Slashdot Mirror

Just three days ago I bought myself a 17" Samsung SyncMaster 710N for EUR 360. The salesman told me they never had a single dead pixel complaint with Samsung monitors. A few dead monitors yes, but no dead pixels. With some other brands (he didn't want to get more specific) the dead pixel problem seems to be more common.

A bit off-topic, but anyway: in case somebody is looking for a decent 17" TFT, based on the few days experience I can warmly recommend the 710N. There's a recent review of a bunch of 17" monitors at Tom's hardware page, the 710N became the "Editors Choice" label.

Far be it from me to call B.S. on something before having seen it, but lately hardware manufacturers seem to be relying more and more on "Press Releases" and benchamrks to garner attention, and thus investor money rather than truly innovating as was the norm only a few years back. Tom's hardware got sick of pandering to the hardware companies claims and said they were going to put an end to it.

http://www4.tomshardware.com/column/20041011/index .html

This reeks of a venture capital marketing strategy to me, but I suppose once the show is over and we see what they have to offer, I might change my mind. At the moment though this press release seems more hype than anything else judging from past experience with Infinium.

Are the temperature specs posted in this picture really accurate ? That's interesting, because I'm about to upgrade an old pc. The currect case is ok, but it has mediocre ventilation, so I was going with a slower processer (say an Athlon 1800+) to reduce heat. By these specs, I'd be better off with the Athlon 2800+ (which was the one I wanted anyways...)

... as claimed here (presumably as viewed from the desktop)?

I can just imagine PHBs cancelling orders for Opteron servers because "Tom says they don't make them any more".

Doah! Sorry about the skanky link in my last response. Here's a correct one.

Actually I shouldn't give Tom's Hardware a hard time (like everyone else seems to). As articles go, the reviews of high-end ink-jets, the 8-channel RAID6 card and the Viewsonic media center were quite interesting (and a lot more recent than the CPU round-up too).

These days though, my favourite reviewer is Dan (who posts here now and then). Dan seems to understand that a million graphs showing you the statistically insignificant difference between the latest mobos / graphic cards / processors / ram sinks don't really make a great site.

Actually I shouldn't give Tom's Hardware a hard time (like everyone else seems to). As articles go, the reviews of high-end ink-jets, the 8-channel RAID6 card and the Viewsonic media center were quite interesting (and a lot more recent than the CPU round-up too).

These days though, my favourite reviewer is Dan (who posts here now and then). Dan seems to understand that a million graphs showing you the statistically insignificant difference between the latest mobos / graphic cards / processors / ram sinks don't really make a great site.

"Centrino" may be a marketing strategy but the Pentium M processor kicks ass. Specs show a 2MB cache (Dothan variety), 21 W power req. and notebooks with it last atleast 5 hrs on a single battery. I don't think AMD has anything to top that in the same price range.

On the matter of performance, I'd love to find a real comparison of XP-M vs. Pentium-M processors under identical conditions. The closest I can find is an early benchmark comparing the XP-M 1700+ to a Dothan 2.0 GHz. The performance is close enough to chalk up to clock speed. I can't even remotely find a battery life comparison, I'd bet Intel wins that one. For price, you're right, the Athlon XP-M 3000+ at $141 and the Mobile Athlon 64 3400+ aren't in the same class as the Pentium M 755 for $435. Especially since either one of those processors trounces the Pentium in raw power.

The cache size argument is a non-starter - it's only one input that determines system performance, the real comparison. It's like touting the Athlon's larger L1 cache - big deal. The power requirements and battery life are closely related, and I think Intel does win that one, but by how much, and is that worth an extra $300 to Joe Consumer, especially at a massive performance dropoff?

One of the first cases of this was when Tom's Hardware (then only a startup site) reviewed a Riva TNT and said it was twice as fast as 3DFX voodoo (obviously untrue, but it's unknown if Nvidia paid him anything to say this). Eventually 3DFX picked up on this and demanded that Tom changes it, which he did.

Here are the reviews from Tom's site:

Comparison of Graphics Cards with NVIDIA's RIVA TNT Chip [tomshardware.com]
Addendum to Banshee, Savage3D and TNT Preview [tomshardware.com]
New 3D Chips - Banshee, G200, RIVA TNT And Savage3D [tomshardware.com]
Preview of 3Dfx Voodoo Banshee, S3 Savage3D and NVIDIA RIVA TNT [tomshardware.com]

I only skimmed the articles, but he doesn't seem to be saying that the TNT is twice as fast. The last article concludes:

"NVIDIA's RIVA TNT is not the new wonder chip as some people may have expected. However it is sticking up very well against its toughest competitors from 3Dfx. 3Dfx has still got an edge in applications that are available in a Glide version and in games that don't strain the CPU as much, thus giving a dual Voodoo2 configuration the chance to show its power. However, there are many occasions where TNT is at least as good as single Voodoo2, dual Voodoo2 and certainly better than Voodoo Banshee."

Seems fairly objective to me. Did I miss something? Maybe the articles have been edited? aye

One of the first cases of this was when Tom's Hardware (then only a startup site) reviewed a Riva TNT and said it was twice as fast as 3DFX voodoo (obviously untrue, but it's unknown if Nvidia paid him anything to say this). Eventually 3DFX picked up on this and demanded that Tom changes it, which he did.

Here are the reviews from Tom's site:

Comparison of Graphics Cards with NVIDIA's RIVA TNT Chip [tomshardware.com]
Addendum to Banshee, Savage3D and TNT Preview [tomshardware.com]
New 3D Chips - Banshee, G200, RIVA TNT And Savage3D [tomshardware.com]
Preview of 3Dfx Voodoo Banshee, S3 Savage3D and NVIDIA RIVA TNT [tomshardware.com]

I only skimmed the articles, but he doesn't seem to be saying that the TNT is twice as fast. The last article concludes:

"NVIDIA's RIVA TNT is not the new wonder chip as some people may have expected. However it is sticking up very well against its toughest competitors from 3Dfx. 3Dfx has still got an edge in applications that are available in a Glide version and in games that don't strain the CPU as much, thus giving a dual Voodoo2 configuration the chance to show its power. However, there are many occasions where TNT is at least as good as single Voodoo2, dual Voodoo2 and certainly better than Voodoo Banshee."

Seems fairly objective to me. Did I miss something? Maybe the articles have been edited? aye

One of the first cases of this was when Tom's Hardware (then only a startup site) reviewed a Riva TNT and said it was twice as fast as 3DFX voodoo (obviously untrue, but it's unknown if Nvidia paid him anything to say this). Eventually 3DFX picked up on this and demanded that Tom changes it, which he did.

Here are the reviews from Tom's site:

Comparison of Graphics Cards with NVIDIA's RIVA TNT Chip [tomshardware.com]
Addendum to Banshee, Savage3D and TNT Preview [tomshardware.com]
New 3D Chips - Banshee, G200, RIVA TNT And Savage3D [tomshardware.com]
Preview of 3Dfx Voodoo Banshee, S3 Savage3D and NVIDIA RIVA TNT [tomshardware.com]

I only skimmed the articles, but he doesn't seem to be saying that the TNT is twice as fast. The last article concludes:

"NVIDIA's RIVA TNT is not the new wonder chip as some people may have expected. However it is sticking up very well against its toughest competitors from 3Dfx. 3Dfx has still got an edge in applications that are available in a Glide version and in games that don't strain the CPU as much, thus giving a dual Voodoo2 configuration the chance to show its power. However, there are many occasions where TNT is at least as good as single Voodoo2, dual Voodoo2 and certainly better than Voodoo Banshee."

Seems fairly objective to me. Did I miss something? Maybe the articles have been edited? aye

One of the first cases of this was when Tom's Hardware (then only a startup site) reviewed a Riva TNT and said it was twice as fast as 3DFX voodoo (obviously untrue, but it's unknown if Nvidia paid him anything to say this). Eventually 3DFX picked up on this and demanded that Tom changes it, which he did.

Here are the reviews from Tom's site:

Comparison of Graphics Cards with NVIDIA's RIVA TNT Chip [tomshardware.com]
Addendum to Banshee, Savage3D and TNT Preview [tomshardware.com]
New 3D Chips - Banshee, G200, RIVA TNT And Savage3D [tomshardware.com]
Preview of 3Dfx Voodoo Banshee, S3 Savage3D and NVIDIA RIVA TNT [tomshardware.com]

I only skimmed the articles, but he doesn't seem to be saying that the TNT is twice as fast. The last article concludes:

"NVIDIA's RIVA TNT is not the new wonder chip as some people may have expected. However it is sticking up very well against its toughest competitors from 3Dfx. 3Dfx has still got an edge in applications that are available in a Glide version and in games that don't strain the CPU as much, thus giving a dual Voodoo2 configuration the chance to show its power. However, there are many occasions where TNT is at least as good as single Voodoo2, dual Voodoo2 and certainly better than Voodoo Banshee."

Seems fairly objective to me. Did I miss something? Maybe the articles have been edited? aye

This has been done at least once before (something called Yamaha DiscT@2): http://www4.tomshardware.com/storage/20020927/. This time though, the etching is not done on the burned side: http://www.cdfreaks.com/news/8847. I doubt it will take off, but I must admit it would be interesting to try out.

What is new about pliable solar sells? What about this jacket for instance?

http://www4.tomshardware.com/column/20040430/

Is that where the now-delayed WinFS was going?

Check this out for cooling concerns:
Liquid Nitrogen 5GHz CPU.

You're confused. He doesn't work for Tom's Hardware (PG-13).

Take a look at this article and especially this video. The 3.6 GHz P4 overheats with the stock cooler.

Take a look at this article and especially this video. The 3.6 GHz P4 overheats with the stock cooler.

Additionally, take a look at this article and especially this video. The 3.6 GHz P4 overheats with the stock cooler.

Additionally, take a look at this article and especially this video. The 3.6 GHz P4 overheats with the stock cooler.

here you go

http://www6.tomshardware.com/cpu/20010917/index.ht ml

Fanless Media Center Box
There isn't enthusiasts for a 3,389.61 USD Media Center Box.
May be a every-day-$500 PC with a not-so-usual case running GeexBox it's a better, cheaper solution.

- GeexBox Fan Club -

Athlon Mobile-XP 2200+
Zalman CPU Heatsink and Fan (1600RPM - QUIET)
NVidia GeForce4 MX
Hauppauge PVR-250
Streamzap Remote
Actisys IR Blaster
Windows XP
Beyond TV 3 - PVR Software

The GeForce4 MX GPU is passively cooled with just a heatsink. The only fans in the system are the power supply fans and the CPU fan. The CPU fan has been "underclocked" down to 1600 RPM.

The CPU I use is Barton core at 1.6 GHz (I think). Being a mobile part, it has a much lower stock voltage, and can't change clock multiplier on the fly. I use CrystalCPUID (Toms Hardware) to underclock the CPU to save power and keep it nice and cool. The system runs great. It's very quiet, the HDDs make more noise than the fans do, and I have no thermal issues. Best of all, it was very inexpensive. I put it together for around $500. No monthly subscription fees for Beyond TV either, and their SW works great.

I'm running Mandrake in my office now, and I'm gonna try to create a similar setup with Myth TV too just to try it out.

You mean the "rumors" aren't officially "news" until they appear on /.? Forget what we've been reading since Febuary on http://www.anandtech.com, http://www.tomshardware.com, http://www.theinquirer.net, http://www.arstechnica.com, http://www.hardocp.com, http://www.aceshardware.com, and of course http://www.intel.com, it's not true until it appears on /. ...

PSSST!!! I've heard the rumor that Apple is planning on ditching Motorola's chips for IBM processors in their upcoming Macintoshes. Has anyone elseo heard about something called a "G5"? Some say it might also be 64 bit? Heavens-to-Betsy, let's post it to /.'s FP.

Tom's Hardware also did review the SLI setup.

Christmasy? I know the perfect page:

http://www6.tomshardware.com/consumer/20041115/hol iday_guide-13.html

It'd be nice if the link pointed to the FIRST page of the holiday buyer's guide rather than the page where the submitter was spanking his monkey while submitting the /. story.

Take a look at this video that Tom's Hardware (article only in German) did on the heat problems of the 3.6 GHz P4. The bloody thing overheats with the stock cooler and even when the ambient temperature of the case is well within the advertised limits.

Take a look at this video that Tom's Hardware (article only in German) did on the heat problems of the 3.6 GHz P4. The bloody thing overheats with the stock cooler and even when the ambient temperature of the case is well within the advertised limits.

Well, a number of bad things can happen to a computer, especially one that's running, such as the fan may stall etc.. Take a look at what happened to the old AMD proccessors when the fan stalled. Now they have thermal protection and the CPU just cuts off... However there was a 10% chance 1/10 chance that the CPU would just burn before the thermal protection kicked in (I'm sorry, I don't have the link to that particular article).

Only $300, and just look at the elegant design and sturdy construction. $300 well-spent.

*rolls eyes*

Sometimes it's just better to buy things.

Only $300, and just look at the elegant design and sturdy construction. $300 well-spent.

*rolls eyes*

Sometimes it's just better to buy things.

Only $300, and just look at the elegant design and sturdy construction. $300 well-spent.

*rolls eyes*

Sometimes it's just better to buy things.

Only $300, and just look at the elegant design and sturdy construction. $300 well-spent.

*rolls eyes*

Sometimes it's just better to buy things.

This project really held my interest. Not only could I get a great image for less than 1/3 of the price of a 'real' projector. And I could have more control over it anyway!

It wasn't until the last picture on the last page that I started to lose interest. Notice how the center of the image is far brighter than the edges?

That's entirely expected, if you think about how the overhead projector works. By comparison, I've never seen this on a 'real' projector. Still a nifty idea, but I think I'll splurge on a real one.

When I heard that name I couldn't shake the image of Hugo Weaving's, (Agent Smith in the Matrix), voice saying that to Neo all the time.

In fact every time I see Hugo, like in the Lord of the Rings, I still hear him saying that...
"Mr. Anderson!"

Anyway, I'm glad to see that Best Buy is finally being recognized more for their money grabbing. Being an independent computer consultant, I'm tired of the Compaq/HP pushers filling the market with crap.
Further, the Geek Squad is now eating into my profits from service.

Irregardless, I for one welcome our new overlords. I've simply switched purchasing from OEM vendors to purchasing from Best Buy, Staples, Future Shop and so forth when rebates and discounts make it profitable.

What I dislike the most is that it's such a GAME.

Here is how you play and what you get:

1. Comb the flyers weekly, (both online and mailbox versions).
CircuitCity.com
FutureShop.ca
Staples.ca
BestBuy.ca
BestBuy.com
LondonDrugs.ca
OfficeDepot.com
RadioShack.com
(Please add more, I'm sure there are many)
2. Compare prices from Ebay, factoring in landed costs like shipping and duty.
3. Compare reviews and comments on items you are thinking of buying.
Tomshardware.com
Zdnet.com
4. Try to take advantage of 150% buyer protection by pitting store against store.
5. Now go and purchase what you can at the lowest possible price.
6. You will now get sales pitches, reams of paper receipts and mumbling twitchy eyed sales people running about checking the validity of your homework.
7. Don't forget to use any Airmiles, Reward Cards etc. to get even more discounts.
8. Before you leave the store, make sure you have everything you'll need to make a proper rebate.
9. Immediately test the product(s) you buy.
10. Do any returns ASAP.
11. If you do a return, make sure you go back to see if it's on the bargain table :->
12. Immediately fill out and make copies of your rebates, receipts and UPC codes.
13. Check everything for accuracy and dates.
14. Call help lines if you are missing any critical items or are unsure of anything in the rebate process before hand.
15. Immediately mail in rebates and keep postal receipts for your records.
16. Goto 1.

What you get is a product for a price you should have gotten right from the #$%king beginning.
Welcome to the rat race of buying and selling.
There are no winners, just lots of wasted time making paper for bureaucrats, lawyers and accountants.

Maybe we are just living in The Matrix.

Looking over the PC benchmarks for the GeForce FX 5200 there is little chance of running this game in XGA. I'm hoping Apple beefs up the video power after Tiger is released, then they will have an unbeatable package.

I've heard of using the outer cylinders for speed (because of their larger capacity and faster transfer rate) but not the inner cylinders.

Tom's review of the 2.5" Savvio shows that while its overall performance as a workstation drive suffers from exactly what you say, for database benches it surpasses a 3.5" 10k rpm drive. For database (particularly OLTP) use it's I/Os per sec, especially with 2k or 4k writes. Sequential transfer rate is not as important in that application.

Varying speeds usually causes random access delays since it takes time for the new speed to settle when heads are moved in/out on the disk. The momentum of the motor and platters is huge compared to that of the heads.

Reduce the mass and area of the media and boost RPMs, and possibly add multiple heads per platter (internal striping). DB heads would rejoice. And it's DB heads that pay beaucoup $$$ for SCSI or FC-AL arrays.

(Folks doing media work like video or rendering that need sequential can go for stuff like Xserve RAID with SATAFC-AL and stripe sequential bandwidth...)

Tom's has an interesting article on a new "8 ms" LCD. Take a look and decide for yourself if it's worth the money. IMO, it ain't!

I recently bought a Sony SDM-S204/B 20.1" LCD and while pretty pricey, it looks amazing both playing games and on the desktop. I did quite a bit of research on these and it seems like the response time stats given by manufacturers are pretty meaningless - they vary widely in the specification measurements.

Basically, the ISO standard measures the time taken to move a pixel from totally black to totally white (actually to within a small percentage). This ISO standard for response times is not very good and needs to be replaced - mostly because this is not a typical scenario, pixels are much more likely to be moving from some percentage on to some percentage off, or vice versa. If you have a major colour change, the voltage differential is going to be much greater so the movement will be faster. Panels are being created that manipulate the standard measurements to only improve the black to white transitions, totally ignoring the common case scenario for benchmarking performance. This anandtech article gives a pretty good (and brief) explanation on why these times are basically completely meaningless.

One other thing to be wary of is the interpolation methods some of the cheaper monitors use when not displaying in native resolutions. Try setting the desktop to 800x600 and even 640x480 in the store just to see how fuzzy things get. The sony has a native resolution of 1600x1200, but I don't often get to play games in that res - but running 3d and 2d games in 1024x768 and 800x600 even both still look fantastic. This wasn't the case with my previous (cheap) lcd, and it certainly wasn't the case with a lot of the monitors I checked out in the store.

There is nothing finer than raising the hackles of delusional AMD lovers. However, today I do so with a heavy heart. This is no time to take aim at the pompous, self-righteous head-in-the-sand-ostriches of the alternative chip lifestyle. One must embrace them, hug them and wipe away their tears.

Right here. Though, I must admit that I found some of the results to be a little wonky, along with the test bed. How'd they get a FX-51 running on a socket 939 board? Underlocked a FX-53?

I suspect that for me, that "something better" might very well be this unit reviewed by Tom's Hardware:

Archos Gmini 400 - http://www6.tomshardware.com/mobile/20041021/index .html

Which plays music (MP3, WAV, WMA), acts as a digital photo viewer (ala new iPod), but can also transfer those photos off of your compactflash card via the built-in CF interface (adaptors to other formats available), and can also view movies in DivX format (either on the screen, or utilizing the included video-out port for a regular TV set).

Oh yes, and it's also a portable gaming system...

And it's the same size as an iPod. 20gb version now, hopefully larger soon.

Is this an iPod killer? I don't know, but it's currently where I'd put my money.

N.

After looking at how CPUs handle faulty heat sinks, you would think that having a large supply of water nearby would be a good thing.

Or maybe a jug of liquid nitrogen...

LN2 is fine and good as long as you have a replenishable supply, and asphyxiation doesn't concern you all that much. That being said, it still looks like a lot of fun.

No, The point was that the P4 thermal management was on the core, and would dynamically reduce the clock speed when overheating, whereas the athlon thermal management was on the motherboard and the diode which were used couldn't react quickly enough to a sudden loss of cooling. THG under no circumstances "disabled" the thermal management.
Here is the original article

THG got a lot of grief over this from AMD fanboys until AMD came clean and admitted this was a problem
AMD's response to the article

No, The point was that the P4 thermal management was on the core, and would dynamically reduce the clock speed when overheating, whereas the athlon thermal management was on the motherboard and the diode which were used couldn't react quickly enough to a sudden loss of cooling. THG under no circumstances "disabled" the thermal management.
Here is the original article

THG got a lot of grief over this from AMD fanboys until AMD came clean and admitted this was a problem
AMD's response to the article

The P4 already does this. It will turn down the speed and even disable individual cpu components in order to save its life if it begins to overheat.

TomsHardware produced this video a while ago, detailing what happens when the heatsink and fan is removed during workload. They test both AMD and Intel processors from back then.