Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

P4 3.2GHz Reviews

Posted by Hemos on from the tide-goes-in-tide-goes-out dept.

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.

5 of 296 comments (clear)

  1. Stuff that matters. by DeadScreenSky · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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
  2. Meh by ickoonite · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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

  3. Re:Buying other items with small performance incre by onion2k · · Score: 5, Insightful

    If you run a toast shop, and you're making 5000 slices of toast a day...

    --
    http://twitter.com/onion2k
  4. Purchasing Cycles by Detritus · · Score: 4, Insightful

    There are many organizations that do not have a budget or process for replacing obsolete/outdated equipment.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
  5. Brief benchmark rant by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful


    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....