Re:What does hyperthreading have to do with it?
on
AMD Quad Cores, Oh My
·
· Score: 1
But one core can do video encoding and the other can do audio encoding, simultaneusly
Yes, that can be done, but the audio encoding takes about 1/100th as much CPU power as video encoding, so you wouldn't even notice the nominal performance improvement.
Because if some stupid app was taking 100% CPU power, on the old machine that meant it was using 50% of my CPUs, and I had a whole nother CPU available for killing errant apps with.
And if that "stupid app" was fully threaded (as many apps will eventually become), it would have been using up 100% CPU power on BOTH CPUs, thus removing the benefit of SMP.
Even gamers now do stuff like run skype side-by-side with their resource-hogging game.
Yes, but do you think they want to be maxing-out 50% of their processor with the game, and having the other 50% mostly idle? No, they want to have all the performance they can get for that game.
Re:What does hyperthreading have to do with it?
on
AMD Quad Cores, Oh My
·
· Score: 1
zcat foo.gz | bzip2 -c > foo.bz2
Look, ma! Code that will run twice as fast on a multiprocessor system!
Not unless it takes just as much CPU power to decompress a gzip file, as it does to recompress the same file with bzip2.
Multiple seperate cores is good for your desktop PC, where you are running several apps at the same time. However, it sucks for something like video encoding (or decoding for that matter) that can only get slight use out of threading.
A single, slow CPU in my desktop is far more than I need. However, the system I do video encoding on is the machine I would consider upgrading to a faster processor... That is, if I could actually get any use out of the top-of-the-line CPUs.
The situation is no doubt the same for tasks like gaming, encryption, etc.
People keep saying that Apple (and Dell) chose Intel because of AMD's limited capacity. I've called BS on it before, and this article should put the myth entirely to rest. And I quote:
a second, Fab 36, is nearly complete next door to AMD's Fab 30 in Dresden, Germany. Scheduled to come on line early next year
Through a partnership with Chartered Semiconductor - and IBM, who helped refine the manufacturing process - AMD will be able to pass excess demand onto Chartered
There, now will the "supply concerns" people kindly shut the hell up...
There has been some speculation that the new computers from Apple which use an Intel processor will use an Itanium 2 CPU
Wow! Welcome to the Fox News forum...
Bullshit that doesn't even max sense can't be argued with because you don't bother to source this wild speculation.
How's this for a logic test... Apple has said you'll be able to run Windows (and Linux) on Apple machines. Windows doesn't run on IA64. Any of this getting through?
There is market room for at least 3, and possibly 4 architectures out there
That's interesting, because all the different architectures were doing quite well, until Intel spread all the BS about how Itanium was going to destroy them all if they didn't jump on the bandwagon.
We seem to be very quickly approaching one single CPU, and not for technical or economic reasons, but simply because of Intel bluffing everyone into submission.
If you want to continue this argument, please respond to my main point (I.e., there are vastly more x86 PCs out there,
I already did.
Quote: There will be more interest when it's x86, but I don't see any fundamental change here.
and OpenDarwin will run *right now* on dirt cheap, extremely common PCs)
Quote: The x86 version of OpenDarwin has a very, very small list of supported hardware as well, so only a very small percentage of x86 hardware works with it
Obviously, that was supposed to read "porn" not "born". But I get the feeling you're just the kind of troll that would try to make a big issue out of it anyhow.
The only say you have is over your channel selector not mine.
There are millions of laws with "public" in their title that disagree with you.
When I'm subsudizing your channel selector (by giving up my rights to those airwaves) I have a great deal of say in it.
Since you don't seem to be a great believer in individual freedom, maybe the US is not the place for you.
Yeah, the USA broadcasts born over the public airwaves, as proof that you're right, and I'm wrong... Or not...
No, you're just some dumb little troll, who wants to mis-use terms like "individual freedom" to pretent that you're somehow being opressed by not getting your way.
Only for HD channels. SD channels don't go anywhere near 1080i.
None of the channels are going to stick with SD when they have to go digital anyhow. If you're going to get an adapter box, you want to be able to watch the stations broadcasting in 720 and 1080, too.
All television sets sold in the United States in the last few years have a V-chip, which can be set to block unrated programming and programming rated as not intended for children.
Yes it can (thanks to the FCC).
It pretty useless, since the V-Chip is mandated for TVs, but not for VCRs, which can be used to easily get around the restrictions.
Of course the subject was Janet Jackson in the Superbowl, where the V-Chip was completely useless. It's the same issue.
(Not even NetBSD and OpenBSD will run on the Pegasos--for interesting reasons [openbsd.org]--and they'll run on anydamn thing.)
That's an interesting way to put it:
OpenBSD/pegasos ran on the Pegasos I and Pegasos II systems.
This port is no longer maintained.
How is that not running on it? OpenBSD isn't NetBSD, it hasn't been ported to dozens of different architectures. Hell, even the Alpha port has been unmaintained for years now. OpenBSD support was added only because Genesi was supporting the effort. Once the money dried up, so too did the port.
As for NetBSD, well, development is going slow (also no funding), but it seems to be progressing. And what are these "interesting reasons" you are alluding to?
And, for the record, OpenDarwin runs on standard x86 PC hardware, but it doesn't run on non-Apple PPC hardware.
That's simply an issue of drivers, though. The x86 version of OpenDarwin has a very, very small list of supported hardware as well, so only a very small percentage of x86 hardware works with it, too.
Building new chip fab takes at least 2 years, if AMD started today, they'd barely be ready by 2007 and these boxes are going to start shipping in 2006.
I'm sure Intel didn't just find out today that they were going to be Apple's new supplier. I'm sure they've had several months of advanced notice.
It's also not like AMD doesn't produce enough chips as is. They wouldn't have to wait for a new fab to start producing AMD Macs.
In short, the supply BS is exactly why they chose Intel over AMD
You can say it all you want, but it still doesn't pass the laugh test.
Slashdot Mirror
Yes, that can be done, but the audio encoding takes about 1/100th as much CPU power as video encoding, so you wouldn't even notice the nominal performance improvement.
And if that "stupid app" was fully threaded (as many apps will eventually become), it would have been using up 100% CPU power on BOTH CPUs, thus removing the benefit of SMP.
Yes, but do you think they want to be maxing-out 50% of their processor with the game, and having the other 50% mostly idle? No, they want to have all the performance they can get for that game.
Not unless it takes just as much CPU power to decompress a gzip file, as it does to recompress the same file with bzip2.
Multiple seperate cores is good for your desktop PC, where you are running several apps at the same time. However, it sucks for something like video encoding (or decoding for that matter) that can only get slight use out of threading.
A single, slow CPU in my desktop is far more than I need. However, the system I do video encoding on is the machine I would consider upgrading to a faster processor... That is, if I could actually get any use out of the top-of-the-line CPUs.
The situation is no doubt the same for tasks like gaming, encryption, etc.
There, now will the "supply concerns" people kindly shut the hell up...
Have you ever stopped to think that it might not everyone else that's wrong?
Wow! Welcome to the Fox News forum...
Bullshit that doesn't even max sense can't be argued with because you don't bother to source this wild speculation.
How's this for a logic test... Apple has said you'll be able to run Windows (and Linux) on Apple machines. Windows doesn't run on IA64. Any of this getting through?
That's interesting, because all the different architectures were doing quite well, until Intel spread all the BS about how Itanium was going to destroy them all if they didn't jump on the bandwagon.
This is a very good read:
http://projects.csail.mit.edu/gsb/archives/old/gs
We seem to be very quickly approaching one single CPU, and not for technical or economic reasons, but simply because of Intel bluffing everyone into submission.
I already did.
Quote: There will be more interest when it's x86, but I don't see any fundamental change here.
Quote: The x86 version of OpenDarwin has a very, very small list of supported hardware as well, so only a very small percentage of x86 hardware works with it
Old Korean people and Underpants Gnomes in Soviet Russia also misread the title...
Check.
How did you benchmark this? What options where you using? I'd like to know. It's hard to argue with a vague blanket statement.
Check. It's trivially easy to put a Flash HDD in a PC.
Vague and debatable...
Check.
Check.
You can't just go declaring shenanigans on innocent people, that's how wars get started!
Obviously, that was supposed to read "porn" not "born". But I get the feeling you're just the kind of troll that would try to make a big issue out of it anyhow.
There are millions of laws with "public" in their title that disagree with you.
When I'm subsudizing your channel selector (by giving up my rights to those airwaves) I have a great deal of say in it.
Yeah, the USA broadcasts born over the public airwaves, as proof that you're right, and I'm wrong... Or not...
No, you're just some dumb little troll, who wants to mis-use terms like "individual freedom" to pretent that you're somehow being opressed by not getting your way.
Gee, you're right, it sure would have been smart of me if I had addressed that issue IN THE NEXT SENTENCE...
Nobody said it was. I get the feeling you don't understand the point of this discussion.
None of the channels are going to stick with SD when they have to go digital anyhow. If you're going to get an adapter box, you want to be able to watch the stations broadcasting in 720 and 1080, too.
You still have to recieve and decode the 1080i signal. Then convert it to analog.
We're talking about the public airwaves here, not what you watch in private, so I have at least as much say over it as you do.
If you don't like it, you are the one who can go watch a DVD instead.
Yes it can (thanks to the FCC).
It pretty useless, since the V-Chip is mandated for TVs, but not for VCRs, which can be used to easily get around the restrictions.
Of course the subject was Janet Jackson in the Superbowl, where the V-Chip was completely useless. It's the same issue.
That's an interesting way to put it:
OpenBSD/pegasos ran on the Pegasos I and Pegasos II systems.
This port is no longer maintained.
How is that not running on it? OpenBSD isn't NetBSD, it hasn't been ported to dozens of different architectures. Hell, even the Alpha port has been unmaintained for years now. OpenBSD support was added only because Genesi was supporting the effort. Once the money dried up, so too did the port.
As for NetBSD, well, development is going slow (also no funding), but it seems to be progressing. And what are these "interesting reasons" you are alluding to?
That's simply an issue of drivers, though. The x86 version of OpenDarwin has a very, very small list of supported hardware as well, so only a very small percentage of x86 hardware works with it, too.
That's got to be the absolute dumbest response I've heard.
And is that for high-def? Decoding MPEG-2 at a resolution of 1920x1080? Obviously not.
AMD has very, very good mobile processors, that are just as low-power as anything Intel has produced, while performing much better.
I'm sure Intel didn't just find out today that they were going to be Apple's new supplier. I'm sure they've had several months of advanced notice.
It's also not like AMD doesn't produce enough chips as is. They wouldn't have to wait for a new fab to start producing AMD Macs.
You can say it all you want, but it still doesn't pass the laugh test.
It's SFW for me, since I don't have flash installed on any of the machines I use...