Slashdot Mirror

There never was any desktop 8xx parts, only laptop, desktop went straight from 7xx to 9xx.

The PCI-express version is still 3.0, may have been 2.0 when Linus Tech Tips or whomever tested it back then but the graphics cards has become faster.

On the other hand AMD has abandoned CrossFire branding completely and SLI is pretty dead/unused too. In DX12 you may be able to even force rendering onto two cards but really close to no-one is using two cards for gaming and very close to no-one is using four for that purpose.

SLI didn't worked with a bunch of games and even when it work people complain on micro stutter so personally I kinda feel it may be more worth to get the most expensive model and considering those sit at ~$1300 now you gotta ask yourself how many spend that and how many are willing to spend two-four times more than that? Also those cards can do 60+ fps 4K gaming alone.

For textures the compression has improved which Nvidia argued compensated for the lower memory bandwidth. AFAIK SLI doesn't let you share RAM between the cards, I don't know what the SLI bridge actually do. The new cards use NVLink and as such at-least for the professional cards you can use all the RAM added up together and on the professional cards the connection is very fast but on the consumer cards it's slower but I don't know if they still add the VRAM together and if the typical scenario is just two cards maybe the lower bandwidth doesn't matter all that much.

Not SLI:
https://www.techpowerup.com/re...
8x vs 16x:
AC:O 1080p: 104.7 vs 114.5 fps.
BF1 UHD: 95.8 vs 97.6 fps.
CoD:WWII 1080p: 207.7 vs 217.0 fps.
Civ VI UHD: 115.3 vs 122.7 fps.
And so on.
They lost 2-3% using 8x all in all over the various resolutions, that was just for a single card but hardly worth being upset about.

SLI:
https://www.gamersnexus.net/gu...
Ashes of the Singularity, UHD Crazy:
16+16: 127.2 / 47.7 / 42.8 (avg, 1% low, 0.1% low)
16+8: 125.1 / 46.9 / 41.8 (but in what situation will you ever have 16+8?)
8+8: 106.9 / 40.9 / 37.3
So with NvLINK/SLI it matter more than for a single card.

As for scaling:
NvLink 2080Ti Sniper Elite UHD High DX 12: 209.8 / 145.1 / 132.1
2080Ti FE: 108.2 / 93.2 / 91.4
So a very good result there.
SLI 1080Ti: 170.3 / 104.8 / 97.4
1080Ti: 86.6 / 75.1 / 72.2
So very good results both with new cards with NvLink and the old cards with SLI in that DirectX 12 title.

I don't really know what I wrote when I started this post but for a single card 8x seem to only make 2-3% difference, for two it's more like 20% difference and in a game which has great DX12 and scaling results using two cards whatever SLI or NvLink worked great.

• TSMC's 7nm proceess yields 6.9 billion transistors on 100 mm^2, or 69 million transistors per mm^2.
• Intel claims their 10nm process will yield up to 100 million transistors per mm^2, which would still put them ahead.
• For reference, Intel's 14nm process yields 37.5 million transistors per mm^2. Meaning TSMC's 7nm process would be roughly equivalent to (14nm)*sqrt(37.5/69) = 10.3 nm in Intel-speak compared to Intel's 14nm process..

You'll note that Intel's 10nm process yields more improvement than the (14/10)^2 = 1.96x density increase you'd expect. So some of the components are being shrunk more thna a 14:10 ratio with the new process. However, Intel's 10nm process has been delayed repeatedly since 2016, with the latest schedule being no commercial shipments until 2019. So I guess that puts TSMC ahead for now if it can deliver this in volume without problems.

Intel is extracting higher speeds from their designs.

Marginally, and not for all single core loads. And never forget that standard operating practice for Intel is to place their thumb on the benchmark scales. For example, check this out. No shortage of reports like that.

Whatever slim lead Intel still has in single-core performance is widely expected to evaporate because of Intel's 10nm node fiasco, whereas AMD is already starting the 7nm production ramp for Instinct GPGPU parts. Don't just take my word for it.

In short, Intel is about to lose whatever single-core IPC lead they still have, entirely because they built their own fabs and messed up. Going fabless for the 10nm node would have been brilliant but too late for that now. Maybe next node.

This hits SPECIFICALLY INTEL CPUs yet is presented as "AMD too".

A Playstation 4's GPU is roughly on par with a GTX 590 or Radeon 7970. You can find those on eBay for about $80-$150, unaffected by the cryptocurrency craze (they're so old and inefficient that any miner using them would lose money).

You get a console for the exclusive game titles. You get a gaming PC if you want graphics performance and/or resolution better than an 6 year old GPU.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

And there was me worrying about PCIe risers in things like the Node 202

https://www.techpowerup.com/re...

The same could be said about PC vs Mac...

That PC didn't even have a monitor.

The same could be said about PC vs Mac...

>>AMD has similar features in theirs as well.

>Do you have any evidence of this? I'd like to learn more about that
A link or two would be nice.

Platform Security Processor (PSP); it is exactly the same as Intel's backdoor- hardware based, secret, non-controllable.

https://hothardware.com/news/a...

https://www.techpowerup.com/23...

https://libreboot.org/amd-libr...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

I didn't know that. Thanks for the info.

Interesting sequence of events.

newegg sold: https://www.techpowerup.com/22...

anti-patent troll lawyer leaves: http://www.law.com/nationallaw...

current lawsuit: https://arstechnica.com/tech-p...

a direct shot with a 9mm at reasonable range would mean they were surgically removing macbook pro bits from the bullet wound on his shoulder/back

It was only handgun ammunition probably from a good distance, and it's not like we have not seen a MacBook stop a bullet before...

I fear that their top end chip is still getting stomped by the Core i5 in most benchmarks, so they are still making last minute tweaks to improve performance. They can only do so much at this point, though. I'd like to be wrong about that, but until we start seeing reviews I'm going to be a skeptic.

What AMD will do that Intel won't do is release a mainstream chip with no graphics. If you look at the Skylake quadcore die you'll see something like 40% of it is graphics, 40% CPU cores and 20% miscellaneous. You could put four more CPU cores in the same space. Obviously you won't have built in graphics but for gamers you'll have a dGPU anyway, so nothing much of value was lost. Intel has force bundled this so they can kill the low end graphics market, but as a dGPU gamer you're paying an "GPU tax" for something you don't use. Of course you could move to the X99 platform and "enthusiast" CPUs, but then you're paying an even bigger premium for that. I don't know if they'll match an i5 single threaded, but it's a long time since games started to have to work with dual and quad cores. If games scale well to eight cores I'm sure a Zen octo-core will beat an i5 quad-core by a considerable margin. Of course Intel could just "mainstream" their enthusiast platform to compete, but that would mean lowering prices a lot. Either way it's a pretty big win for the consumer.

It's not "sites like reddit" claiming it.
It started with techpowerup article, mentioning exactly what was wrong: cards running at higher frequencies than normal retail versions: Here is it:

MSI and ASUS have been sending us review samples for their graphics cards with higher clock speeds out of the box, than what consumers get out of the box. The cards TechPowerUp has been receiving run at a higher software-defined clock speed profile than what consumers get out of the box. Consumers have access to the higher clock speed profile, too, but only if they install a custom app by the companies, and enable that profile. This, we feel, is not 100% representative of retail cards, and is questionable tactics by the two companies. This BIOS tweaking could also open the door to more elaborate changes like a quieter fan profile or different power management.

http://www.techpowerup.com/for...

Nvidia will probably soon put out a new GPU that fits in the 750ti price and thermal range, and it will probably be the fastest card that does not require an external power connector. (Much like the 750ti is now)

It's already out. Better revisions of the GTX 950 have been able to get the power down to 75w. For that you get 40% higher performance than the GTX 750 Ti, and for just a five dollar premium over other GTX 950 cards!

The Asus card review

The Newegg page.

The pictures on the Newegg site still show a power connector, but on the Asus product page it's clearly removed:

https://www.asus.com/us/Graphi...

And a recet review also confirms no power connector!

So yeah, Nvidia pushed this out unofficially because they will be waiting a few months for GP107, and thye wanted to stop making GTX 750 Ti silicon.

Seeing as the purpose of this setup seems to be more for the ability to drive the 5K display than to actually use the power of the GPU for gaming or other heavy tasks, I don't think it's going to be a huge issue. As well, the 4x lane isn't as huge a limitation as you'd expect

NVMe is making its arrival to PCs as well. Apple is just often among the first to adopt the coolest and most fresh hi-tech.

If by "among the first" you mean later than Dell and pretty much at the same time as Asus, Gigabyte, MSI, and every other first tier motherboard manufacturer.

Search this list for laptops which had the interface well before Apple introduced it in their line.

Among the first... more like among the all.

The birth of a troll. Not that he hadn't been kicked out of several other online forums for the same behavior. I've had some fun googling the alecstaar username and seeing his banned self being talked about as a sort of trolling legend, while most are unaware of his Slashdot antics.

Or weirder, making coherent positive contributions on other web sites.

Im genuinely curious about what makes him tick

It looks like severe bipolar disorder, with Persecutory delusions - http://psycheducation.org/diag...

From what I've read about AMD's Zen architecture, they've dispensed with the "two single threaded cores per module" architecture and now have SMT allowing two threads in each core according to this, much like "hyper threading" on Intel chips.

If that's the case, and we can expect a 32 core chip to execute 64 threads, then that's an awful lot of threads to keep supplied with data and instructions. In comparison, the biggest Intel Xeon I know about, the E5-2699 v3 has 18 cores, 36 threads, 45MB of last level cache, and 4 memory channels (68GB/sec to RAM). Intel sticks pretty close to that 1.25MB cache per core in their big Xeons. So if you adhered to Intel's apparent rules, a 32 core 64 thread chip would need 80MB of LLC and maybe 6 memory channels. Anandtech estimates 5.7 billion transistors for the big Xeon. Scaling the Intel design from 18 to 32 cores would require over 10 billion transistors! That number leads me to believe that an SMT 32 core 64 thread chip built with 2016 technology would not be practical.

What might be practical is a chip with some "heavy" cores optimized for balls-to-the-wall floating point execution, and other "lighter" cores for lower power integer tasks. This has been done in "octocore" mobile phone chips and called a big LITTLE architecture. The idea is that the OS and various decoding and checksumming tasks can stay resident on the low power light cores, while the heavy cores do things like game physics and photo noise reduction. Because the multiprocessing is not symmetric, the OS kernel needs special rules to assign tasks to cores. Which leads me to wonder if AMD has something like big LITTLE up its sleeve for 32 core Zens.

Yes, and that's not a big deal for most games and applications.

Okay, so you have no idea how to compare performance? Let me show you how easy it is!

The GTX 960 is 60% faster than your GTX 560. Let me tell you how easy it was to figure this out:

1. TechPowerUp review shows GTX 680 7% faster than the GTX 960.

https://www.techpowerup.com/re...

2. Older TechPowerUp review shows GTX 680 70% faster than the GTX 560 Ti.

https://www.techpowerup.com/re...

GTX 960 is 100/107 the speed of the GTX 680 = 0.93

The GTX 680 is 100/59 the speed of the GTX 560 Ti = 1.7

1.7 * 0.93 is almost 60 percent improvement. And that's from a $190 card:

http://www.newegg.com/Product/...

And if you must have more performance, this is over twice as fast as your GTX 560 Ti, and is only $300.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/...

Now, quit your complaining. Both Nvidia and AMD are up against a wall because there's only been one process node shrink since 2011. 14nm is due next year, but until then they had to make magic happen with Maxwell (it's a more efficient architecture, making better use of available compute and memory resources to reduce costs).

That said, the GTX 680 is on the exact same process node as the GTX 960, and it cost $500 on release! So if they can offer nearly the same performance for $200 today, imagine what they can do in a year or two when they actually have a process shrink to work with!

Okay, so you have no idea how to compare performance? Let me show you how easy it is!

The GTX 960 is 60% faster than your GTX 560. Let me tell you how easy it was to figure this out:

1. TechPowerUp review shows GTX 680 7% faster than the GTX 960.

https://www.techpowerup.com/re...

2. Older TechPowerUp review shows GTX 680 70% faster than the GTX 560 Ti.

https://www.techpowerup.com/re...

GTX 960 is 100/107 the speed of the GTX 680 = 0.93

The GTX 680 is 100/59 the speed of the GTX 560 Ti = 1.7

1.7 * 0.93 is almost 60 percent improvement. And that's from a $190 card:

http://www.newegg.com/Product/...

And if you must have more performance, this is over twice as fast as your GTX 560 Ti, and is only $300.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/...

Now, quit your complaining. Both Nvidia and AMD are up against a wall because there's only been one process node shrink since 2011. 14nm is due next year, but until then they had to make magic happen with Maxwell (it's a more efficient architecture, making better use of available compute and memory resources to reduce costs).

That said, the GTX 680 is on the exact same process node as the GTX 960, and it cost $500 on release! So if they can offer nearly the same performance for $200 today, imagine what they can do in a year or two when they actually have a process shrink to work with!

Perhaps you should update your lovely Wikipedia page, because it is outdated.

SATA 3.1 standard note at techreport
Webopedia info on SATA 3.x
Wikipedia's own entry on SATA 3.1
TechPowerUp article about SATA 3.1

Here's a press release from sata-io about it: in PDF format

Not only does TRIM via NCQ exist, it is in the recent specifications. You see, the thing about computer technology is that it keeps being improved. Outdated information doesn't stop that. It just becomes outdated.

Gsync is already DOA, VESA has adopted AMD's Freesync over it. Including no licensing charges, which basically means compared to Gsync where nvidia wanted to charge for it, they're screwed.

Pegatron named as Microsoft Surface fondleslab foundry

Microsoft Inks Deal With Pegatron Over Linux and Chrome Use

Pegatron Gets OEM Orders for Blu-ray Xbox 360 Consoles

This is good news, though:

NEC Display Solutions Introduces 24-Inch UHD Display

There's no danger in buying a Playstation 4. What are they going to do, rootkit their own hardware?

No, just remove advertised functionality with an update. http://www.techpowerup.com/156...

Haswell-E coming out later this year will have 6 or 8 cores (source).

That myth about Apple getting a one-year exclusive deal on Thunderbolt was debunked by Intel the day after it's release, three years ago. On top of that, Thunderbolt could never work as a standard PCI add-on card, because it is lower-level and needs to expose/act as an entire PCI bus itself. Asus makes add-ons for certain of their motherboards that have an additional specific Thunderbolt header, though - and Displayport is optional there, busting yet another one of your claims.

MS pulled a fast one at E3, wehre they used high end PC's to demo the XBox One.
IIRC MS later claimed that these were "representative" and also used for development. However, if these were the machines the devs were using to develop their game, it's no wonder they exceeded the available resources on the console.
http://www.techpowerup.com/185...

The first gen Conroe Core 2 chips apparently used a similar design trick. It was after all primarily a return to the Pentium III core with a die shrink and some tweaks to support EMT64. Intel was scrambling to recover from the wasteful detour of the Pentium IV. It might have taken them one more gen before the redesign for full 64-bit ALUs - I don't remember anymore.

Well, that link looks like a forum of fanboys rather than a forum of experts (for one thing, they appear to be confusing EM64T, the Intel 64-bit x86 instruction set, with the initial implementations; the ISA is true 64-bit, even if the initial implementations don't have 64-bit data paths, just as an IBM System 360/30 was a 32-bit computer even though it had 8-bit data paths internally and did 32-bit arithmetic a byte at a time).

The first posting linked to an article at chip-architect.com about the 64-bit Pentium 4, and that's the posting that contains the actual analysis of the 64-bit Pentium 4 (as opposed to the shouting on the forum).

About all the forum posters say about Conroe is "seems to apply since conroe as intel fans will tell you KILLS/rapes/pilleges amd in 32bit, but in 64bit they just shrug and ignore the fact that it dosnt perform as well as conroe 32bit perf would emply."; nobody on the forum appears to have actually looked at the die layout as the guy on chip-architect.com did.

The first gen Conroe Core 2 chips apparently used a similar design trick. It was after all primarily a return to the Pentium III core with a die shrink and some tweaks to support EMT64. Intel was scrambling to recover from the wasteful detour of the Pentium IV. It might have taken them one more gen before the redesign for full 64-bit ALUs - I don't remember anymore.

ATX spec requires 16ms minimum hold-up time at full load.
Off-line UPSes can take 10ms or so to switch to inverter.
Doesn't sound like there's a problem so far...
Now look at this review about 2/3 down.
Yeah, name-brand PSUs that can't even do 7ms.
Whoops.
Your guess is a good as mine as to how much hold-up time the $15 "500W" firestarters often seen in budget builds have.

It's probably more to do with taking measurements at a 12 inch distance rather than something reasonable or even standard like 3 feet. While they're not perfect, I find that that techpower up has the best measurements regarding noise and the largest sample size of different cards.

Has ATI fixed the micro stutter of their cards?

ATI always seems to have a high framerate, but when you compare it to nvidia, there's more stutter and lag.. i.e.: http://www.techpowerup.com/177173/hd-7950-may-give-higher-framerates-but-gtx-660-ti-still-smoother-report.html - has this been fixed?

If these links are to be believed, this is just another rebadge:

http://news.softpedia.com/news/First-Sighting-of-Radeon-R9-280X-Really-a-Rebranded-HD-7970-GHz-Edition-386239.shtml

http://videocardz.com/45877/amd-radeon-r9-280x-rebranded-hd-7970-ghz-edition

http://www.techpowerup.com/191440/radeon-r9-280x-is-rebranded-hd-7970-ghz-edition.html

http://www.guru3d.com/news_story/radeon_r9_280x_could_be_a_rebadged_hd_7970_ghz_edition.html

http://www.techpowerup.com/190121/massive-fire-at-sk-hynix-facility-in-wuxi-china.html
http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/09/04/us-hynix-suspension-idUSBRE9830SP20130904

I couldn't say. The problem was acknowledged by nvidia (albeit as something intentionally designed rather than a bug) but perhaps it's a workaround for something in Windows. Supposedly ATI cards suffer a similar - if not as serious - flaw (IIRC only the memory speed clocks up). Its also possible that the problem only appears on certain GPU chipsets (definitely the 4xx and 5xx lines, and apparently the 6xx GPUs as well), so if you have an older or new card it may not effect you. There also seemed to be some argument if it always happened or if it required "different monitors" (e.g., some reported that using identical monitors did not trigger the problem).

In any event, the posted solution is also Windows-only. /That/ fact occurred to me roughly 2.7ns after I hit the submit button ;-)

Nonetheless, if you /do/ have one of those cards be aware that plugging in more than one monitor may cause it to ramp up to full speed, wasting electricity and generating excess heat for no good use. Unfortunately, it's not immediately obvious so I felt obligated to bring it to people's attention. If it doesn't happen to you, then count yourself fortunate (especially when your electric bill comes due). But checking is relatively easy (Windows users can use GPU-Z to see their GPU's current clock speed) and it may save you some money in the long run.

I believe this is intel's "NGFF" or "Next Gen Form Factor" -- I think the trade name is now m.2 . This format which apparently is a hybrid pcie-e and sata form factor. I guess the electrical signals are there for sata? But these devices can operate at pci-e x2 or x4. http://www.techpowerup.com/178188/intel-ssd-530-in-ngff-form-factor-pictured-arrives-in-q2.html

Look familiar?
http://www.tweaktown.com/news/27850/adata_shows_working_next_generation_form_factor_ngff_on_video_at_ces/index.html

Apple seems to have their own "extra long" variety (maybe) -- possibly to get at capacities around 1tb?

that said the only article I saw there was comparing a $650 chip vs a $130 AMD A10 chip. and the only game it's close to the 650 in performance is Crysis Warhead which is heavily CPU limited. in other games they were only competitive where the settings were low which not only allowed the Intel card to close performance but also the A10.

the 4770k which is the $339 part is slower than the a10 in games according to this

http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/Intel/Core_i7_4770K_Haswell_GPU/

Though there are several solutions, none of them are ideal. When you're running Windows 7 x64, it gets even more hairy. Here's one discussion thread about the problem and options. So, I'd be unwilling to call it "already been done." The problem is that the Windows file system "API" is less than functional and a pain in the ass under the best of circumstances. From what I have read, the universal "best solution" is to boot from a Linux (any) LiveCD if you want to work with ext# partitions.

The i7 3770K has a TDP of 95W

Intel's website says 77 W while various websites say the retail packaging says 95 W. Weird.

I'm a linux fan, and I build a LOT of custom systems for people (and sell them for a living).
So pissing me off costs a manufacturer a few hundred sales a year.
SO lets multiply that by a few thousand "linux fans" who are also responsible for corporate purchases, hardware sales at local shops, etc.
It adds up.

Let's have a look at the numbers:

In terms of annual sales figures, ASUS emerged as the highest grossing motherboard vendor with 21.6 million units sales in calendar year 2010, followed by Gigabyte with 18 million units.

ASRock Third Largest Motherboard Vendor

ASRock sold eight million motherboards in 2011, compared with ECS and MSI who sold seven million apiece.

ASRock

It is a good bet, I think, that corporate buyers will be looking for a board that does support Secure Boot.

Probably. The first 3tb was released June 2010. [techdigest.tv] 4tb came out Oct 2011. [storagereview.com] Not exactly amazing growth, over a year for 1tb, at this rate we'll be 9tb in 2016. At this rate we will not see 60tb by 2016, and I say "we" meaning end consumer, maybe some lab monkey will see an areal density equivalent to 60tb, but it won't be available for sale. You're making the flawed assumption that current PRM technology can continue at that pace and that HAMR will not be a disruptive technology resulting in a "bump" in the density. HAMR will be a bump in density just like PRM was only a bump in density over the older recording methods.

You're exactly right: perpendicular recording (PRM) was a bump in recording methods. Before perpendicular recording the largest hard drive was 400gb and perpendicular recording did exactly what slashdot predicted, offer 10x the storage, with 4tb hard drives now available only 7 years after PRM came out in 2005.

But it took 10 full years to reach that 10x prediction, and hard drive capacity has been increasing at the same exponential growth for 30 years. What they're calling for is a huge leap, 15x the storage in 4 years, from 4tb to 60tb, and that's just not going to happen.

I would predict 10-20tb, but I'm not sure anyone will care since we'll all be using multiple terabyte SSDs by 2016 anyway, they're increasing at a much faster growth rate than hard drives and who wants to wait milliseconds to transfer date at mBps when you can wait nanoseconds to transfer at gBps? Hard drives will be almost as useful in 2016 as tape drives are in 2012.

For example take microSD cards, they're at 64gb now. 100 of those would be 55mm by 15mm by 20mm = 16,500 mm3, much smaller than a 3.5" hard drive at 101.6 mm × 25.4 mm × 146 mm = 368,650 mm3, yet a hundred 64gb microSD cards would provide 6.4tb of storage, far more than any hard drive and it could fit in a cellphone and weigh only 50grams (0.1 lbs) compared to the 1.5 lbs a hard drive weighs. Of course at $87 each that would be almost $9,000, but flash memory prices are dropping faster than any other technology related item so I have no doubt that $9k will be ~$200 within a few years.

I too used to work for Speakeasy, roughly 1.5 years ago before they were bought out. If your connection drops down to 0.1 or 0.2 at night then I would call your ISP when you're having the issue and request that they run a loop length test (aka plugged/unplugged test. This is the test where they have you unplug your modem for a couple of minutes, then plug it back in but with the power unplugged on the modem). Have them compare the results to when you first signed up for service. Theoretically they should know what to do from here, based on the results of the test, but if they don't then I would ask them what the results were and whether it's reporting any issues like metallic noise on the line, tip to ring, tip to ground, etc. I'd also ask them if they've installed any bridgetaps on the line, and if so, if they can remove them as this can impact service. If they don't find an issue on the line than I would ask them if their backhaul is currently over-saturated, and if it is, to be switched to another backhaul. They can often view this information by logging into Cacti or some other bandwidth monitoring program they use to see the current usage. Anywho, I glanced at this article and this guy does a pretty good job at explaining how DSL works and what some of the common issues are: http://www.techpowerup.com/forums/showthread.php?t=113143 Hope this helps!

Really? I have not used a Bobcat, do I don't know much about them. Cool to know that they can actually play games - maybe that's why they are responsible for most of AMD's sales (or profits, or both - I forget).

Bulldozer sucks and I agree with you about their through use of the Phenom chain. And while they do it to a certain extent with Bulldozer, there's no excuse to disable extra cores phisically. If I could buy a FX6100 and try to turn it into a FX8120, then they would have a much more attractive product. I have never won extra cores in the AMD lottery, but why they would deliberately remove such a fun "feature" is a mystery to me.

Didn't MS already implement the scheduler fix on Win 7 via a hotfix? It saw gains of about ~2% overall - see http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/windows-7-hotfix-bulldozer-performance,3119-6.html Which means Bulldozer will suck forever. Piledriver seems better, though, according to http://www.techpowerup.com/img/12-04-10/79a.jpg That's if such table is trustworthy, and it's doubtful, given that they didn't even get the FP/GHz percentage gains right.

The site is http://www.techpowerup.com/

I used to go there to learn how to overclock AMD based systems and to discuss other 'computer technical' material circa 2006 or thereabouts.

(It's mostly a gamers forums is why, they are into 'ekeing out' performance that way, via hardware/mobo side overclocking & thus, best guys to learn that from imo)...

HOWEVER:

All I see now is the "seizure" page from ICE now, but no reasons why (there probably IS a valid reason though, or they wouldn't have done it).

The host there, a fellow that goes by the handle/nickname W1zzard, does a decent program called GPU-z (for checking videocard capabilities, much like CPU-z does)...

Funny part is?

His page for download of that program is still up beneath that domain though, here, oddly enough:

http://www.techpowerup.com/gpuz/

* Thus, has me wondering what's going on there... & I went searching (out of curiousity) for a comprehensive list of domains seized by ICE but cannot find such a list...

APK

P.S.=> IS there a comprehensive list of domains seized by ICE in total summation? Thanks... apk

The site is http://www.techpowerup.com/

I used to go there to learn how to overclock AMD based systems and to discuss other 'computer technical' material circa 2006 or thereabouts.

(It's mostly a gamers forums is why, they are into 'ekeing out' performance that way, via hardware/mobo side overclocking & thus, best guys to learn that from imo)...

HOWEVER:

All I see now is the "seizure" page from ICE now, but no reasons why (there probably IS a valid reason though, or they wouldn't have done it).

The host there, a fellow that goes by the handle/nickname W1zzard, does a decent program called GPU-z (for checking videocard capabilities, much like CPU-z does)...

Funny part is?

His page for download of that program is still up beneath that domain though, here, oddly enough:

http://www.techpowerup.com/gpuz/

* Thus, has me wondering what's going on there... & I went searching (out of curiousity) for a comprehensive list of domains seized by ICE but cannot find such a list...

APK

P.S.=> IS there a comprehensive list of domains seized by ICE in total summation? Thanks... apk

I said desktop on ARM -- the desktop on 32/64-bit will work with existing applications just fine. The point was that "desktop" is not available as an option on the new platforms for any serious development (e.g. porting Photoshop or LibreOffice to ARM); you are relegated to using Metro and the WinRT APIs which are not designed for creating complex applications.

App Suspension:

  1. http://blogs.msdn.com/b/b8/archive/2012/02/09/building-windows-for-the-arm-processor-architecture.aspx -- can't find the specific quote in the article, but checking out the comments: e.g. "I hate that the OS suspends the app when it's not in the foreground. To fix this issue, I always run it in Visual Studio, so it doesn't get suspended."

  2. http://hexus.net/tech/news/software/35057-microsoft-windows-8-feature-app-suspension/ -- "This time around it's Microsoft's announcement that its goal is to suspend Metro apps that are currently not visible on the screen to curtail and, with any luck, cut completely their power consumption" and bear in mind that the desktop is just another application (unless Microsoft are treating the desktop applications in the Desktop application differently to Metro applications in Metro).

  3. http://www.techpowerup.com/160208/Windows-8-To-Introduce-App-Suspension.html -- "Simply put, it is a kernel optimization that "suspends" applications that are running in the background without much activity." This is a further clarification on the suspension behaviour, which would mitigate the problem (e.g. what about an alarm clock application, an application polling a server infrequently, or VMware with a powered on but idle OS).

Where are the other review links?

http://www.overclockers.com/amd-radeon-hd-7970-graphics-card-review/
http://www.madshrimps.be/articles/article/1000250/#axzz1hFPj6oTt
http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/AMD/HD_7970/
http://www.hardwarecanucks.com/forum/hardware-canucks-reviews/49646-amd-radeon-hd-7970-3gb-review-25.html

> What about 4 6990's in quad crossfire I have no clue if thats even possible,

Here's your answer ... just shy of 100 fps in BF:BC2 256x1600 4xAA

$1499 each
http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/ASUS/Mars_II/