HAHA, I just noticed that too, technically I had mine posted before you though, but yes, we had the same train of thought. You know why? Its cause were smart cookies We both know computers, and we know where the technology is heading. And we obviously are in agreement there reading your post just now.
After reading your post however, I am going to say that it is in my opinion, that we have already reached that plateau.
You never hear about CPU's that perform greater then 6GHZ, even in the highest top of the line gaming machine that is even faster then my computer. Why is that? Cause with more frequency, equals more heat. And even powerful water cooling setups, are pretty much maxed out if you pumping 6GHZ worth of heat into the exchange system.
There is only so much heat that liquid can move away from your CPU. Air cooling can handle even less! This is why those crazy overclockers trying to get the greatest benchmarks on the leaderboards, they don't do it with water cooling, as they would be overextended long time ago. They use liquid nitrogen.
So what is the average speed of most computers sold today? The answer is between 2.2GHZ, to 4GHZ, with turbo capacities between 3GHZ to 5GHZ. Why? Cause anymore, and your generating so much heat, your going to trip the 110C overload, and cause your computer to shutoff.
So what have they been doing with CPU's since? Razing frequency? No! Cores! Yes, cores, upon cores, upon cores upon cores. Have you seen how many cores they top tier production machines use in the production field? 64-core and 128-core Threadrippers CPU's.
People realized we can't keep cramming frequency increases into everything, that only generates added heat and more power consumption. So instead, we have multiple core CPU's, to try and offload responsibilities to each core, thus allowing for parallel process computing. This gives the illusion that our CPU's are faster.
But in reality, they are no faster then CPU's from 10-years ago, they are just more efficient at handling tasks at once time, so your computer doesn't choke on a single core, like computers did back in the 2000's and earlier. But we have reached that plateau, we can't cram anything more out of them but add cores.
Now, 12th gen Alderlake CPU's are interesting, because now they have P-states and what is it C-states? They basically have a redesign that is supposed to make them more efficient. But here's the kicker, you need Windows11 to unlock those features, ohhhhh, how convenient.
Each generation they do add something new, but when you look at the overall benchmarks listed by tech media, each generation is usually only a few percent faster then the previous generation. I guess 12th gen Alderlake is supposed to be what 15% faster then previous generation, but at what cost?
Have you seen how much the top tier 12th gen CPU's cost? By the time your done with your build, you got 1300 dollar in your CPU, another 1300 dollars into your GPU, and 500 dollars in your motherboard, by the time your done, you've got like 4,000 to 5,000 dollar into your desktop build.
Its the kind of thing that makes you wish you just bought a notebook instead. Which is of course what I did. Nope, Aravisian and I agree, quantum computing is the real generational change, but we won't see it anytime soon so ya.