I don't think $30 makes that much of a difference. I was more talking about the savings from getting a cheaper (e.g. sub $200) CPU as opposed to getting a high end one like an i7. At the high end is where it makes sense to still buy an Intel if what you care about is gaming. In the middle it seems like AMD might be a better value unless Intel drops the price of the I5-7600K to $170 or something.
Also I haven't really looke dinto MOBOs too much. But my brief research lead me to believe that AMD MBOs were generally cheaper, leading to an even bigger price advantage. I have not heard anything about the AMD MOBOs being the source of any performance bottlenecks.
I was figuring that the total savings from going from an Intel I7 + MOBO to a middle end Ryzen + MOBO would be ~$200 which will definitely get you a better tier of GPU.
I'm sure I've spent money inefficiently on gaming computers in the past, and I am going to try really hard to do it more efficiently this time around, especially since I will probably be building 3 or 4 identical ones.
Windows is still backwards compatible.... The latest version supports older hardware. It's is the hardware that is not backwards compatible to older versions of windows (although that is because of microsoft). Whether you use linux or windows 10 is up to you.
Most people will not even consider running an OS other than windows.
Most of those people will never consider running a version of windows older than 10 on those newer chips.
Of the people that would prefer to run older versions of windows, most will decide to switch to windows 10 rather than linux.
I actually do think microsoft is dying a slow death. The list of reasons to keep using windows continues to grow smaller, but one big thing on that list that is probably not going away quickly is "It's the only thing I'm familiar with".
My job is to develop software that runs on linux. I have my mom running linux. I want windows to die. But it's going to be a while.
assume that the market for x86/x64 completely dries up, they can simply be a US version of a TSMC/GSMC, and still be above water.
Which would mean that the part of Intel that is analogous to what AMD is now would be dead along with AMD, and the part of Intel that is analogous to GSMC would still be around along with GSMC
Would it really make any difference in that scenario if GSMC was still called AMD?
A. I was being (pretty obviously) facetious, and replying to a ridiculous comment with another ridiculous comment.
B. You seem to have taken the comment about "Republicans with Nazi ideologies whose idea of healthcare is people dying in the streets", and attempted to refute it by offering one example of a person who has allegedly died during the Trump administration but actually due to events set in motion under Obama administration. And then say how you fail to see how this one example fits with my facetious claim.
I'm not sure why you find this sort of evidence compelling (or would imagine that I might find this sort of evidence compelling).
The correct response to someone legitimately claiming that "Nazi Republicans want people to die in the streets" is not simply to show that one person "died in the street" under Trumps watch was actually Obama's fault.
But hey, I guess this kind of logic must persuade people. Politicians on both sides use it all the time.
I think what is "the right thing to do" is debatable. Maybe instead of making music, Beyonce should first be working on ensuring that medical breakthroughs cure deafness so *everyone* can enjoy her music, and not just those who can hear. If we made listening to music contingent on deafness being cured, there would be a lot more pressure to have it cured. Until we do that, there will never be the same amount of leverage to cure deafness in general.
I don't think using tax money to help increase for disabled people is unreasonable. I think preventing access to education for everyone until everyone can have equal access is unreasonable. Yes you get leverage from this, but I don't think this leverage is worth the cost it imposes.
Making a video available on the internet is speech (in the freedom of *speech* sense). Not all forms of speech are literally a person speaking verbally, although the vast majority of these videos are probably depictions of that... What you said is technically true, but it's not because this content isn't speech, it's because UC is state institution and not a person.
It sure seems that leftist ideology has gone overboard now and then. But it's still better than having people dying in the streets that the rightists want. Everytime I see someone dying in the street I say "Now the rightist philosophies of selfishness have backfired for all to see." Until the rightists learn the value of compassion, their Nazi ideologies spewed by trump tower politicians will continue to harm America. But needing to move the videos to a new server is also pretty bad too.
On paper, the Ryzen 1400 looks better than the I5-7500, and at $170 it's $30 cheaper. You can dump the money you save getting a cheaper CPU (intel or amd) into a faster GPU.
I actually do way more programming than gaming on my PC, but honestly I don't really care about compilations taking a bit longer. I am usually coding during long compilations anyway. But lag during gaming is really annoying. So I would definitely prioritize gaming performance over other sorts of benchmarks. The only other consideration I have is cost. There is so much diminishing returns in getting an expensive CPU. Is 2x the price worth 5% better performance?
I think it makes much more sense to build moderately priced desktops that cost half the price of high end desktops, and just build them twice as frequently.
I'm not sure AMD will want Intel's profits now that they will be forced into a price war. Intel has a lot of money, but I don't see much profit in the immediate future for them, at least not the kind of profit they enjoyed for the last ~decade with 0 competitors.
Hate speech laws and Trump are not mutually exclusive. They can both lead to lynch mobs. Trump has said he want's to strengthen libel laws so the media aren't able to "lie" about him. As far as I am concerned, all attempts to restrict freedom of speech are antithetical to a free society. It seems neither left nor right wing extremists support freedom of speech when they are in power, and in my opinion are just 2 sides of the same coin. Political ideologies can have more than one dimension.
I would advise Facebook to call their bluff. Germany doesn't have authority over what everyone on the internet can read/write. They may feel they have the authority to prohibit what people in Germany read/write. If Facebook refuses to comply with German laws and refuses to pay any fines, Germany's only real option is to force German ISPs to block facebook. Let German politicians deal with the repercussions of that decision.
A. Incompetence. It's not a sign of corporate greed to offer someone a job and then quickly rescind that offer. This does not exclude greed as a factor, but a greedy corporation that was competent would simply have never made the job offer in the first place. And by corporate competence I am not referring specifically to the competence of any of the individual employees of the corporation, just their collective ability to work together.
B. Bad regulations. None of this would be an issue if we just had a decent healthcare system to begin with. Forcing the responsibility of healthcare onto employers was a way for cowardly legislators to avoid the blame of raising taxes and not providing public welfare. It's easy to sell a public comprising people desperate for good healthcare and people resistant to paying more taxes on a plan to take the money from "rich corporations" to pay for healthcare. But this poorly thought out solution creates some undesirable incentives.
Whether you are on the left or the right, you should be in favor of single payer healthcare. If you are on the right, if you can get over paying higher taxes to benefit those less fortunate, it actually allows for a more free labor market without the perverse incentives that come with tying healthcare to employment.
The FBI, et al. would rather exist in a world that is very dangerous and they alone possess the tools to (sometimes, maybe) protect us, than live in a world that is a little safer and no one has those tools. This is in the interests of the FBI and not necessarily in the interests of the society it is tasked to protect.
I guess that all depends on Intel's willingness to try to drop prices. We could certainly see another "golden age" if Intel thinks they can get away with selling equivalent (to AMD) chips at higher prices due to their brand. I would not consider this scenario a "golden age". I think a true golden age (for the consumer) would be where every manufacturer drops prices to be as competitive as possible.
It's not necessarily gouging. For all we know intel is now taking a loss on these chips just to undercut AMD. This is of course an equally unscrupulous capitalist practice, along with every other capitalist practice, including giving away product for free to the needy just to garner public support for use in future profit.
I tried to return my season ticket, but they wouldn't give me my money back. They said THEY wanted it.
--Lenny
As with everything in life a Simpsons quote captures the heart of the issue. AT&T will say that they *can't* give you your money back, but in reality it just boils down to the fact that they want to have your money more than they want you to have it.
I'm holding off on buying a new chip until ryzen comes out. Maybe it wouldn't make sense for Intel to do this kind of thing, since they might even prefer you buy one of their existing chips rather than waiting for the new one to clear out some old inventory, but for AMD, you might be holding off on buying a current Intel product to wait to buy a new AMD product. I'm sure as hell not buying an excavator now, and I don't think anyone else is either, and I think AMD knows that.
Slashdot Mirror
I don't think $30 makes that much of a difference. I was more talking about the savings from getting a cheaper (e.g. sub $200) CPU as opposed to getting a high end one like an i7. At the high end is where it makes sense to still buy an Intel if what you care about is gaming. In the middle it seems like AMD might be a better value unless Intel drops the price of the I5-7600K to $170 or something.
Also I haven't really looke dinto MOBOs too much. But my brief research lead me to believe that AMD MBOs were generally cheaper, leading to an even bigger price advantage. I have not heard anything about the AMD MOBOs being the source of any performance bottlenecks.
I was figuring that the total savings from going from an Intel I7 + MOBO to a middle end Ryzen + MOBO would be ~$200 which will definitely get you a better tier of GPU.
I'm sure I've spent money inefficiently on gaming computers in the past, and I am going to try really hard to do it more efficiently this time around, especially since I will probably be building 3 or 4 identical ones.
Windows is still backwards compatible.... The latest version supports older hardware. It's is the hardware that is not backwards compatible to older versions of windows (although that is because of microsoft). Whether you use linux or windows 10 is up to you.
Most people will not even consider running an OS other than windows.
Most of those people will never consider running a version of windows older than 10 on those newer chips.
Of the people that would prefer to run older versions of windows, most will decide to switch to windows 10 rather than linux.
I actually do think microsoft is dying a slow death. The list of reasons to keep using windows continues to grow smaller, but one big thing on that list that is probably not going away quickly is "It's the only thing I'm familiar with".
My job is to develop software that runs on linux. I have my mom running linux. I want windows to die. But it's going to be a while.
Some people will die before they upgrade to windows 10, so not *everyone*.
Linux doesn't force you to use systemd...
Don't try FreeBSD!
assume that the market for x86/x64 completely dries up, they can simply be a US version of a TSMC/GSMC, and still be above water.
Which would mean that the part of Intel that is analogous to what AMD is now would be dead along with AMD, and the part of Intel that is analogous to GSMC would still be around along with GSMC
Would it really make any difference in that scenario if GSMC was still called AMD?
A. I was being (pretty obviously) facetious, and replying to a ridiculous comment with another ridiculous comment.
B. You seem to have taken the comment about "Republicans with Nazi ideologies whose idea of healthcare is people dying in the streets", and attempted to refute it by offering one example of a person who has allegedly died during the Trump administration but actually due to events set in motion under Obama administration. And then say how you fail to see how this one example fits with my facetious claim.
I'm not sure why you find this sort of evidence compelling (or would imagine that I might find this sort of evidence compelling).
The correct response to someone legitimately claiming that "Nazi Republicans want people to die in the streets" is not simply to show that one person "died in the street" under Trumps watch was actually Obama's fault.
But hey, I guess this kind of logic must persuade people. Politicians on both sides use it all the time.
I think what is "the right thing to do" is debatable. Maybe instead of making music, Beyonce should first be working on ensuring that medical breakthroughs cure deafness so *everyone* can enjoy her music, and not just those who can hear. If we made listening to music contingent on deafness being cured, there would be a lot more pressure to have it cured. Until we do that, there will never be the same amount of leverage to cure deafness in general.
I don't think using tax money to help increase for disabled people is unreasonable. I think preventing access to education for everyone until everyone can have equal access is unreasonable. Yes you get leverage from this, but I don't think this leverage is worth the cost it imposes.
Making a video available on the internet is speech (in the freedom of *speech* sense). Not all forms of speech are literally a person speaking verbally, although the vast majority of these videos are probably depictions of that... What you said is technically true, but it's not because this content isn't speech, it's because UC is state institution and not a person.
Hopefully some day, someone will hope for someone to hope you get handicapped some day.
Hopefully some day, someone will hope you get handicapped some day.
It sure seems that leftist ideology has gone overboard now and then. But it's still better than having people dying in the streets that the rightists want. Everytime I see someone dying in the street I say "Now the rightist philosophies of selfishness have backfired for all to see." Until the rightists learn the value of compassion, their Nazi ideologies spewed by trump tower politicians will continue to harm America. But needing to move the videos to a new server is also pretty bad too.
On paper, the Ryzen 1400 looks better than the I5-7500, and at $170 it's $30 cheaper. You can dump the money you save getting a cheaper CPU (intel or amd) into a faster GPU.
I actually do way more programming than gaming on my PC, but honestly I don't really care about compilations taking a bit longer. I am usually coding during long compilations anyway. But lag during gaming is really annoying. So I would definitely prioritize gaming performance over other sorts of benchmarks. The only other consideration I have is cost. There is so much diminishing returns in getting an expensive CPU. Is 2x the price worth 5% better performance?
I think it makes much more sense to build moderately priced desktops that cost half the price of high end desktops, and just build them twice as frequently.
I'm not sure AMD will want Intel's profits now that they will be forced into a price war. Intel has a lot of money, but I don't see much profit in the immediate future for them, at least not the kind of profit they enjoyed for the last ~decade with 0 competitors.
Don't forget to also flag content to ensure queries like "is Google flagging holocaust denial" don't push users to conspiracy theories.
Hate speech laws and Trump are not mutually exclusive. They can both lead to lynch mobs. Trump has said he want's to strengthen libel laws so the media aren't able to "lie" about him. As far as I am concerned, all attempts to restrict freedom of speech are antithetical to a free society. It seems neither left nor right wing extremists support freedom of speech when they are in power, and in my opinion are just 2 sides of the same coin. Political ideologies can have more than one dimension.
I would advise Facebook to call their bluff. Germany doesn't have authority over what everyone on the internet can read/write. They may feel they have the authority to prohibit what people in Germany read/write. If Facebook refuses to comply with German laws and refuses to pay any fines, Germany's only real option is to force German ISPs to block facebook. Let German politicians deal with the repercussions of that decision.
This is about:
A. Incompetence. It's not a sign of corporate greed to offer someone a job and then quickly rescind that offer. This does not exclude greed as a factor, but a greedy corporation that was competent would simply have never made the job offer in the first place. And by corporate competence I am not referring specifically to the competence of any of the individual employees of the corporation, just their collective ability to work together.
B. Bad regulations. None of this would be an issue if we just had a decent healthcare system to begin with. Forcing the responsibility of healthcare onto employers was a way for cowardly legislators to avoid the blame of raising taxes and not providing public welfare. It's easy to sell a public comprising people desperate for good healthcare and people resistant to paying more taxes on a plan to take the money from "rich corporations" to pay for healthcare. But this poorly thought out solution creates some undesirable incentives.
Whether you are on the left or the right, you should be in favor of single payer healthcare. If you are on the right, if you can get over paying higher taxes to benefit those less fortunate, it actually allows for a more free labor market without the perverse incentives that come with tying healthcare to employment.
The FBI, et al. would rather exist in a world that is very dangerous and they alone possess the tools to (sometimes, maybe) protect us, than live in a world that is a little safer and no one has those tools. This is in the interests of the FBI and not necessarily in the interests of the society it is tasked to protect.
I guess that all depends on Intel's willingness to try to drop prices. We could certainly see another "golden age" if Intel thinks they can get away with selling equivalent (to AMD) chips at higher prices due to their brand. I would not consider this scenario a "golden age". I think a true golden age (for the consumer) would be where every manufacturer drops prices to be as competitive as possible.
It's not necessarily gouging. For all we know intel is now taking a loss on these chips just to undercut AMD. This is of course an equally unscrupulous capitalist practice, along with every other capitalist practice, including giving away product for free to the needy just to garner public support for use in future profit.
I just takes a little time when there are only 4 competitors.
I personally find not hitting visually human beings wandering into intersections with my car very useful.
I tried to return my season ticket, but they wouldn't give me my money back. They said THEY wanted it.
--Lenny
As with everything in life a Simpsons quote captures the heart of the issue. AT&T will say that they *can't* give you your money back, but in reality it just boils down to the fact that they want to have your money more than they want you to have it.
Wasn't it ment to have been launched in 2016?
Wasn't it supposed to be spelled meant?
Do you see what I did there? Did this add anything to the discourse?
I'm holding off on buying a new chip until ryzen comes out. Maybe it wouldn't make sense for Intel to do this kind of thing, since they might even prefer you buy one of their existing chips rather than waiting for the new one to clear out some old inventory, but for AMD, you might be holding off on buying a current Intel product to wait to buy a new AMD product. I'm sure as hell not buying an excavator now, and I don't think anyone else is either, and I think AMD knows that.