/20th the power:
https://www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu.php?cpu=Intel+Celeron+N3450...
https://www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu.php?cpu=Intel+Core2+Quad+Q6...
Those who had systems with the latter would certainly not have considered them slow. Netbooks at the time often had this:
https://www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu.php?cpu=Intel+Atom+N270+%40...
For a long time, my daily driver was this:
https://www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu.php?cpu=Intel+Pentium+4+2.4...
I can say that the above was more than sufficient to do native development, audio+video conferencing, watching videos, listening to music, as well as the usual office tasks of email, documents, image editing, IM, and the like. Software inefficiency has simply expanded to fill all available CPU performance.