Slashdot Mirror
Toms Hardware Reviews 65 CPU's, Past & Present
An anonymous reader writes "Toms Hardware has an interesting review of 65 processors ranging from 100 MHz to 3066 MHz. They spent more than 300 hours benchmarking and recording the scores. Worth a quick glance, especially for the Unreal Tournament 2003 scores on the 100 MHz pentium!" CT: Yeah yeah. It's a dupe. Funny that not a single reader emailed me in almost 2 hours to tell me.
Granted it's dead now, but they once stood much like AMD today as a alternative to Intel CPUs. They even started the trend to call CPUs not by its clock (MHz), but by it's "P-rating", roughly how it benchmarked against Intel CPUs.
For a reasonable fee per story, I am offering my services to the editors of /. as a proofreader and duplicate checker. Additionally, I will assist if necessary (at a negotiable hourly rate) in adding code to automatically send the draft article blurbs to my wireless device. I am unable to proofread overnight (I have to sleep sometime), so that will have to be covered by another shift, or written off as "happy slashdot error time."
I cannot guarantee 100% error correction, but I will stake my job on significantly decreased rates of grammar and spelling mistakes, and far fewer duplicate postings.
I would also like a T-shirt that says "I work for slashdot".
Please, for the sake of your readers, hire me. I want to help!
Yea. I mean, why not rewrite the slashcode
base to handle this. It's a very common
problem, and sooooo simple to fix.
Nor the NexGen Nx586, which had 256K on chip cache two years before the Pentium Pro.
They have the K5 on there, which was AMD's bastardization of the Nx586 after they acquired NexGen.
NexGen was the first company to reverse engineer an Intel processor and produce a compatible version. They had some really fine people at that company, and it was their design work which brough us the AMD K6 and Athlon processors. Its unfortunate they don't get a lot of credit. No one seems to remember how terrible AMD used to be. Their acquisition of NexGen was one last ditch effor to do something other make 386 and 486 processors.
I don't read or respond to AC posts
Waaaa waaaa, the people who I ignore as much as I can and who pay my salary refuse to do my job for me, waaa, waaa
If I had a breif spell of insanity and thought that Slashdot editors gave a crap about what anyone thought, or even for a moment believed that the editors listen to input, yeah, I might've written a mail. But it seems that everything else that people write Slashdot about, suggestions and complaints alike, is ignored as soon as possible. So why should anyone bother to write you Taco?
I like Slashdot, I like the people on Slashdot, I'm a Slashdot addict, I'll refresh the front page after I'm done writing this. But man, the staff running this place is unbelievable. No spell checking, ever. Dupes, trolls, fakes, bad URLs etc etc all find their way through to the frontpage way too often indicating that half the time the staff don't even read the article, much less check links or such. There is no staging or testing lab, it's quick hacks and patches on the live boxes which every now and then brings the site down or creates some other, ahem, interesting results.
In short, the Slashdot staff isn't even trying anymore. Complete stagnation.
Aaaah it feels good to burn some karma, of course, I'll never get to moderate anything after this rant though.
Wax-Museum Fire Results In Hundreds Of New Danny DeVito Statues
What would be even funnier would be to repeat the same story to the exclusion of all others on April 1st. It would be particulary amusing if that story were a fictitious arcticle about reducing redundancy in Slashdot headlines.
Modest doubt is called the beacon of the wise. - William Shakespeare
There should be a category for duplicates. It is obvious that they now have a policy to announce duplicates when they are discovered. When a dup is announced, it should be moved to this category and we can all remove (or not remove) that category from our preferred view. Then users don't have to worry, the /. team doesn't have to pull the story and (of course) the editors still won't have to do their jobs...
-Sean
Depending on the authority you go by, the "standard" for writing plurals of acronyms varies.
The (US) Government Printing Office Style Manual states: "an apostrophe is used to indicate...the coined plurals of letters, figures, and symbols." GPO provides examples such as YMCA's and ABC's.
On the other hand, the 14th Edition of the Chicago Manual of Style states: "So far as it can be done without confusion, single or multiple letters, hyphenated coinages, and numbers used as nouns (whether spelled out or in numberals) form the plural by adding s alone." Provided examples include CODs and IOUs. Also according to this source, "Abbreviations having more than one period, such as M.D. and Ph.D., often form their plurals of an apostrophe and an s." Examples given include M.A.'s and Ph.D.'s. I particularly enjoy this excerpt for its anthropomorphism of words, ascribing the action of forming the plural to the words themselves rather than the writer.
Then, of course, there is the real definition of apostrophe, the first listed in Websters Revised Unabridged Dictionary (1913):
A figure of speech by which the orator or writer
suddenly breaks off from the previous method of his
discourse, and addresses, in the second person, some
person or thing, absent or present; as, Milton's
apostrophe to Light at the beginning of the third book of
``Paradise Lost.''
Thus, for one who considers processors as narrative, it is indeed likely that there might be an apostrophe in a CPU, for example, in the case of a cache miss....