Slashdot Mirror
AMD Receives $683M for Dresden Plant
Cocooner writes "Infoworld has an article explaining how AMD received $683 million in grants from Germany and the state of Saxony for its next-generation microprocessor wafer facility. The new plant will be located in Dresden, adjacent to Fab 30 and will be called Fab 36. It will be the first AMD 300mm manufacturing facility."
Woohoo!
After hearing how much the improvements in Linux performance was, I decided to do some benchmarks.
Here are the Machines I used.
AMD Opeteron 3400+ with UltraSCSI320 Hard disks
XServe G5
386SX with MFM hard disks
Copying a 17 Mebibyte file from one hard drive to another.
SCO UnixWare : 7.3 Seconds
Windows Longhorn Server beta : 7.5 Seconds.
Windows Server 2003 : 9 Seconds
Mac OS X Server 2004 : 9.5 Seconds
Windows 2000 Server : 11 Seconds
Linux 2.7 Server : 16 Seconds.
Linux 2.6 Server : 18 Seconds
MSDOS on a 386DX : 20 Seconds.
Linux 2.4 Server : 30 Seconds
Linux 2.2 Server : 48 Seconds
Linux 2.0 Server : 75 Seconds.
As you can See, Linux dosent come CLOSE to beating enterprise systems at high performance servers. EVEN Msdos from a 386SX smokes Linux!
Don't mod me down unless you can justify these speeds. It is pretty obvious by now why SCO is suing Linux, because they are stealing their code to gain speed. And yes, DMA WAS ENABLED.
Just in time for the next B-17 raid
...fucking pathetic that they wouldn't want to or couldn't build in the US (cost)....
America is fucking pathetic.
efficiency is of prime importance. Thus the use of
C would be limited and well controlled, rather like small assembler routines are currently used in some systems for the same purpose. Indeed the move to C++ should only be considered in the case of upgrading a body of C programs for backwards compatibility. In the case of new projects alternatives to C and C++ should seriously be considered.
advanced musician ensure that the tempo of a
piece is correct, and since playing to a metronome
is more difficult, will help sharpen the musicians
performance of the piece. The musician does not
just view the metronome as an aid for beginners,
or as something that restricts him to a set beat, but
as a tool that helps produce a polished and
professional performance. C should not be seen as
a language to which you graduate after you have
learnt to program in languages with safety checks.
In fact changing to C or C++ is a great step
backwards. Languages with consistency and
semantic checks are essential aids to the
production of professional software.
Programming is the orchestration of change
within a large state space. Object-oriented
techniques provide a method of simple division
and management of such state spaces. Managing
such state spaces requires the simplest techniques,
in order to guard against detectable
inconsistencies that lead to errors in executable
systems. C and C++ do not implement the simple
management of a large state space, and allow
many potential errors to go undetected. The role
of a language as a tool cannot seriously be
regarded as some authoritarian that stops us doing
what we want or need to do, as many languages
with type safety and consistency checks are often
viewed. Programming languages should embody
the collective wisdom of common sense practices
that have been learnt over many years, by
common and painful experience. C++ lacks the
implementation of much of this wisdom.
[Sakkinen 92] observes that much of the C++
literature has few references to external work or
research. It fails to draw on the insights and
progress made by many researchers. This leads
me to believe that C++ is parochial and removed
from the many advances that will make
production of systems easier and more cost
effective.
This paper has shown many cases where C++
uses old C mechanisms to provide things that can
and should be expressed consistently within the
object-oriented paradigm. For example type
casting. The move to pure object-oriented
languages will facilitate more consistent
programming and avoid many typical errors that
occur in software production. C++ also makes
distinctions that belong in the ?how?
implementation domain. For example, ?.? vs ?->,
and variables and functions. These make
bookkeeping work for programmers, which
should be handled by a compiler. But then C++
fails to make distinctions that belong in the ?what?
problem domain. For example, procedures vs
functions. Making distinctions in the ?how?
domain adds inconvenience to the language.
Failing to make distinctions in the ?what? domain
limits the power and expressiveness of the
language. The amount of change required in C++
to address the issues raised in this paper is seen as
largely insurmountable.
It is better to detect and avoid errors than to
fix them. The fixing of errors happens many times
during the development process. This slows down
the development process, and is therefore costly.
Good programmers in this context (often called
?gurus?), are those who recognise symptoms, and
recommend fixes. Good programmers in the better
sense (often called ?impractical idealistic
dreamers?) adopt better practices (programming
languages being a subset of these), that avoid
error in the first place.
A programming language is just a tool, in the
same way that an axe is a tool. If the axe is blunt
when chopping down a tree, then procedu
The US is spending over billions a week in Iraq! At least the German is getting a high tech chip production plant and 1000 high tech jobs.
I guess we will get lower (HA!) price down the road from Iraq?
oooh, J.R. Simplot.
-I DDoSed your mom.
all of those times are horribly... i just copied 45mb from my main PC over to my server across a 100mbit network connection (wich is a hell of alot slower than any HDD), and it took about 4 seconds. im guessing you dont have proper drivers for your SCSI device there.