The Athlon 64 CORE is simply a K7 with X86-64, Hypertransport, SOI, and an integrated memory controller. They made a few other minor tweaks (like slightly increasing the pipeline) but there is a lot more that is old about the A64 than there is new. Clearly these deseign enhancements have paid off, but to compare the XP/64 to the PIII/PIV is not really apples to apples. The PIV was a radical change in design.
Of course the irony is that Intel looks to be going back to a PIII-like architecture for the future.
740 was not released in the last year, it has been around forever as the Athlon XP socket.
940 is for the high end. You can't put a Xeon in a P4 board. It's not going anywhere.
754 was a stepping stone to 939 which is better and cheaper. Intel did the exact same thing when the P4 came out and they went from Williamette to Northwood (socket 423 to 478). It may be inconvenient to people who didn't do their research - socket 939 was known to be coming from day one - but it's not unreasonable or unprecedented. Also, Socket 754 will be supported for at least another year so it's not like they are totally abandoning it today. The 3700+ which is very comprable to the 3800+ is on 754.
I suppose the numerous Pakistani, Indian, and Saudi Muslims that I have talked to who are all are very familiar with the sentiments of the region could be wrong. Sure they don't speak for everybody, but I've heard the same thing from enough people in that region to get an idea of what they are thinking.
Granted, these are people in the U.S. looking for an education, but they are very realistic and candid about the situations in their homelands.
You can't overlook the fact that corporations (the primary interests of which are generally those of the rich) play a huge part in government policy these days.
Fact: The U.S. couldn't account for every single biological weapon in this country. There is a lot of beaurocracy between the leaders and the people who actually manage this stuff. I only say this to illustrate how unrealistic him being able to hunt down and destroy everything is.
Fact: These many tons of chemical weapons that were unaccounted for were past their expiration dates so the whole idea was moot to begin with. Unless the U.S. was scared of being attacked by a big blob of green goo. Now if they were able to provide evidence of fresh munitions or REAL evidence of a nuclear program then ok.
"The terrorists are actually fueled by an extreme vision of Islam; and their major hatred is because the US is not islamic."
This is mostly bullshit. They hate the U.S. because the U.S. has their nose in every fucking place in the Middle East supporting tyrants and dictators. They want the U.S. to get the hell out. This is why most of the Al Q terrorist attacks before 9/11 that targeted Americans happened in and around the Middle East. Yeah they have broadened their horizons as of late, but it ain't because they didn't have the capacity before.
There is a small amount of truth there in the fact that there is a lot of hatred for the Saudi Government which is a whore to the U.S. and professes Islam while taking pleasure trips to America where they can spit in the face of the beliefs of their people. Also, U.S. influence is generally anti-Islamic as U.S. popular culture is Anti-Islamic (and anti-Christian for that matter).
Bin Laden and the boys didn't carry out 9/11 for that reason though. They happen to be Muslims and the U.S. happens to be mostly Christian, but if the U.S. didn't meddle in the Middle East the way that it has, 9/11 would have never happened.
Bottom line is, the enemy is the enemy, no matter what, but the worst thing that you can do is oversimplify your enemy's motives to something that admonishes you of any responsibility. Mainly because that's rarely the case, and also because it tends to encourage severe under/over estimation.
People bitch about the P4 because the high end ones are power vampires. Since Intel hasn't done much more than push the chip up 200 MHz in the past year, there hasn't really been much else to talk about.
I never said that the Barton wasn't a hot chip. I was saying that the K8 is not somewhat better, it is significantly better - all around that is, but especially heat-wise. It's not the heat spreader, the only thing that truly helps with is the durability of the chip. The SOI process appears to be the main cause though the efficiency of the chip - as noted below - surely helps as well.
The K8 is somewhat improved though but still has the heat factor.
You're joking right? It's well documented that the A64 Chips are notably cooler than any Northwood P4 over 3.0 GHz. We won't even get into the Prescott - AKA PresHOTT to the more cynical.
You can now get an A64 2800+ for the same price as a P4 2.8.
But of course there are precious few - if any, now that deregulation is running its course - examples of a real monopoly. It's almost as much of a fable as perfect competition.
The purpose of the PR system has been to reflect that the Athlon XP chips are more efficient and compare favorably to P4 chips, but the official explanation of them was indeed the Thunderbird comparison as seen in the first Athlon XP review by Anandtech.
These "Model Numbers" are supposed to correspond to the real world performance of the Athlon XP CPUs when compared to higher clocked competitors. While AMD will argue that the Model Numbers are used to compare the Athlon XP to an equivalently clocked Thunderbird, it's clear that the ratings are used to somehow bridge the clock speed gap between the Athlon and the Pentium 4.
If you took a few more seconds to search Geek.com you would see that they corrected their supposition that the XP model numbers were based on P4 numbers:
Apparently it is the performance relative to a Thunderbird Athlon and has nothing to do with Pentium 4. Many sites (including ours) have been reporting that the Athlon XP model number system will be relative to the performance of Northwood Pentium 4s, therefore allowing a 1.533GHz Athlon to perform like a 1.8GHz Pentium 4 Northwood.
Well in the beginning, the XPs always exceeded their PR rating when compared to a P4. The early Northwood P4 chips brought some parity while the later ones noticably outperformed the AMD chips. Of course the AMD chips scaled pretty consistently amongst themselves while the P4 line went through pretty dramatic changes in performance.
If you have a Thunderbird 1.4 it is a 1.4 GHz CPU using the Thunderbird core. The Athlon XP chips used the Palomino cores and Athlon XP is where the Performance ratings took over.
Is this a joke? Have you seen the G5 tower cooling system? You also realize that heat is a reason why we haven't seen G5 laptops right?
...the PowerMac G5 microchip processor series sucks up a huge amount of power and puts out enough heat to burn toast. The power is not an issue when you can plug your machine into a wall. But to cool down the G5 box, Apple resorted to an anodized aluminum chassis and space-age cooling system using nine -- count 'em, nine -- different fans to keep the machine copacetic.
I know that they are using copper heatsinks and lots of fans to keep those new XServes cool. I doubt that they are much cooler than Opterons at the same speed. I conceed that Apple is probably being cautious on their design but be careful what you label power hungry, this is not your father's Gx processor. I say all of this with 2 G5s (Dual 20" cinema displays baby!) and a G4 sitting right next to me.
A quick googling shows that the G5 consumes about 75% of the power that a P4 would, when clocked to comparable performance levels. I have not verified the numbers, but if true a 25% reduction is certainly interesting enough to explore.
My question is how much more power does that supercooling system that adds about 10 lbs to the G5 consume?
Why would you even consider buying hardware before the software is even available? Either wait, and the hardware prices of what you want today will drop, or get something cheaper (and in this case 32-bit, and save your money!)
Could it be the fact that the A64 is still a best of breed 32-bit system as well?
I've found that Netscape tends to do most of the things that you mention much better than Mozilla. You'll find that Netscape works MUCH better with plugins. Particularly Real and WM. I should also say that I mainly use Firebird now and don't have the problems that you have, if that's worth anything (if it's not I don't need to know).
Whenever I have newbies that whine about IE, I point them to Netscape 7.1 and I can generally recommend it with authority. It's not IE so it's not realistic to say (or expect) that it does everything that IE does. However it does a lot that IE doesn't, and for some users that evens it out in the end.
Slashdot Mirror
The Athlon 64 CORE is simply a K7 with X86-64, Hypertransport, SOI, and an integrated memory controller. They made a few other minor tweaks (like slightly increasing the pipeline) but there is a lot more that is old about the A64 than there is new. Clearly these deseign enhancements have paid off, but to compare the XP/64 to the PIII/PIV is not really apples to apples. The PIV was a radical change in design.
Of course the irony is that Intel looks to be going back to a PIII-like architecture for the future.
740 was not released in the last year, it has been around forever as the Athlon XP socket.
940 is for the high end. You can't put a Xeon in a P4 board. It's not going anywhere.
754 was a stepping stone to 939 which is better and cheaper. Intel did the exact same thing when the P4 came out and they went from Williamette to Northwood (socket 423 to 478). It may be inconvenient to people who didn't do their research - socket 939 was known to be coming from day one - but it's not unreasonable or unprecedented. Also, Socket 754 will be supported for at least another year so it's not like they are totally abandoning it today. The 3700+ which is very comprable to the 3800+ is on 754.
I think that this is dotting the line between believing and knowing.
I hear it all the time on the liberal media. It's the mainstream folks that have missed it.
I suppose the numerous Pakistani, Indian, and Saudi Muslims that I have talked to who are all are very familiar with the sentiments of the region could be wrong. Sure they don't speak for everybody, but I've heard the same thing from enough people in that region to get an idea of what they are thinking.
Granted, these are people in the U.S. looking for an education, but they are very realistic and candid about the situations in their homelands.
You can't overlook the fact that corporations (the primary interests of which are generally those of the rich) play a huge part in government policy these days.
Fact: The U.S. couldn't account for every single biological weapon in this country. There is a lot of beaurocracy between the leaders and the people who actually manage this stuff. I only say this to illustrate how unrealistic him being able to hunt down and destroy everything is.
Fact: These many tons of chemical weapons that were unaccounted for were past their expiration dates so the whole idea was moot to begin with. Unless the U.S. was scared of being attacked by a big blob of green goo. Now if they were able to provide evidence of fresh munitions or REAL evidence of a nuclear program then ok.
The thing is that 20 years ago Saddam was our (the US's) homeboy.
Uhhh... not when the rich are the rulers.
"The terrorists are actually fueled by an extreme vision of Islam; and their major hatred is because the US is not islamic."
This is mostly bullshit. They hate the U.S. because the U.S. has their nose in every fucking place in the Middle East supporting tyrants and dictators. They want the U.S. to get the hell out. This is why most of the Al Q terrorist attacks before 9/11 that targeted Americans happened in and around the Middle East. Yeah they have broadened their horizons as of late, but it ain't because they didn't have the capacity before.
There is a small amount of truth there in the fact that there is a lot of hatred for the Saudi Government which is a whore to the U.S. and professes Islam while taking pleasure trips to America where they can spit in the face of the beliefs of their people. Also, U.S. influence is generally anti-Islamic as U.S. popular culture is Anti-Islamic (and anti-Christian for that matter).
Bin Laden and the boys didn't carry out 9/11 for that reason though. They happen to be Muslims and the U.S. happens to be mostly Christian, but if the U.S. didn't meddle in the Middle East the way that it has, 9/11 would have never happened.
Bottom line is, the enemy is the enemy, no matter what, but the worst thing that you can do is oversimplify your enemy's motives to something that admonishes you of any responsibility. Mainly because that's rarely the case, and also because it tends to encourage severe under/over estimation.
Where in my post did you see ANY mention of an Athlon XP?
People bitch about the P4 because the high end ones are power vampires. Since Intel hasn't done much more than push the chip up 200 MHz in the past year, there hasn't really been much else to talk about.
I never said that the Barton wasn't a hot chip. I was saying that the K8 is not somewhat better, it is significantly better - all around that is, but especially heat-wise. It's not the heat spreader, the only thing that truly helps with is the durability of the chip. The SOI process appears to be the main cause though the efficiency of the chip - as noted below - surely helps as well.
Cool and Quiet is just icing on the cake.
The K8 is somewhat improved though but still has the heat factor.
You're joking right? It's well documented that the A64 Chips are notably cooler than any Northwood P4 over 3.0 GHz. We won't even get into the Prescott - AKA PresHOTT to the more cynical.
You can now get an A64 2800+ for the same price as a P4 2.8.
But of course there are precious few - if any, now that deregulation is running its course - examples of a real monopoly. It's almost as much of a fable as perfect competition.
There are certainly effective monopoloies though.
While it may not really be the case these days, it is clearly not a myth.
The purpose of the PR system has been to reflect that the Athlon XP chips are more efficient and compare favorably to P4 chips, but the official explanation of them was indeed the Thunderbird comparison as seen in the first Athlon XP review by Anandtech.
These "Model Numbers" are supposed to correspond to the real world performance of the Athlon XP CPUs when compared to higher clocked competitors. While AMD will argue that the Model Numbers are used to compare the Athlon XP to an equivalently clocked Thunderbird, it's clear that the ratings are used to somehow bridge the clock speed gap between the Athlon and the Pentium 4.
If you took a few more seconds to search Geek.com you would see that they corrected their supposition that the XP model numbers were based on P4 numbers:
Apparently it is the performance relative to a Thunderbird Athlon and has nothing to do with Pentium 4. Many sites (including ours) have been reporting that the Athlon XP model number system will be relative to the performance of Northwood Pentium 4s, therefore allowing a 1.533GHz Athlon to perform like a 1.8GHz Pentium 4 Northwood.
Well in the beginning, the XPs always exceeded their PR rating when compared to a P4. The early Northwood P4 chips brought some parity while the later ones noticably outperformed the AMD chips. Of course the AMD chips scaled pretty consistently amongst themselves while the P4 line went through pretty dramatic changes in performance.
If you have a Thunderbird 1.4 it is a 1.4 GHz CPU using the Thunderbird core. The Athlon XP chips used the Palomino cores and Athlon XP is where the Performance ratings took over.
Maybe the fact that there weren't 300 million people on an Earth Area Network called the Internet back then.
Is this a joke? Have you seen the G5 tower cooling system? You also realize that heat is a reason why we haven't seen G5 laptops right?
I know that they are using copper heatsinks and lots of fans to keep those new XServes cool. I doubt that they are much cooler than Opterons at the same speed. I conceed that Apple is probably being cautious on their design but be careful what you label power hungry, this is not your father's Gx processor. I say all of this with 2 G5s (Dual 20" cinema displays baby!) and a G4 sitting right next to me.
A quick googling shows that the G5 consumes about 75% of the power that a P4 would, when clocked to comparable performance levels. I have not verified the numbers, but if true a 25% reduction is certainly interesting enough to explore.
My question is how much more power does that supercooling system that adds about 10 lbs to the G5 consume?
Why not get the 64-bit stuff out now so that it can mature when there is a need?
Why would you even consider buying hardware before the software is even available? Either wait, and the hardware prices of what you want today will drop, or get something cheaper (and in this case 32-bit, and save your money!)
Could it be the fact that the A64 is still a best of breed 32-bit system as well?
It's a G4 450. Not exactly cutting edge.
I've found that Netscape tends to do most of the things that you mention much better than Mozilla. You'll find that Netscape works MUCH better with plugins. Particularly Real and WM. I should also say that I mainly use Firebird now and don't have the problems that you have, if that's worth anything (if it's not I don't need to know).
Whenever I have newbies that whine about IE, I point them to Netscape 7.1 and I can generally recommend it with authority. It's not IE so it's not realistic to say (or expect) that it does everything that IE does. However it does a lot that IE doesn't, and for some users that evens it out in the end.