P4 3.2GHz Reviews
Nathan writes "The Intel 3.2GHz Pentium4 has passed its NDA with reviews coming out over the net, including this one at MBReview, This one at HardAvenue, This one at TweakTown and this review at HotHW." Yay. Benchmarks. Wowee-zowee.
Yay. Benchmarks. Wowee-zowee.
If it isn't important, if it doesn't matter, then don't post it.
There is no excellent beauty that hath not some strangeness in the proportion. -- Francis Bacon
Whilst I would extend my sincerest thanks to dear Intel for yet more predictable inching up of the top speed for x86, I would like to point out that a far more interesting processor revolution is to take place today at 17:00 UTC, in the form of the PowerPC 970.
64bit for the consumer and the world's most beautiful OS or a meagre increase for a 32bit chip with Microsoft Windows. I know what I'll pick...
iqu
Yay. Benchmarks. Wowee-zowee.
If it's that boring, why include it on the main page as a story?
Trolling is a art,
Because the general sheep public don't understand or care about that stuff. They just see the ever widening "GHZ" label and buy away every time intel releases a new chip.
If you run a toast shop, and you're making 5000 slices of toast a day...
http://twitter.com/onion2k
There are many organizations that do not have a budget or process for replacing obsolete/outdated equipment. Like rain in the desert, money for new equipment comes in infrequent deluges. When money is available, you buy the top-of-the-line computer. You may be using it for the next ten years.
Mea navis aericumbens anguillis abundat
Come on beyond a few people this sort of speed really isn't necessary is it!
For most people when processors hit 750 mhz that was enough for them. And then MS released XP but that only raised the stakes a slight bit. 1.2 ghz is enough for 90% of people out there!
Yet some people still crave speed, I have an aunt who does nowt more than send a few emails a month and play minesweeper and (much to my annoyance as I may use it for maybe 5% of my tasks) she has a faster cpu than me!
On a side note, what's happeneing with AMD these days? they seem to really be losing it at the high end, it terms of both value and performance. there 3200 seems only about as good as a p4 2800 of so.
Still they still are the better choice at the same end of the pricing scale below the curve of insanity!
Personally I'd much prefer some nice advances in some other area, cpu's are dull these days and I doubt 64 bit will convince me otherwise.
+----------------- | What is the question!
My Ti Powerbook G4 running at 800MHz runs just fine and it gets 6 hours of battery life. When are PC users going to realize that you don't need any more performance than that? Power savings is more important these days.
Ok, I have a small rant concerning benchmarks. I'm in the sciences and often look at graphs of data. I am getting SO TIRED of benchmark results being posted with y-axes that go from 2500 to 2600 showing the relative "improvement" of newer, faster cpu's when they ought to be scaled from 0 to X "mips", "flops" or whatevers so that you can see at a glance that the changes are or are not significant.
Better yet are plots showing how much they have "improved" relative to simple clock speed increases (if at all!) and normalized "mips/dollar" for cost evaluation....
Not every CPU intensive application can be done on a cluster. It depends on if the work can be distributed or not. Not every problem can be broken down into discrete little chunks that can be done on separate nodes in a cluster. It doesn't always work out that way.
My journal has hot