fact: Athlon's have always produced less heat than PIVs doing the same work.
The thing that confuses people is that Athlons since the Thunderbird have been much physically smaller than PIVs and so temperatures in small area got high with T-birds and late Palominoes.
Palominoes, T-Breds, and Bartons run much cooler than T-birds did. You can put 4 Bartons or T-breds in a 1U server no problem -- no way with PIV.
Anyone who says PIVs are better than Athlons (especially now) because they aren't as hot, is wrong in basically every way.
I'm actually surprised a 2 year old PowerBook is able to run so nearly as fast as the very fastest pc notebook you can buy -- one which has about 1hr of batery life even when taking advantage of underclocking while unplugged "technology" (speedstep -- still not able to actually do anything with idle calls).
They compared the very fastest notebook you can buy (when not running off battery), which only runs nearly that fast when tethered to wall outlet with cpu cooking at like 50W, to a PowerBook that is slower than any you can buy right now (20% lower clock rate and much less cache than currently available) and uses less than half the power.
What kind of comparison is that???
Looking at the charts, it appears that a current PowerBook would easily smoke the P4 book in speed alone. Even if you ignored the higher cache (which is not insignificant b/c altivec is severely handicapped by small caches), a 1GHz PowerBook would be about 25% faster than the one they tested. This would make it faster than any P4 book even when P4 plugged into wall cooking at like 50W.
Furthermore, PowerBooks with Radeon cards can run at full speed for hours on one battery, whereas P4 books will roast your nads for about an hour while running half speed and then die.
I've never owned an Apple product and certainly am not a mac zealot, but this test is ridiculously rigged. Nice way to get on Slashdot real easy.
Anyone know whether or not it'll include ATI's new linux drivers -- the ones that finally support all hardware features rather than just the ones that are easy to code?
If answer=yes, then I do believe we have the first major distro to fully support the fastest video card available along with the best dual-monitor cards (aside from matrox) and the most energy efficient notebook video that can actually play games decently.
Anyone got benchmarks of the new drivers, by the way. Maybe UT3 in linux versus UT3 windows, same Radeon card.
Any chance Slashdot could be the ONE PLACE IN THE ENTIRE WORLD where I might be safe from PS3 advertising?
Besides, weren't we burned bad enough with PS2? Sony's spec claims have always been 100% meaningness -- they obviously just throw outrageous BS out there when someone else has the more advanced system so people who buy for advanced will not see differences between sony and more advanced (in present case xbox and previously dreamcast) as nearly as significant when they think sony's next will be 100000^100000x better.
Man it's rich. MS: "What are you talking about? We don't have a monopoly. Geez we're just innovators making great software that the consumers overwhelmingly choose as their favorite. However, there is no excuse for PC makers giving the consumer the opportunity to not choose Windows because it's impossible for a consumer to legitimately want to install a different OS."
I guess now that the anti-trust case has declared Microsoft a monopoly and at the same time that the government is ok with it, the obvious criminals are the people who choose not to pay MS $100 or wtvr everytime they buy a PC.
Yeah, I definately check out the noise levels before I buy. The new IBM with fluid bearings is very quiet too. But you can still hear them and if you put two in there you hear them twice as much (or at least 4dB more which is almost twice as loud).
Well, I'm glad they run, but that's not enough. Quake and UT run faster in linux than they do on winblows (search Tom's Hardware if curious, don't remember which article but had graphs and everything). If games on ATI not just as fast in linux as winblows, then I'll have to wrestle with temptation to dual boot.
I need to know if ATI linux drivers are winblows fast in linux. If they aren't, then I'm goin nvidia.
Just an engineering student here, but doesn't the US have these tremendous debts for the sake of making investments? We borrowed the money in order to invest it in things which return at higher than 17% rate.
I mean, I agree that we should spend more on technology, but I don't see the reason we don't as being that our government can't control itself with a credit card. Isn't the idea that the US receives more loans than anyone else because they can most be trusted to pay it back, and having such good credit is a privilege because it opens up investment opportunities that others only wish they could take advantage of?
Also, military spending is hugely technology spending, so I consider it a poor example of misuse of money. Your CPU is the result of the military wanting to improve upon homing pigeons for missle guidance, for example. I can vouch that basically all of the research occuring at my mechanical engineering school is being paid for by DARPA (including my assistantship). The bills for the bullets and APCs and stuff are peanuts compared to bills for coming up with the technology that keeps our military ahead and everyone eventually benefits from the technology. Even if a tank costs like a million dollars, undoubtably 99.9% of that money is going to families of people that design and assemble the tanks, the cost of the materials is peanuts.
Anyone know what the x86 equivalent, speedwise, of a 600MHz G3 is? Running linux especially. I'm looking for benchmarks because I don't trust anectodotal info anymore. Wouldn't mind seeing G4 comparisons too, but G3 comparisons probably more fundamental since G4 needs software optimizations in order to perform better than G3 and I assume G4 optimizations pretty much out of question on linux.
Can I buy an ATI card to play UT2, Doom3 and Quake3 on linux, or do I need to buy an Nvidia card? That is, with these drivers and a 9700, am I going to constantly be tempted into dual booting b/c card faster in Windows, or might gaming in linux actually be slightly faster than same games in windows as it is with Nvidia cards -- this makes all the difference in the world to me.
along the lines of Insight my ass
on
239 MPG Car
·
· Score: 1
Along the lines of an Insight would mean a hybrid obviously. Sorry, but Honda didn't innovate the 2-seat car. This thing is a million times more similar to the GM EV1 (composite construction, clean-sheet replacements for traditional automotive systems)if you feel you have to put it in the context of other greeny cars. Only an american would think that having 2 seats (nevermind the layouts are 90 different) was even noteworthy while completely missing the fact that the cars are about as opposite as can be in the segment.
Of course, VW would never make a hybrid because it's not in the business of building "halo" cars at the expense of an well-intentioned but inadequately informed public -- (hybrids are presently a sham -- compare a Jetta TDI to any hybrid in any category including overall mpg, acceleration, room, price, handling, TDI wins them all, especially when you consider how much gas engine emissions deteriorate constantly and rapidly with age). The VW simply represents the state of the art in a technology the narrow-minded and uninformed American car buying public is behind on by about 7 years as usual -- direct injection, s fuel rail, super intelligent cpu-controlled, turbo-diesels. We deserve hybrids.
Anybody know how much more it would have cost for it to work with Firewire rather than USB2.0? I'm just totally turned off by the USB2. Isn't USB2 just a copy of Firewire designed to make money for Intel at the industry's and consumer's expense? Wouldn't Firewire be 10 times more common if Intel hadn't been pushing all the manufactures to hold off for the arrival of USB2? Isn't USB2 way more CPU intensive? No way in hell would I go out and buy a USB2 card.
On another note...This would be a good time to buy a CDRW that you intended to keep for while since, according to Tom's Hardware, CDRWs have arrived at a point where their speed can't really go up anymore do to some kind of inherent physical limitations.
It's not a pile of shit if it's the only thing we can do to prevent another 9/11. The terrorists want to kill as many Americans as they can. This, as we've seen, means thousands if not hundreds of thousands (chemical or nuclear) at a time with minimal effort. Is it that you are sure that there is a better way of stopping terrorism, or do you think that the terrorists will just get bored and see the error of their ways, turning into peaceful hippies at retreats singing and dancing to cum by yah?
It must be nice being able to go through life condemning everyone, saying what they're doing is wrong because it has a con, completely ignorant of whether or not there is an alternative with fewer cons available. Anybody'd feel real good about themselves doing that, problem is when America starts getting so detached from reality that those people start to represent significant share of voting public, that's when people like Sadaam and Bin Ladin start getting away with stuff like 9/11 and buiulding nukes.
I'm just hoping I can get away with 50 more years before the nuke.
Standards and familiarity are not the same thing. "Familiarity" in the context of this topic/article is what MS hopes phone manufactures will figure customers want (eg "better put MS on our phones b/c our customers are used to using Windows"). Standards are what will make it possible for customers to have options in what they use because without standards someone like MS can lock competitors out by making them incompatible with the main.
It's asinine to talk about MS "familiarity" as a standard because MS is the antithesis of standards -- that's what they do -- take things which are standard, leverage its monopoly on the desktop to propogate incompatibility to fragment things, and then sit and then just hang out till everything's so fscked that everyone has to revert to whatever MS has got, with innovator's suffocated to the wayside.
When you are talking about standards in the context of browsers, u're usually talking about whether or not they comply with them and thus whether or not they encourage web developers to take advantage of "features" which are nonstandard. MS makes deliberately non-standards compliant browsers in order to seduce web developers and unknowing (Office and Frontpage) users into increasing the number of sites which dont work right in Netscape, Mozilla, Opera, etc. This is a disgusting manipulation and attempt to take over for one's own purposes something which was intended to be universal and available to all.
Therefore, implicitly equating "standards" with MS's "familiarity" while talking about browsers is dumb. If MS doesn't take over by convincing the phone companies that their phones need to be maximally familiar to windows users, then there is some hope that standards compliant browsers such as Opera will prosper in this sector.
The article actually says that Opera does better job of displaying web pages too. They show example of Opera displaying standard and popular web site (designed for large screens) very nicely on a small screen. They describe how mobile IE displays the same page much less nicely, requiring lots of scrolling.
So, in addition to being leaner, Opera is also impressing with superior results at displaying on small screens. The fact that it's not MS is just icing on the cake -- certainly not the main attraction.
ATI bought Fire like a year ago. Fire have 133t, German, OpenGL, professional workstation, $4000 videocard, driver coders who've been writing drivers for Unix workstations since the beginning. Nvidia might write drivers which work well by gamer standards, but Fire is used to writing (Unix) drivers for systems where ever screwing up at all is totally unacceptable.
These new drivers were probably written by Fire guys, which means they're probably in a completely different universe quality-wise.
Games on PC are much better than the same games on PS2. Theory and hype aside, in practice the PS2 is equivalent to something like a 3 year old computer speed-wise.
On top of this, TVs have horrible resolution, refresh rate, and image quality.
I'm the exact opposite of you -- I got a PS2 and never play it except when people are over and want to play sega tennis or fighting game or two (in which case I'm actually likely to bust out Dreamcast for Soul Caliber instead), whereas I probably average good 15hours a week of Quake and UT on PC.
I guess the PC multiplayer online games with unbelievable graphics where you are competing against freakin' elite ninjas who are so damn good they make you sad because you will never be 1/100th as good no matter how much you practice somehow seem more significant than console games. For me, Quake is like tennis or something while Starcraft is like chess maybe -- they take immense practice and skill (to be really good) and have intellectual depth.
There are a few console games I love too but none of them have remained fascinating the way lots of PC games do -- console games just seem to be comparatively superficial and/or kiddy.
Now I could spend about $700 to get about a.0000001% improvement in performance over the last P4 which was news on slashdot like 2 weeks ago.
For god's sake can we please stop having advertising for every damn stepping of the P4 as news on Slashdot?!?!
For heaven's sake it isn't even a good processor. Aside from the fact that this processor is basically itself hype personified and the last one in need of extra attention (it's overwhelming advancement over P3 and Athlon was in ability to trick more consumers with high clock rate while doing less work), if I wanted to know what current clock speed of P4, than I'd go to Ace's, Tom's, Anand or any of another million sites which specialize in that.
If we're going to have to have this kind of "news" on here, then let's hear about good processors and/or new processors and/or useful, truly significant news in that kind of thing (for example Apple's recent move to 333 bus with DDR and dual 1.25 G4s which suddenly made Macs twice as fast).
Huh. I've always considered it to be pretty much the other way around -- MS UIs are Godawful, however open-source software is forced to mimic it because average users don't like to have to relearn how to use their computers.
Evolution looks like Outlook (by far the most widely used application of its type because it is comes with MS Office) to make it easier for Outlook users to switch. If MS didn't have monopoly, then Ximian would have the freedom to attempt something better, but they don't.
Just in case you weren't aware of it yet, Apple has recently hiked the Power Macs' busses to 167 with PC2700 (2.7GBps with much lower latency than RDRAM) memory. The Power Macs also have 2MB of 4.6GBps L3 cache.
I know the G4s were ridiculously choked off there for a while, but I'd think the problem's been licked with these changes.
Slashdot Mirror
fact: Athlon's have always produced less heat than PIVs doing the same work.
The thing that confuses people is that Athlons since the Thunderbird have been much physically smaller than PIVs and so temperatures in small area got high with T-birds and late Palominoes.
Palominoes, T-Breds, and Bartons run much cooler than T-birds did. You can put 4 Bartons or T-breds in a 1U server no problem -- no way with PIV.
Anyone who says PIVs are better than Athlons (especially now) because they aren't as hot, is wrong in basically every way.
By buying a used MS notebook from someone, you're only giving them the money to go buy a new one. It's really exactly the same.
Anyone know either if it runs on OSX or when a Mac version is likely to be released?
I'd vote for an identical twin brother of his, but the last thing we need is for Apple to start fscking up again cuz Steve not running it any more.
They compared the very fastest notebook you can buy (when not running off battery), which only runs nearly that fast when tethered to wall outlet with cpu cooking at like 50W, to a PowerBook that is slower than any you can buy right now (20% lower clock rate and much less cache than currently available) and uses less than half the power.
What kind of comparison is that???
Looking at the charts, it appears that a current PowerBook would easily smoke the P4 book in speed alone. Even if you ignored the higher cache (which is not insignificant b/c altivec is severely handicapped by small caches), a 1GHz PowerBook would be about 25% faster than the one they tested. This would make it faster than any P4 book even when P4 plugged into wall cooking at like 50W.
Furthermore, PowerBooks with Radeon cards can run at full speed for hours on one battery, whereas P4 books will roast your nads for about an hour while running half speed and then die.
I've never owned an Apple product and certainly am not a mac zealot, but this test is ridiculously rigged. Nice way to get on Slashdot real easy.
Anyone know whether or not it'll include ATI's new linux drivers -- the ones that finally support all hardware features rather than just the ones that are easy to code?
If answer=yes, then I do believe we have the first major distro to fully support the fastest video card available along with the best dual-monitor cards (aside from matrox) and the most energy efficient notebook video that can actually play games decently.
Anyone got benchmarks of the new drivers, by the way. Maybe UT3 in linux versus UT3 windows, same Radeon card.
Any chance Slashdot could be the ONE PLACE IN THE ENTIRE WORLD where I might be safe from PS3 advertising?
Besides, weren't we burned bad enough with PS2? Sony's spec claims have always been 100% meaningness -- they obviously just throw outrageous BS out there when someone else has the more advanced system so people who buy for advanced will not see differences between sony and more advanced (in present case xbox and previously dreamcast) as nearly as significant when they think sony's next will be 100000^100000x better.
Man it's rich.
MS: "What are you talking about? We don't have a monopoly. Geez we're just innovators making great software that the consumers overwhelmingly choose as their favorite. However, there is no excuse for PC makers giving the consumer the opportunity to not choose Windows because it's impossible for a consumer to legitimately want to install a different OS."
I guess now that the anti-trust case has declared Microsoft a monopoly and at the same time that the government is ok with it, the obvious criminals are the people who choose not to pay MS $100 or wtvr everytime they buy a PC.
Yeah, I definately check out the noise levels before I buy. The new IBM with fluid bearings is very quiet too. But you can still hear them and if you put two in there you hear them twice as much (or at least 4dB more which is almost twice as loud).
To all those using RAID personal computer: Is it really worth the noise? That grating whine of hd spindle is the most annoying sound pcs make.
Well, I'm glad they run, but that's not enough. Quake and UT run faster in linux than they do on winblows (search Tom's Hardware if curious, don't remember which article but had graphs and everything). If games on ATI not just as fast in linux as winblows, then I'll have to wrestle with temptation to dual boot.
I need to know if ATI linux drivers are winblows fast in linux. If they aren't, then I'm goin nvidia.
So how fast are they?
Just an engineering student here, but doesn't the US have these tremendous debts for the sake of making investments? We borrowed the money in order to invest it in things which return at higher than 17% rate.
I mean, I agree that we should spend more on technology, but I don't see the reason we don't as being that our government can't control itself with a credit card. Isn't the idea that the US receives more loans than anyone else because they can most be trusted to pay it back, and having such good credit is a privilege because it opens up investment opportunities that others only wish they could take advantage of?
Also, military spending is hugely technology spending, so I consider it a poor example of misuse of money. Your CPU is the result of the military wanting to improve upon homing pigeons for missle guidance, for example. I can vouch that basically all of the research occuring at my mechanical engineering school is being paid for by DARPA (including my assistantship). The bills for the bullets and APCs and stuff are peanuts compared to bills for coming up with the technology that keeps our military ahead and everyone eventually benefits from the technology. Even if a tank costs like a million dollars, undoubtably 99.9% of that money is going to families of people that design and assemble the tanks, the cost of the materials is peanuts.
Anyone know what the x86 equivalent, speedwise, of a 600MHz G3 is? Running linux especially. I'm looking for benchmarks because I don't trust anectodotal info anymore. Wouldn't mind seeing G4 comparisons too, but G3 comparisons probably more fundamental since G4 needs software optimizations in order to perform better than G3 and I assume G4 optimizations pretty much out of question on linux.
Can I buy an ATI card to play UT2, Doom3 and Quake3 on linux, or do I need to buy an Nvidia card? That is, with these drivers and a 9700, am I going to constantly be tempted into dual booting b/c card faster in Windows, or might gaming in linux actually be slightly faster than same games in windows as it is with Nvidia cards -- this makes all the difference in the world to me.
Of course, VW would never make a hybrid because it's not in the business of building "halo" cars at the expense of an well-intentioned but inadequately informed public -- (hybrids are presently a sham -- compare a Jetta TDI to any hybrid in any category including overall mpg, acceleration, room, price, handling, TDI wins them all, especially when you consider how much gas engine emissions deteriorate constantly and rapidly with age). The VW simply represents the state of the art in a technology the narrow-minded and uninformed American car buying public is behind on by about 7 years as usual -- direct injection, s fuel rail, super intelligent cpu-controlled, turbo-diesels. We deserve hybrids.
Anybody know how much more it would have cost for it to work with Firewire rather than USB2.0? I'm just totally turned off by the USB2. Isn't USB2 just a copy of Firewire designed to make money for Intel at the industry's and consumer's expense? Wouldn't Firewire be 10 times more common if Intel hadn't been pushing all the manufactures to hold off for the arrival of USB2? Isn't USB2 way more CPU intensive? No way in hell would I go out and buy a USB2 card.
On another note...This would be a good time to buy a CDRW that you intended to keep for while since, according to Tom's Hardware, CDRWs have arrived at a point where their speed can't really go up anymore do to some kind of inherent physical limitations.
It's not a pile of shit if it's the only thing we can do to prevent another 9/11. The terrorists want to kill as many Americans as they can. This, as we've seen, means thousands if not hundreds of thousands (chemical or nuclear) at a time with minimal effort. Is it that you are sure that there is a better way of stopping terrorism, or do you think that the terrorists will just get bored and see the error of their ways, turning into peaceful hippies at retreats singing and dancing to cum by yah?
It must be nice being able to go through life condemning everyone, saying what they're doing is wrong because it has a con, completely ignorant of whether or not there is an alternative with fewer cons available. Anybody'd feel real good about themselves doing that, problem is when America starts getting so detached from reality that those people start to represent significant share of voting public, that's when people like Sadaam and Bin Ladin start getting away with stuff like 9/11 and buiulding nukes.
I'm just hoping I can get away with 50 more years before the nuke.
Standards and familiarity are not the same thing. "Familiarity" in the context of this topic/article is what MS hopes phone manufactures will figure customers want (eg "better put MS on our phones b/c our customers are used to using Windows"). Standards are what will make it possible for customers to have options in what they use because without standards someone like MS can lock competitors out by making them incompatible with the main.
It's asinine to talk about MS "familiarity" as a standard because MS is the antithesis of standards -- that's what they do -- take things which are standard, leverage its monopoly on the desktop to propogate incompatibility to fragment things, and then sit and then just hang out till everything's so fscked that everyone has to revert to whatever MS has got, with innovator's suffocated to the wayside.
When you are talking about standards in the context of browsers, u're usually talking about whether or not they comply with them and thus whether or not they encourage web developers to take advantage of "features" which are nonstandard. MS makes deliberately non-standards compliant browsers in order to seduce web developers and unknowing (Office and Frontpage) users into increasing the number of sites which dont work right in Netscape, Mozilla, Opera, etc. This is a disgusting manipulation and attempt to take over for one's own purposes something which was intended to be universal and available to all.
Therefore, implicitly equating "standards" with MS's "familiarity" while talking about browsers is dumb. If MS doesn't take over by convincing the phone companies that their phones need to be maximally familiar to windows users, then there is some hope that standards compliant browsers such as Opera will prosper in this sector.
The article actually says that Opera does better job of displaying web pages too. They show example of Opera displaying standard and popular web site (designed for large screens) very nicely on a small screen. They describe how mobile IE displays the same page much less nicely, requiring lots of scrolling.
So, in addition to being leaner, Opera is also impressing with superior results at displaying on small screens. The fact that it's not MS is just icing on the cake -- certainly not the main attraction.
ATI bought Fire like a year ago. Fire have 133t, German, OpenGL, professional workstation, $4000 videocard, driver coders who've been writing drivers for Unix workstations since the beginning. Nvidia might write drivers which work well by gamer standards, but Fire is used to writing (Unix) drivers for systems where ever screwing up at all is totally unacceptable.
These new drivers were probably written by Fire guys, which means they're probably in a completely different universe quality-wise.
Games on PC are much better than the same games on PS2. Theory and hype aside, in practice the PS2 is equivalent to something like a 3 year old computer speed-wise.
On top of this, TVs have horrible resolution, refresh rate, and image quality.
I'm the exact opposite of you -- I got a PS2 and never play it except when people are over and want to play sega tennis or fighting game or two (in which case I'm actually likely to bust out Dreamcast for Soul Caliber instead), whereas I probably average good 15hours a week of Quake and UT on PC.
I guess the PC multiplayer online games with unbelievable graphics where you are competing against freakin' elite ninjas who are so damn good they make you sad because you will never be 1/100th as good no matter how much you practice somehow seem more significant than console games. For me, Quake is like tennis or something while Starcraft is like chess maybe -- they take immense practice and skill (to be really good) and have intellectual depth.
There are a few console games I love too but none of them have remained fascinating the way lots of PC games do -- console games just seem to be comparatively superficial and/or kiddy.
Now I could spend about $700 to get about a .0000001% improvement in performance over the last P4 which was news on slashdot like 2 weeks ago.
For god's sake can we please stop having advertising for every damn stepping of the P4 as news on Slashdot?!?!
For heaven's sake it isn't even a good processor. Aside from the fact that this processor is basically itself hype personified and the last one in need of extra attention (it's overwhelming advancement over P3 and Athlon was in ability to trick more consumers with high clock rate while doing less work), if I wanted to know what current clock speed of P4, than I'd go to Ace's, Tom's, Anand or any of another million sites which specialize in that.
If we're going to have to have this kind of "news" on here, then let's hear about good processors and/or new processors and/or useful, truly significant news in that kind of thing (for example Apple's recent move to 333 bus with DDR and dual 1.25 G4s which suddenly made Macs twice as fast).
Huh. I've always considered it to be pretty much the other way around -- MS UIs are Godawful, however open-source software is forced to mimic it because average users don't like to have to relearn how to use their computers.
Evolution looks like Outlook (by far the most widely used application of its type because it is comes with MS Office) to make it easier for Outlook users to switch. If MS didn't have monopoly, then Ximian would have the freedom to attempt something better, but they don't.
Just in case you weren't aware of it yet, Apple has recently hiked the Power Macs' busses to 167 with PC2700 (2.7GBps with much lower latency than RDRAM) memory. The Power Macs also have 2MB of 4.6GBps L3 cache.
I know the G4s were ridiculously choked off there for a while, but I'd think the problem's been licked with these changes.