Re:The problem with Rambus compared to SDRAM...
on
Will Rambus Go Bust?
·
· Score: 2
Plus, RAMBUS creates more heat than conventional SDRAM (SDR or DDR). More heat means case designers may have to redesign their cases and would be extremely hard to use in laptops. Also, the more RIMMs you install, the higher the latency. RAMBUS is a serial memory technology, therefore you degrade performance as you increase memory in the system. Serial memory technologies can be advantageous when reading large blocks of memory but for normal everyday tasks(office software, CPU intensive, games, etc.), it falls short. --
A little OT, but I really liked the Dune series of books. I think it would make a great story line for a TV series. It could take place in the time after the 3rd book. When is the miniseries coming out? --
You can remove QT from your system with out screwing up your Mac. You will be able to use most Applications. The point is that Quicktime, when installed, is very tight with the MacOS. Just installing the MacOS is like having half of Quicktime already installed with out running the Install QuickTime installer. --
I remember overclocking my Mac IIsi by desoldering my 40MHz quartz clock crystal with a 50MHz and later a 66MHz. The CPU (a Motorola 68030) ran at half the crystals frequency so it went from 20MHz to 25MHz (woohoo!). When I went to 33MHz, I had speaker issues for some reason but things still worked (with a RadioShack heatsink glued to the processor. Man those were the good old days;) --
Thats not the reason either. The new Celerons are flip chip and the older ones are regular socket 370, therefore you can't interchange them. You would need some sort of an adapter. I think the main reason is intel is trying to differentiate the processors and direct OEMs into putting Celerons into low end systems while the P3's should be used for midranged business systems. --
Why is Intel crippling the new Celeron with a 66MHz bus? I mean the P3 is already at 133 so the Celeron is at half the bus speed of the P3. The Spitfire on the otherhand, shares the Athlons bus speed and seems will be a better performer. We'll see how this affects performance and how soon Intel will change their minds on Celeron FSB speed. I'm recommending my friends get Athlon systems or iMacs depending on thier needs. --
Alpha doesn't play in the same ball park? Pull-ease... I've seen cheap Alphas going for the price of slightly high end P3 and G4 systems (~$2000) with impressive specs. I know people with Alphas at home.
And yes, bashing pink "iMac" is really funny and YOU KNOW WHY !! ahahahaha
More MHz == better performance? Would a 1GHz 386 be faster than a 500MHz PIII? No. Design of theprocessor, cache architecture, instructions issued per clock cycle, ISA, etc. all have bearing on the processor performance. Also, why is 'IMAC' all in caps? Could you tell me what it stands for?
If x86 is sooooo bad, don't wait and buy a fucking pink IMAC and stop BSing about something you don't know.
Why is the Macintosh the only other alternative to x86? How about Alpha or Sparc? Or was this just another opportunity for you to bash 'pink' iMacs?
(please no ALTIVEC RuLeZ pathetic replies)
You should go to arstechnica and check out the article comparing SIMD units. You'd be surprised. I'm not ragging on the x86 architecture, but you have some weird ways of determining performance (MHz only). --
G4 isn't 128 bit. The Vector unit is. The FPU is 64 bit and the Integer unit is 32-bit. What the G4 has is plenty of registers (Altivec has it's own) and a shorter pipeline that makes it more efficient (although it makes it harder to clock up). The G4+, out this summer-fall, will have a 256bit 256KB on die cache, 2 more int units, the altivec unit will be able to execute 2 vector instructions in a clock cycle, and another FPU will be added. Plus, 36bit memory addressing will enable it to access 64GB of RAM instead. --
Here's an advantage: System on a chip. How does a chip with a processor (maybe 2 or 4), large full speed cache, memory controller, PCI bridge, maybe 256MB (1GB? who knows?) of RAM, ethernet controller, etc., all on one chip sound? Sounds pretty good to me. Get memory latency down to like 1-1-1 and blazing i/o performance. You would make the motherboard extremely small and save a massive amount of space. Since the memory controller and PCI bridge ar on the Processor itself, the pin out can be kept under 400 pins. With enough memory on chip, who would need memory slots? This is the future IMHO. --
I know. If there is life on Jupiter, it may be considered an act of war is we start crashing things into it! You sure as hell know we would go ballistic... --
Slashdot Mirror
Plus, RAMBUS creates more heat than conventional SDRAM (SDR or DDR). More heat means case designers may have to redesign their cases and would be extremely hard to use in laptops. Also, the more RIMMs you install, the higher the latency. RAMBUS is a serial memory technology, therefore you degrade performance as you increase memory in the system. Serial memory technologies can be advantageous when reading large blocks of memory but for normal everyday tasks(office software, CPU intensive, games, etc.), it falls short.
--
Drink mat. That's british for coaster, right? ;)
--
Right on. The most intelligent comment yet in this story. I just wish more people were as open minded.
--
A little OT, but I really liked the Dune series of books. I think it would make a great story line for a TV series. It could take place in the time after the 3rd book. When is the miniseries coming out?
--
Thats ok I'll wait for the G4...
--
You can remove QT from your system with out screwing up your Mac. You will be able to use most Applications. The point is that Quicktime, when installed, is very tight with the MacOS. Just installing the MacOS is like having half of Quicktime already installed with out running the Install QuickTime installer.
--
No you see, today is minus 2 day. He is right...
--
AMD is part of the AIM Alliance? Since when? The A part is for Apple... not AMD.
--
I remember overclocking my Mac IIsi by desoldering my 40MHz quartz clock crystal with a 50MHz and later a 66MHz. The CPU (a Motorola 68030) ran at half the crystals frequency so it went from 20MHz to 25MHz (woohoo!). When I went to 33MHz, I had speaker issues for some reason but things still worked (with a RadioShack heatsink glued to the processor. Man those were the good old days ;)
--
Thats not the reason either. The new Celerons are flip chip and the older ones are regular socket 370, therefore you can't interchange them. You would need some sort of an adapter. I think the main reason is intel is trying to differentiate the processors and direct OEMs into putting Celerons into low end systems while the P3's should be used for midranged business systems.
--
Why is Intel crippling the new Celeron with a 66MHz bus? I mean the P3 is already at 133 so the Celeron is at half the bus speed of the P3. The Spitfire on the otherhand, shares the Athlons bus speed and seems will be a better performer. We'll see how this affects performance and how soon Intel will change their minds on Celeron FSB speed. I'm recommending my friends get Athlon systems or iMacs depending on thier needs.
--
Ask abit or asus to make one. No one is stopping them. See here for more info.
--
Spoons are hype. There is no Spoon!
--
Anything could be the 'greatest ever' only if it was developed better. Duh.
--
No, that wasn't my intention. Do you?
--
And yes, bashing pink "iMac" is really funny and YOU KNOW WHY !! ahahahaha
That says it all.
--
If x86 is sooooo bad, don't wait and buy a fucking pink IMAC and stop BSing about something you don't know.
Why is the Macintosh the only other alternative to x86? How about Alpha or Sparc? Or was this just another opportunity for you to bash 'pink' iMacs?
(please no ALTIVEC RuLeZ pathetic replies)
You should go to arstechnica and check out the article comparing SIMD units. You'd be surprised. I'm not ragging on the x86 architecture, but you have some weird ways of determining performance (MHz only).
--
Oh and I forgot to add, they are increasing the pipeline to 7 stages allowing it to clock up easier.
--
G4 isn't 128 bit. The Vector unit is. The FPU is 64 bit and the Integer unit is 32-bit. What the G4 has is plenty of registers (Altivec has it's own) and a shorter pipeline that makes it more efficient (although it makes it harder to clock up). The G4+, out this summer-fall, will have a 256bit 256KB on die cache, 2 more int units, the altivec unit will be able to execute 2 vector instructions in a clock cycle, and another FPU will be added. Plus, 36bit memory addressing will enable it to access 64GB of RAM instead.
--
With that overwhelming evidence, who could argue with you?
Calm down, it's just a joke! I swear!
--
Can I make one from parts at a Radio Shack?
--
Here's an advantage: System on a chip. How does a chip with a processor (maybe 2 or 4), large full speed cache, memory controller, PCI bridge, maybe 256MB (1GB? who knows?) of RAM, ethernet controller, etc., all on one chip sound? Sounds pretty good to me. Get memory latency down to like 1-1-1 and blazing i/o performance. You would make the motherboard extremely small and save a massive amount of space. Since the memory controller and PCI bridge ar on the Processor itself, the pin out can be kept under 400 pins. With enough memory on chip, who would need memory slots? This is the future IMHO.
--
The G4 is made on a .22 process. The Leff is .15. Motorola used this as a marketing ploy, I think.
--
I know. If there is life on Jupiter, it may be considered an act of war is we start crashing things into it! You sure as hell know we would go ballistic...
--
Thats when you tell them, "Windows, thats another thing I have to talk to you about..."
--