Yes - part of the issue is that 5.4GHz needs 16x the power to get the same range as at 2.4GHz. Look at the specs: 802.11b@2.4GHz at 24dBm gets twice the range of 802.11a@5.4GHz with 30dBm xmit power. Although you will really need 802.11g to do a more accurate comparison, cause it will use OFDM.at 2.4GHz just like 802.11a.
On another note, 55MHz is a big difference - Most xmiters are well below -60dBc by the time you get only 10MHz outside of the channel.
I can guarantee that my points take effect at speeds much lower than 30GHz - even as low as 100MHz these effects can be rather significant. I just had to work on a board today that had problems running at 100MHz because of poor design.
Wait a sec. So you say it's ok to compare an overclocked P4 to a standard Athlon. Why not OC the Athlon too? It's not that difficult. If you aren't going to have a level playing field, you can write a P4 to K6-3 (with 3d now!).
As for why the Hz matters, there are several reasons. 1st - a large component of the power disappation in a cmos chip increases with the frequency. Second, there is a maximum Ft for a transistor process. Next, it gets more difficult to design motherboards that work at higher frequencies. Another issue is that higher frequencies are more likely to radiate, causing EMI issues.
As for 'Intel could easily release those 2.6GHz processors today' is a bunch of crap. Remember the P3 1.13GHz processors which were released and then unreleased? I'll bet you don't know the first thing on an IC release procedure. It isn't simply 'it runs at this speed - let's sell it'. First, you need to run a complete fault coverage at that speed to ensure that there is no dynamic problem. Next, you need to modify your testing procedure (and maybe buy lots of new test equipment at $2000000+ each). And then you need to estimate yield. And I net I'm missing a few dozen steps too.
So, the bottom line is a slower processor that can equal the performance of a higher frequency processor is usually a 'better' design. Of course, you can say the same thing about power dissapation - and the Athlon really burns a lot of power.
How much do you think it costs to make ICs? I worked at one semiconductor manufacturer, and that kind of mark-up is common. An ADC that cost $2.00 to make was to sell for $40.00. The semi makers need that kind of margin to recoup all the development costs.
Well, not everyone is a "open source or nothing" zealot. I care greatly about performance - stability AND speed. So if a closed source compiler can provide a significant improvement in performance, I'm not going to rule it out because it's name isn't GNU.
Well, actually RDRAM does have a higher bandwidth. On some types of applications, it will provide a significant advantage. For majority of applications though, the high enough bandwidth and lower latency of DDR is superior. Perhaps this fellow has such an application that RDRAM works on. Of course, he didn't say if the Athlon had DDR or SDR SDRAM. Nor did he mention clock speeds. It sure isn't fair to compare an Athlon 900MHz to a P4 2.2GHz.
Well - a few pedantic corrections:
CD technology is 44.1KHz, not 144KHz. And I doubt you could find a 24bit 920KHz ADC that cost anything reasonable. First, I there is something I call "marketing bits". Just because an ADC or DAC has 2 extra bits, does not mean it is guarenteed to have better SNR and THD. That is why the 12 bit and 14 bit scanners make me laugh. My company sells test equipment, and it has a 16bit instrument that could beat the majority of 24bit converters in SNR and THD.
Next, a major issue with your wafer processor is testing. Currently, verification and testing a chip costs more than manufacturing or packaging.
That also applies to your ADCs and DACs.
Still, I gotta admit the wafer processor would be cool. Let me know when you can make one for less than a grand!
Get real. Why would I boot off of my MP3 player? That is simply retarded marketing thinking. Why not put a 1GB microdrive into a digital camera and boot from that too?
Those links are a bunch of crap. Get real - when directtv and dish networks join together, the subscription costs will go up. Don't expect otherwise. When TCI started gaining 'economies of scale' did the average customer benefit with lower costs or better service? No.
Take a look at This
This Link
was mentioned on/. a while back. Just don't miss the last paragraph.
While the poll fixing was not anywhere near as bad, MS should not have done it. It is a blatent attempt to deceive. Nothing less.
Corporations should adhere to codes of conduct which prohibit any unethical beharior.
Well - A paranoid sort would see that the upload BW cap would KILL file sharing like gnutella (if it were universally applied). A paranoid sort would then extrapolate to external RIAA types reminding the broadband providers how much they would save by limiting the uploads.
Well, since Intel wants to own the chipset business, it probably won't happen. Of course, Intel actually did own the chipset business until it got too cozy with Rambus...
Not sure if anyone noticed or not...
on
Monsanto and PCBs
·
· Score: 1
But the end of the article had a beautiful statement from Monsanto/Solutia:
"I'm pretty proud of what we did," Kaley said. "Was it perfect? No. Could we be second-guessed? Sure. But I think we mostly did what any company would do, even today."
I think a perfect punishment for the executives would be that they MUST live in the poisoned town (with their families) for the rest of their life. I like it better than sending them to prison...
Well, given the history of various MS email leaks, I am inclined to believe it. It is completely plausable that MS would be focused on Linux on the server side. Read the email - that is how marketing/sales thinks. That is the message that all salesmen are told - find out what your customers need, protect your turf, and here is how to discredit your competitors.
I admit that the GT is not a great handler. At least in stock. I saw the Mustang referred to as a 'knuckle-dragger' in comparison to the WRX. However, you can improve the handling quite a bit - check out a Rosch Mustang. It isn't for doing dukes of hazard style dirt road racing, but on roads it will behave better than you expect. In addition, while my GT has tons of torque, those bastards at Ford started the GTs with 4.6 Liter engines a little light on the hp - the newest GTs have 260hp, mine is a wimpy 220.So, the WRX could possibly take my car straight line.
Yeah - I am not a big fan of rice cookers. My current car is a '96 Mustang GT. I haven't done much to the car (only subframe connectors to brace it and a K&N air filter). It is a lot of fun (except when I got that ticket). I love the power. However, I really was seriously considering a WRX wagon - cause I have too many kids for a Mustang to be practical, and it's cheaper than the S4 and Lexus Icross. However, my wife has already decided what my next car is (thanks hon...). My next car is (drum roll please) a Honda Odyssey! Now we are talking some serious performance here!
Errr - not quite. There used to be covenents and restrictions that wouldn't allow you to sell the house to someone who wasn't white, for example. Clauses of that nature cannot be enforced in the United States anymore ( who says there's no such thing as progress?)
You may be able to attach some clauses to a sale, but you will be responsible for enforcing it. And there is the very good chance that a judge will simply toss your case out. Of course, IANAL.
Now to bring this topic back to the original subject. Although a previous poster stated this quite well, it still seems to have some mentally challenged people tied up. So once again:
1) A book is not a computer game
2) You need to BUY the game to use the translation.
Re:can't compete with bikes yet
on
This is IT?
·
· Score: 1
Slashdot Mirror
Well, after GWB is done working over the economy, that $67 will really only be like $15 in today's money...
Yes - part of the issue is that 5.4GHz needs
16x the power to get the same range as at 2.4GHz. Look at the specs: 802.11b@2.4GHz at 24dBm gets twice the range of 802.11a@5.4GHz with 30dBm xmit power. Although you will really need 802.11g to do a more accurate comparison, cause it will use OFDM.at 2.4GHz just like 802.11a.
On another note, 55MHz is a big difference - Most xmiters are well below -60dBc by the time you get only 10MHz outside of the channel.
Why do I need to believe in some supernatural song-and-dance to think that people should have basic freedoms?
Actually, Shrub's father stated that atheists don't deserve to be citizens:
Click Here
But I don't think that the fruit falls far from the bush...
I remember when 128M was enough....
I can guarantee that my points take effect at speeds much lower than 30GHz - even as low as 100MHz these effects can be rather significant. I just had to work on a board today that had problems running at 100MHz because of poor design.
Wait a sec. So you say it's ok to compare an overclocked P4 to a standard Athlon. Why not OC the Athlon too? It's not that difficult. If you aren't going to have a level playing field, you can write a P4 to K6-3 (with 3d now!).
As for why the Hz matters, there are several reasons.
1st - a large component of the power disappation in a cmos chip increases with the frequency. Second, there is a maximum Ft for a transistor process. Next, it gets more difficult to design motherboards that work at higher frequencies. Another issue is that higher frequencies are more likely to radiate, causing EMI issues.
As for 'Intel could easily release those 2.6GHz processors today' is a bunch of crap. Remember the P3 1.13GHz processors which were released and then unreleased? I'll bet you don't know the first thing on an IC release procedure. It isn't simply 'it runs at this speed - let's sell it'. First, you need to run a complete fault coverage at that speed to ensure that there is no dynamic problem. Next, you need to modify your testing procedure (and maybe buy lots of new test equipment at $2000000+ each). And then you need to estimate yield. And I net I'm missing a few dozen steps too.
So, the bottom line is a slower processor that can equal the performance of a higher frequency processor is usually a 'better' design. Of course, you can say the same thing about power dissapation - and the Athlon really burns a lot of power.
How much do you think it costs to make ICs? I worked at one semiconductor manufacturer, and that kind of mark-up is common. An ADC that cost $2.00 to make was to sell for $40.00. The semi makers need that kind of margin to recoup all the development costs.
Well, not everyone is a "open source or nothing" zealot. I care greatly about performance - stability AND speed. So if a closed source compiler can provide a significant improvement in performance, I'm not going to rule it out because it's name isn't GNU.
Well, actually RDRAM does have a higher bandwidth. On some types of applications, it will provide a significant advantage. For majority of applications though, the high enough bandwidth and lower latency of DDR is superior. Perhaps this fellow has such an application that RDRAM works on. Of course, he didn't say if the Athlon had DDR or SDR SDRAM. Nor did he mention clock speeds. It sure isn't fair to compare an Athlon 900MHz to a P4 2.2GHz.
Well - a few pedantic corrections:
CD technology is 44.1KHz, not 144KHz. And I doubt you could find a 24bit 920KHz ADC that cost anything reasonable. First, I there is something I call "marketing bits". Just because an ADC or DAC has 2 extra bits, does not mean it is guarenteed to have better SNR and THD. That is why the 12 bit and 14 bit scanners make me laugh. My company sells test equipment, and it has a 16bit instrument that could beat the majority of 24bit converters in SNR and THD.
Next, a major issue with your wafer processor is testing. Currently, verification and testing a chip costs more than manufacturing or packaging.
That also applies to your ADCs and DACs.
Still, I gotta admit the wafer processor would be cool. Let me know when you can make one for less than a grand!
Yeah - you would buy the 487 co-processor, which was really a 486. When you used the 487, it DISABLED the 486sx, and the co-processor ran the system!
Ah, the wonders of competition. Intel can't get away with that anymore.
Bob was a great example of MS Innovation!
Get real. Why would I boot off of my MP3 player? That is simply retarded marketing thinking. Why not put a 1GB microdrive into a digital camera and boot from that too?
Those links are a bunch of crap. Get real - when directtv and dish networks join together, the subscription costs will go up. Don't expect otherwise. When TCI started gaining 'economies of scale' did the average customer benefit with lower costs or better service? No. Take a look at This
This Link was mentioned on /. a while back. Just don't miss the last paragraph.
While the poll fixing was not anywhere near as bad, MS should not have done it. It is a blatent attempt to deceive. Nothing less.
Corporations should adhere to codes of conduct which prohibit any unethical beharior.
Well - A paranoid sort would see that the upload BW cap would KILL file sharing like gnutella (if it were universally applied). A paranoid sort would then extrapolate to external RIAA types reminding the broadband providers how much they would save by limiting the uploads.
Well, since Intel wants to own the chipset business, it probably won't happen. Of course, Intel actually did own the chipset business until it got too cozy with Rambus...
But the end of the article had a beautiful statement from Monsanto/Solutia:
"I'm pretty proud of what we did," Kaley said. "Was it perfect? No. Could we be second-guessed? Sure. But I think we mostly did what any company would do, even today."
I think a perfect punishment for the executives would be that they MUST live in the poisoned town (with their families) for the rest of their life. I like it better than sending them to prison...
Well, given the history of various MS email leaks, I am inclined to believe it. It is completely plausable that MS would be focused on Linux on the server side. Read the email - that is how marketing/sales thinks. That is the message that all salesmen are told - find out what your customers need, protect your turf, and here is how to discredit your competitors.
I admit that the GT is not a great handler. At least in stock. I saw the Mustang referred to as a 'knuckle-dragger' in comparison to the WRX. However, you can improve the handling quite a bit - check out a Rosch Mustang. It isn't for doing dukes of hazard style dirt road racing, but on roads it will behave better than you expect. In addition, while my GT has tons of torque, those bastards at Ford started the GTs with 4.6 Liter engines a little light on the hp - the newest GTs have 260hp, mine is a wimpy 220.So, the WRX could possibly take my car straight line.
Thanks for the helpful advice! I'll lok into it...
Yeah - I am not a big fan of rice cookers. My current car is a '96 Mustang GT. I haven't done much to the car (only subframe connectors to brace it and a K&N air filter). It is a lot of fun (except when I got that ticket). I love the power. However, I really was seriously considering a WRX wagon - cause I have too many kids for a Mustang to be practical, and it's cheaper than the S4 and Lexus Icross. However, my wife has already decided what my next car is (thanks hon...). My next car is (drum roll please) a Honda Odyssey! Now we are talking some serious performance here!
Do I sound bitter?
Errr - not quite. There used to be covenents and restrictions that wouldn't allow you to sell the house to someone who wasn't white, for example. Clauses of that nature cannot be enforced in the United States anymore ( who says there's no such thing as progress?)
You may be able to attach some clauses to a sale, but you will be responsible for enforcing it. And there is the very good chance that a judge will simply toss your case out. Of course, IANAL.
Now to bring this topic back to the original subject. Although a previous poster stated this quite well, it still seems to have some mentally challenged people tied up. So once again:
1) A book is not a computer game
2) You need to BUY the game to use the translation.
For $3000 I would learn how to ride a unicycle.