Yeah, because clock speeds across cpus and chipsets are a real meaning full comparison. Who cares about stuff memory bandwith and speeds.
AMD are producing the Pentium-4s of this generation, which need about a 25% higher clock speed to be comparable with a similar Intel CPU for single-threaded use. So 1.6GHz is probably going to be soundly dumped on by Intel's low-end i3s unless they can really take advantage of all eight cores (which are presumably four of the Bulldozer-styte cores and not eight full cores).
I remember reading a possibly apocryphal tale about different attitudes to deploying decoys on nuclear missiles in the Cold War; supposedly the US military went to a great deal of trouble building decoys that looked like nuclear warheads, whereas the British saved a lot of money by making the warheads look like decoys.
Make your smart missiles look like dumb missiles until they're too close to engage, and the job is done.
Given that the US has enough nukes to melt the world twice, any large threat even before arriving will be getting quite the return visit.
1. No, they don't. 2. They'd have a hard time justifying a nuclear attack just because China sank one of their carriers operating close to their coast. Few US Presidents would want to see the Chinese nuke LA because the US fleet tried to stop them invading Taiwan and then attacked Beijing.
If I remember correctly, most German tanks in the last years of WWII were destroyed by one or more of:
1. Russians. 2. Air attacks. 3. Germans.
Most of the big tank battles were on the Eastern Front, and by the end of the war the Germans were destroying new tanks when they reached the front line (or turning them into static defences) because they no longer had the fuel to operate them.
That's what the graphics cards do. No consumer graphics card does quads, strips, fans, big dots or wide lines in hardware. The driver has to re-work them on the fly.
Maybe not today, but the ones I used to work on certainly did. And given that today's 'pro' graphics cards are typically just 'consumer' cards with different drivers, I'm pretty sure their hardware will handle it too; they'd probably have to disable the code in the 'consumer' driver to stop it working.
One of the reasons why Vista got such a reputation for unreliability was that the video card vendors outright refused to rewrite their drivers for WDM. They kept pretending it just wasn't going to happen, and didn't finally do the update until after it was too late and Vista had already hit the stores.
Changing the driver model was such a stupid idea that everyone hoped Microsoft would realise and change their minds. Until then, no-one was going to put resources onto debugging drivers for an OS that wasn't even released yet when they could be improving drivers for hardware and operating systems customers actually had.
Just another dumb idea on Microsoft's part, believing they could do what they wanted and the rest of the world would follow them with their tails wagging.
The only fault I have is that it is too heavy for what it is, but a) it is a 2-3 year old design; b) it's built quite tough.
One of the reasons I like them is because they seem far more robust than my Asus Transformer; particularly after seeing pictures of screens people claim to have broken just by picking them up or closing them on the keyboard dock.
Awesome, you'll be able to use the built-in calculator to your great benefit!
Most people I know use tablets for email, web browsing and e-book reading while traveling. So not having 50,000 fart apps isn't really a big downside. And, from what I understand, they've made porting Android apps much easier in the new OS so there should be at least 5,000 fart apps soon.
I'm assuming the families of these kids put them to work out of necessity, so what happens to these kids and their families now?
Most likely they starve. But at least they'll die happy in the knowledge that they're not being exploited by evil capitalists, and so long as they don't get on TV while they're dying, rich Westerners will tell each other how wonderful it is that they're preventing evil capitalist exploitation.
The programmer I used to work with who'd sometimes bring his Ferrari F40 to work in the summer would disagree. Though the golden era of stock options has gone for most.
Good God man! Think of the professors! They might have to start flipping burgers if the current burger flippers stop borrowing quarter of a million dollars to pay for their History Of Tarantino Movies degrees.
Well, duh, when I said 'run four threads' I meant 'run four threads _AT THE SAME TIME_'.
And your hyperthreading numbers are completely bogus. Even the Pentium-4 did better than that and its hyperthreading implementation was lousy compared to an i5.
..and its 140W TDP, significantly more than the 8800 GT or 9800 GT NVidia card that was $200 when they pieced together their 5 year old system, so they need a new power supply too.
As I mentioned down below, I have a gaming PC with an i7 and GTX 660 and it peaks at around 200W at the wall when playing games. Given that the TDP of just the CPU and GPU combined is more than that, the numbers seem excessively high.
Slashdot Mirror
Yeah, because clock speeds across cpus and chipsets are a real meaning full comparison. Who cares about stuff memory bandwith and speeds.
AMD are producing the Pentium-4s of this generation, which need about a 25% higher clock speed to be comparable with a similar Intel CPU for single-threaded use. So 1.6GHz is probably going to be soundly dumped on by Intel's low-end i3s unless they can really take advantage of all eight cores (which are presumably four of the Bulldozer-styte cores and not eight full cores).
Voyager 1/2 could run about 100K instructions per second, maybe less.
The Apollo Guidance Computer was about the same, I believe. Emulating it in real time takes about 2% of a 3GHz Pentium-4.
How many of these pre-WW2 tech planes do you think a single fighter could shoot down in an hour?
About as many as the number of missiles it carries. And each missile will probably cost as much as a squadron of pre-WWII tech aircraft.
I remember reading a possibly apocryphal tale about different attitudes to deploying decoys on nuclear missiles in the Cold War; supposedly the US military went to a great deal of trouble building decoys that looked like nuclear warheads, whereas the British saved a lot of money by making the warheads look like decoys.
Make your smart missiles look like dumb missiles until they're too close to engage, and the job is done.
Then it's not a cheap, mass produced expendable missile anymore.
Because adding a GPS, an ARM chip and some steerable fins makes it really, really expensive.
Given that the US has enough nukes to melt the world twice, any large threat even before arriving will be getting quite the return visit.
1. No, they don't.
2. They'd have a hard time justifying a nuclear attack just because China sank one of their carriers operating close to their coast. Few US Presidents would want to see the Chinese nuke LA because the US fleet tried to stop them invading Taiwan and then attacked Beijing.
If I remember correctly, most German tanks in the last years of WWII were destroyed by one or more of:
1. Russians.
2. Air attacks.
3. Germans.
Most of the big tank battles were on the Eastern Front, and by the end of the war the Germans were destroying new tanks when they reached the front line (or turning them into static defences) because they no longer had the fuel to operate them.
That's what the graphics cards do. No consumer graphics card does quads, strips, fans, big dots or wide lines in hardware. The driver has to re-work them on the fly.
Maybe not today, but the ones I used to work on certainly did. And given that today's 'pro' graphics cards are typically just 'consumer' cards with different drivers, I'm pretty sure their hardware will handle it too; they'd probably have to disable the code in the 'consumer' driver to stop it working.
One of the reasons why Vista got such a reputation for unreliability was that the video card vendors outright refused to rewrite their drivers for WDM. They kept pretending it just wasn't going to happen, and didn't finally do the update until after it was too late and Vista had already hit the stores.
Changing the driver model was such a stupid idea that everyone hoped Microsoft would realise and change their minds. Until then, no-one was going to put resources onto debugging drivers for an OS that wasn't even released yet when they could be improving drivers for hardware and operating systems customers actually had.
Just another dumb idea on Microsoft's part, believing they could do what they wanted and the rest of the world would follow them with their tails wagging.
Installing random apps from untrusted source can cause malware infections. News at 11.
The only fault I have is that it is too heavy for what it is, but a) it is a 2-3 year old design; b) it's built quite tough.
One of the reasons I like them is because they seem far more robust than my Asus Transformer; particularly after seeing pictures of screens people claim to have broken just by picking them up or closing them on the keyboard dock.
Awesome, you'll be able to use the built-in calculator to your great benefit!
Most people I know use tablets for email, web browsing and e-book reading while traveling. So not having 50,000 fart apps isn't really a big downside. And, from what I understand, they've made porting Android apps much easier in the new OS so there should be at least 5,000 fart apps soon.
And I know the other three. I've actually been quite impressed by the Playbook, I'm thinking of buying one myself.
Is there really anyone in the world who hasn't turned this monstrous security hole off yet?
But then, all x86 hardware with Secure Boot is required to have the option to disable that feature.
Until Windows 9, anyway.
'Microsoft Boot' is probably the biggest threat to Linux right now, and I'm amazed that anyone not paid by Microsoft would ever defend it.
The point of secure boot is vendor lockin. The point of Linux is to not be locked to a vendor.
To many X86 servers do not boot Windows for them to try to push that kind of lock down.
Yeah, so? Your $1,000 server motherboard will still be able to run Linux. Doesn't help the rest of us.
If you give Microsoft the power to control what software will and won't run, then they will use it, sooner or later. It's a fscking retarded idea.
How many of them are spammers and phishers?
I'm assuming the families of these kids put them to work out of necessity, so what happens to these kids and their families now?
Most likely they starve. But at least they'll die happy in the knowledge that they're not being exploited by evil capitalists, and so long as they don't get on TV while they're dying, rich Westerners will tell each other how wonderful it is that they're preventing evil capitalist exploitation.
But do you have to make CEO to win the lottery?
The programmer I used to work with who'd sometimes bring his Ferrari F40 to work in the summer would disagree. Though the golden era of stock options has gone for most.
Why attend university at all?
Good God man! Think of the professors! They might have to start flipping burgers if the current burger flippers stop borrowing quarter of a million dollars to pay for their History Of Tarantino Movies degrees.
you do realize 20 years ago america looked just like china.
This is the dumbest thing I've read today.
Are you even twenty years old? Have you ever been to China?
Well, duh, when I said 'run four threads' I meant 'run four threads _AT THE SAME TIME_'.
And your hyperthreading numbers are completely bogus. Even the Pentium-4 did better than that and its hyperthreading implementation was lousy compared to an i5.
As I mentioned down below, I have a gaming PC with an i7 and GTX 660 and it peaks at around 200W at the wall when playing games. Given that the TDP of just the CPU and GPU combined is more than that, the numbers seem excessively high.
Thanks consoles, or thanks Windows XP?
Thanks Microsoft for trying to use DirectX as a stick to force people to switch from XP to Vista. Hey, kind of like Window 8.