Slashdot Mirror

OCH LCD MicroView Review

LCD Mod

Extreme Overclocking-5in LCD Ultra-Thin Video Module Review - Page: 4 - Tweaking PC Hardware To The Max

Mikhailtech

5 Color LCD Mod

Mini LCD Monitor Review - Amdmb.com

Computer Compatible Small Format LCD Monitors

EarthLCD Home Page

Candescent: ThinCRT Showcase

Caltron Industries, Inc.

Caltron Industries, Inc.

Timeline, Inc. LCD Displays

6a3 5 X-Bri PAL-NTSC

6 TFT LCD Module Kits

5 mobile lcd display

Mobile LCD Modules

Pyle PLVWHR56M<br>5.6 Mobile Video LCD Monitor<br><img>

Parts Express: Browsing LCD 4 VIDEO MODULE

LCD Projectors, LCD, LCD Monitors, LCD Displays, LCD Panels, LCD Screens, Small LCD Monitors, LCD Flat Panel Displays, Resistive LCD Touch Screens

flat panel displays from Spire Controls

The concrete case thread

Sorry, pictures have been removed. Still a good read.

http://amdmb.com/#News-7458 or linkified.

Reviewed by amdmb, HotHardware, Neoseeker, CPU Performance, Tech Report, Hardcoreware, Hardocp, Hexus, X-Bit Labs.

hopefully you're not actually putting them in a rackmount case. It would be much more efficient to rig it up where they are just bare drives out in the open. Sure, it looks like hell, but you should be able to stack almost all of the drives in a single rack with a bad-ass motherboard and with 3 or 4 of these in each of them. You should be able to find a decent dual motherboard with 4 64-bit pci slots on them. That would be (4x12+4) 52 drives per computer. At 300GB per drive, that would be over 15 terabytes per computer. You would still need about 64 of them to get your petabyte, but you should be able to put 8-10 per rack.

my math could be wrong though. Still, if you want it to look pretty, it's probably better to go blow your cash on fancy dells, or get Sun to custom make you a $50mil storage solution.

Why? Well, one stated reason was a policy to test only with "publicly available hardware, and publicly available software". Laudable enough, considering that non-public drivers could have any number of bugs or "optimisations" that could render the game incorrectly and thus misrepresent its performance.

Indeed, Valve referred to an issue where fog was completely left out of an entire level, and though they didn't point any fingers, it was later revealed that yes, the beta Det 50s were the culprit.

For further info, you should read this report on the performance of the beta Release 50 Detonators. Summary: not much difference - at least for DX8-level games. DX9 is where the focus supposedly was, and there is a 25% gain in the PS2.0 test in 3DMark03, which is something.

However, who knows if it'll translate to a 25% gain in HalfLife 2 - probably not, in itself. And given recent 3DMark/nVidia events, even that much is uncertain, until the drivers are released for public examination. In any case, it's a long way short of the 100% gain needed for the 5900 Ultra to just draw even with the 9800 Pro.

nVidia apparently have a strong lead in Doom 3 scores, though (admittedly with the partial-precision NV3X-specific code path), so they will no doubt be hoping that Doom 3 outsells HalfLife 2... Myself, I have a 9600 Pro in my sights, just in time for the HL2 release :-)

BTW, regarding the release delay? According to Gabe Newell, "First I've heard of it". So there you are. Only 16 days to go...

Don't link to Tom's Hardware anymore Slashdot. This past week they threatened to sue AMDMB.com for defamatory comments.

http://www.amdmb.com/article-display.php?ArticleID =243

Ok, so THG gets through this week enfuriating the enthusiast community. Posting infomercials labeled as articles, then throws the community this pat yourselves on the back editorial on Open Source? Anyone else find the timing a little suspicious?

As is detailed here and here, Toms Hardware recently performed a media blackout at a Public event, the Million Man Lan Party.

They are currently threatening to sue an online journalist (who happens to be a poor college student) for libel regarding his reporting of this story. Fortunately, the friendly folks at Hardocp have stepped in to provide some legal assistance for the guy, to make sure he is not railroaded into pulling down his editorial describing THG's media shenanigans.

Do your part for Internet Free Speech. Boycott Toms Hardware Guide.

If you actually like THG, you might want to take a look at this article over at AmdMB. I never particularly liked THG, and this just solidifies it.

Im not sure how aware /. readers are of the blackballing THG is performing at the MML, but it absolutely sickens me. I've been reading Toms for a number of years, and this kind of control over the online media HAS to be stopped, before it becomes the defacto standard for events like this. Major props to amdmb.com for bringing this type of slime to our attention.

I personally ordered two Opteron servers this week. I plan on building an e-mail server and K12LTSP server using modified Red Hat Linux. My findings of success/failure when I figure out AMD64 Linux quirks will be posted to AMDMB.com in the coming weeks. (Also check out our Athlon Linux forum.)

From the AMD64-list discussion so far, there are only a few details:

* Kernel and all applications 64-bit compiled. This includes support for the larger memory address space and 16 registers. (SPEED!)
* AMD64 Linux *can* run 32-bit applications, unfortunately you would need 32-bit shared libraries that were not included in this technology preview. They said that they will be included in a possible future shipping distribution. I personally will try to research how to find/build these 32-bit shared libraries for myself, although I suspect it will show up on amd64-list soon enough.
* Existing 32-bit closed source programs like Macromedia Flash plugin 6.0 for Linux may work with 32-bit shared libraries, but not while running within 64-bit compiled Mozilla. You would need 32-bit compiled Mozilla. Bummer.

I haven't had any Abit problems, but I check on the issues with any board at amdmb.com before buying.

But I would agree, for overall reliability, ASUS is the best. I'd take ASUS over Intel.

Manufacturers, driving by consumer marketing which believes that higher Mhz == better product, are optimizing in the wrong areas. If they want to talk numbers, they should be pushing fast memory and buses which are actually a useful measure of a machine's performance, not CPU Mhz which isn't.

So you're saying that they should be increasing memory bandwidth and bus speeds? What a clever idea. You should write a letter to them because clearly they just haven't caught on...oh wait, yes they have.

If they want to talk numbers, they should be pushing fast memory and buses which are actually a useful measure of a machine's performance, not CPU Mhz which isn't.

This is as much bullshit as claiming that only Mhz is a measure of a machine's performance. Obviously it's a combination of all of the systems in the machine, and the large CPU manufacturers aren't stupid (i.e. they want their machines to show up at the top of the benchmarks): As the need arises they increase bus and memory bandwidth accordingly, and for "cutting edge" needs they produce chips with huge L2 caches (though the cost/benefit is out of whack. A P2 2.4Ghz with 2MB of L2 would get trounced by a 2.6Mhz with 512MB of L2 cache, disputing your claims that CPU speed doesn't matter. Large cache chips only make sense if you can't get a faster CPU: In that case the only option they have is to increase the cache). A dual-channel RAMBUS solution isn't going to make a P4 1.4Ghz any faster than it would be with a single-channel: The CPU will never demand that memory bandwidth. Indeed, this was one of the original problems with RAMBUS: The extreme throughput it offered simply wasn't necessary for the early P4s, leading to a lot of the early naysaying about its usefulness. Of course we all know that it because the crucial point for P4 performance as the clock speed accelerated.

Sorry, but your post reeks of "armchair CPU designer" : It's all so clear and so obvious. I mean, it's not like Intel and AMD have a lot of extremely clever people who seek the best balance between all of the systems...is it?

Or you can build a dual processor Athlon system for less money. No need for HypedThreading.

It has been reported on various sites that Athlon XP 2400+ chips (2GHz, new Thoroughbred Revision B core) are trivial to mod for dual CPU operation and easily overclock to 2.25GHz (150MHz FSB, aka 300MHz DDR, which is the most my ASUS A7M266-D will allow) with proper cooling (Thermalright SLK800 being my favorite). The chips are under $200 apiece. Imagine a Beowulf cluster of those...

Proper Athlon MP 2400+'s are due shortly I'd assume.

AMD's Opteron won't reject unlicensed content - Ron Goldin - Fri, Sep 20, 2002 - 10:46 AM
Palladium... just that word sends shivers down my spine.. but it seems AMD is trying to smooth things over a bit and take away the shakes.
In fact, according to an AMD UK representative, AMD's Opteron products will run any kind of content in the future -- contrart to the report in The Age, on which our original report was based.
Part of the content in The Age failed to distinguish between comments Moorhead made and conjecture, AMD said. [emphasis added]
Source: The Inquirer - More Information

Cool, I just read on AMDB (a later page) that the 333 FSB should be introduced in the XP 2800.. nice!

Qoute:
Also, while attending Quakecon 2002, I can finally say with 100% assuredness that AMD will be migrating their next processor to a 166/333 MHz front-side bus. This fact is again showing how much more the latest core revision was able to do for AMD and their confidence. The Athlon XP 2800+ processors will be the first to debut this new FSB speeds, probably in the 2.24 GHz range.

See here. 256meg PC2100 DIMMs back down to $70 apiece. Kudos to amdmb.com for the heads-up.

this fan has already had some discussion on the various case/cooling forums:

amdmb

ars

There's a bunch of other good reviews of the set in all its forms and splendor.


Digit-Life
HardOCP
AnandTech
AMDDb
Via Hardware


</karmawhoring>

They've already release a EV6 bus (Athlon) version of their NForce unified memory graphics/multimedia i/o chipsets.

This means that X86 Linux NForce chipset drivers are probably already out.

Here's a preview of the referance board

Here's a pic of the board

PC unified memory chipsets in the past (SIS, VIA/Trident Blade, VIA/Savage, Intel 810/815), never really had the memory bandwidth for fast gaming graphics, but with a combination of twin bank & DDR its no longer a problem.

They've already release a EV6 bus (Athlon) version of their NForce unified memory graphics/multimedia i/o chipsets.

This means that X86 Linux NForce chipset drivers are probably already out.

Here's a preview of the referance board

Here's a pic of the board

PC unified memory chipsets in the past (SIS, VIA/Trident Blade, VIA/Savage, Intel 810/815), never really had the memory bandwidth for fast gaming graphics, but with a combination of twin bank & DDR its no longer a problem.

The XBox uses a X86 chip (Cu'mine Celeron, ie a P3 core) & a NVidia unified memory multimedia/graphics I/O chipset.

Right now Taiwan's motherboard makers are in the process of bringing out Athlon boards based on the EV6 bus version of NVidia's unified memory 'NForce' multimedia/graphics chipset.

That means that there will be X86 Linux chipset drivers for NVidia's unified memory multimedia/graphics chipset. & the next kernal revision will most probably have them pre-integrated.

This means one should, with little work (once the HDD is re-partitioned/formated, so it no longer has MS's propietry XBos filesystem on it), be able to load a standard X86 distibution on it - such as the Madrake 8/1 gaming installation.

Then any X86 Linux games should hopefully work.

AMD Zone gives this summary at the end of its review: "No architectural or marketing changes with this release ... expect the previous CPUs to decline in price ... expect a bit higher performance and power consumption."

Anandtech agrees, saying the chip will not offer any significant extra performance over the 1800+, so early adopters need not sweat too much about being left behind. The site believes that AMD is currently the performance leader on desktop processors.

VIAHardware.com reckons users could be just as well off picking up the 1800+ at 1.53GHz and simply overclocking it to 1.6GHz. Users already owning a high-speed XP chip are better off waiting for the next upgrade on the platform to significantly increase performance.

Tech Report has some extensive benchmarking, putting the 1900+ slightly ahead of Intel's P4 2.0GHz in most of them, while SimHQ.com gets very excited about the new chip.

Amdmb.com also has a piece showing the expected five to six per cent performance increase.

Yes, some of the information may be more technical than needed for everyday computer enthusiasts, but that doesn't mean others aren't curious or they can't find a use for the information and theory presented in both articles.

http://www.amdmb.com/article-display.php?ArticleID =124&PageID=6

However I tried to triple boot with Windows 98 so I can use a cheap video grabber card--my advice is DON'T EVEN TRY to install Win98 on this board. Mine installed fine but would not boot Win98.

Placing the heatsink/fans on the CPUs was kind of tricky. I had 2mm of clearance between my heatsink/fan of choice and the single row of capacitors on the board. If the caps didn't wiggle I wouldn't have been able to install the heatsink/fans.

I found humor on the inside cover of the manual. I was pleased to see in print that this motherboard is certified for *both* Win2k and RH 7.1. However that textual note was marked with an asterisk to the effect:

This Tyan board is fully supported by Red Hat 7.1; however Tyan is not responsible if Red Hat no longer continues to support Red Hat 7.1.

Also, a warning. If you choose to install 1 Gb or so of ECC, registered memory, then booting takes a long time. There's some kind of POST that occurs for this kind of memory that delays my boot by like 30 seconds.

Finally, I just want to say that SMP is no magic bullet. For my purposes this board is fabulous. But in fact, some applications run more slowly on a dual CPU system. For example, any given single threaded program (read: first person shooter) will take a hit, say 2-5% of its speed. Your application has to use multiple threads to take advantage of this environment. Of course you can run more processes, that's nice.

You can judge for yourself if this is a good board for you. Look at the reviews for the Tyan Thunder K7, I feel they apply to the Tiger when it comes to processor performance. You can find review for that board here and here

http://www.amdmb.com/lkc/

Test Results in Minutes
Abit VP6 dual CPU Pentium III 1GHz machine.
J2 5.55
J3 7.15
J4 7.2667
J5 7.45
J6 7.45

Asus A7V single CPU Athlon 750MHz

J1 10.26
J2 10.93
J3 13.61
J4 13.71
J5 14.3
J6 13.88

Sure there are come cosmetic issues, but it's quite usable. Even Wells Fargo online banking works without requiring me to override the useragent string.

Only issue now is lack of JVM being distributed. But I know it can be added. Can someone post a procedure for FreeBSD?

Tyan is expected to be the first MB manufacturer to release a Dual Athlon board. The model number is S2462. It is reported to have on board Ultra-160 SCSI, dual 100 MBps Ethernet, EIDE, and ATI Rage 128 graphics built on. The price estimates I've heard have it priced at approx $960.00. The last I heard on a ship date was "sometime in May."

There's also an article that says that samples are shipping now. Apparently both Tyan and AMD were demo'ing boards at Cebit. Tyan with a board running 2 900 Mhz Athlons, and AMD with a board running 2 1.2 Ghz Athlons.

For more info, check out http://www.amdmb.com/index.html#News-1486.

Or do a google search on terms Tyan, S2462, etc.