Yeah, we've got PC World. They, erm, suck. Nothing like Fry's or anything good like that.
I think the main point of the article is that due to cost of a laptop in the UK and the weakness of the US dollar right now it makes a lot of sense to buy it in the US instead.
Most laptop PSUs these days will work at either voltage, so all you need is a plug adapter.
You should play Battlefield 1942 - it can use LOTS of time on AI. You also have other stuff like sound, network, inputs etc to deal with let alone something to keep the GFX card busy!
1. It is way too complex. There is no way you can understand it all or hand edit it if required.
2. If it is corrupted, your whole OS won't even boot.
3. Its huge! 45MB of my fairly clean XP box.(although it is in a domain and has policies applied to it, etc, etc, but not much software)
4. You can't move the registry between machines, let alone between different versions of Windows. I can move my.config file between the 2.4 & 2.6 kernel if necessary, it just ignores what it doesn't know.
Several smaller independent registiries might work better. e.g. one for linux conf, one for X, one for KDE, etc. So each one has a small well definied file for all configs.
Because for the applications Pixar has in mind, G5 Macs are neither slower nor more expensive. It's really that simple. G5s deliver the best bang for the buck in the video editing world, period.
Ok, G5s are neither slow nor expensive (when compared to other dual systems) - but what on earth makes you think Pixar's own software is guaranteed to run faster on a G5 the an AMD-64?
As far as I can tell, the G5 and the Opteron are roughly equivlent clock for clock. Optimisation is of course a different issue, which could skew it in each arch's favour.....
emerge DOES NOT update your system config files for you though!
It is "etc-update" which does this, and it will ask you if you want to overwrite each file if necessary. You can even do a side-by-side merge of the new and old files if you are worried.
The US3+ CU is NO FASTER than the US3i at the same clock. Sure it has 8MB cache vs 1MB cache, but the US3i is on-chip and much quicker and has lower memory latency.
AMD can do that if they want. But you'd be pretty pissed off if they then changed the "2400+" to a 1750MHz processor without telling anyone wouldn't you?
Face it, computer companies have doing this for a while. Cyrix did and AMD does with the performance rating. You can argue that the Athlon 2400+ is as fast as a 2.4 ghz P4, but it's still misleading.
Here is a clue.
AMD's processor ratings have NOTHING to do with Intel's speed. What they are saying is a 2400+ CPU is equivilent to a 2.4GHz of the older Athlon core, even though the newer one is clocked at ~2GHz.
And they come to that conclusion by running benchmarks. Sounds fair to me.
If you wish to use it to compare it against a P4, then go ahead, but that is not what it is meant for.
I've benchmarked SPARC Solaris system running the exact same programs in 32-bit and 64-bit mode. The 32-bit code is always 10-15% faster!
Why? The increase of memory usage and cache usage as stated above. If you don't need 64-bit, stick to 32-bits.
However, this is only the case if the 32-bit and 64-bit modes are the same. BUT....
On x86-64, this is not the case. In 64-bit mode you get double the number of registers
This is very important. x86 by default only has 8 register, and AMD kept it that way in 32-bit mode for compatability reasons. In x86-64 mode, you get 16 registers instead. So despite the extra memory & cache pressure, it is faster.
If you look around, you'll find benchmarks where LAME is 30% in 64-bit mode because of this!
Slashdot Mirror
Yeah, we've got PC World. They, erm, suck. Nothing like Fry's or anything good like that.
I think the main point of the article is that due to cost of a laptop in the UK and the weakness of the US dollar right now it makes a lot of sense to buy it in the US instead.
Most laptop PSUs these days will work at either voltage, so all you need is a plug adapter.
You should play Battlefield 1942 - it can use LOTS of time on AI. You also have other stuff like sound, network, inputs etc to deal with let alone something to keep the GFX card busy!
No, that is not true. I could run a 32-bit machine with 64GB of memory if I wanted.
There is however a 4GB limit per process! Unless you use Intel's PAE, which gives you about 64GB IIRC.
The registry?
.config file between the 2.4 & 2.6 kernel if necessary, it just ignores what it doesn't know.
1. It is way too complex. There is no way you can understand it all or hand edit it if required.
2. If it is corrupted, your whole OS won't even boot.
3. Its huge! 45MB of my fairly clean XP box.(although it is in a domain and has policies applied to it, etc, etc, but not much software)
4. You can't move the registry between machines, let alone between different versions of Windows. I can move my
Several smaller independent registiries might work better. e.g. one for linux conf, one for X, one for KDE, etc. So each one has a small well definied file for all configs.
Sounds like Gentoo's etc-update. It'll merge trivial changes if it can, or it'll let you walk through merges, etc etc. Pretty cool.
I'm sure one probably used the other for some ideas.... although I don't know which.
Sadly in the closed-driver world, Nvidia is way faster than ATi.
I know, I've used both cards under Linux playing the UT2004 demo.
Actually, it is the Duron 1GHz core those numbers are based off. Same as the t-bird core, but with less L2 cache.....
No, neither one is going to help you there.
1. The power consumpution is about the same. Intel are the heat freaks at the moment. IBM & AMD share process technology after all.
2. The system bus is the same for both systems, 800MHz HT channels.
As I see it, the Opteron is the x86 equiv of for the PPC 970. They are very similar!
Ok, G5s are neither slow nor expensive (when compared to other dual systems) - but what on earth makes you think Pixar's own software is guaranteed to run faster on a G5 the an AMD-64?
As far as I can tell, the G5 and the Opteron are roughly equivlent clock for clock. Optimisation is of course a different issue, which could skew it in each arch's favour.....
IBM takes TPC-C lead.
Also, Intel will claim to sell a lot of processors. Perhaps some independant numbers would be of more use? They tell a fair more interesting story.
Death of Itanium?
Read the part where it says how many Itaniums Dell and IBM shipped in the last quarter! These are IDC figures, not Intel's.
Thank you AC!
emerge DOES NOT update your system config files for you though!
It is "etc-update" which does this, and it will ask you if you want to overwrite each file if necessary. You can even do a side-by-side merge of the new and old files if you are worried.
Hey! Thats the same password as my planet's airsheild!
"Me fail English? Thats unpossible!"
:)
Well I still like it.
The P4 is so in-efficient clock-for-clock that just about everything is better than it!
Then you need to get with the times if you even think this is correct. I ran a load of EDA apps on SPARC, Xeons and Opterons.
Guess what? The Opteron is 33% quicker CLOCK FOR CLOCK! As they clock a lot higher, you can guess they were a lot quicker.
On a side, I've found Sun's Ultra 5s to be very prone to failures.
The US3+ CU is NO FASTER than the US3i at the same clock. Sure it has 8MB cache vs 1MB cache, but the US3i is on-chip and much quicker and has lower memory latency.
US3+ CU's only use remains large SMP systems.
I agree with the AC - neither.
Use Gentoo! Best distro I've ever used!
AMD can do that if they want. But you'd be pretty pissed off if they then changed the "2400+" to a 1750MHz processor without telling anyone wouldn't you?
Here is a clue.
AMD's processor ratings have NOTHING to do with Intel's speed. What they are saying is a 2400+ CPU is equivilent to a 2.4GHz of the older Athlon core, even though the newer one is clocked at ~2GHz.
And they come to that conclusion by running benchmarks. Sounds fair to me.
If you wish to use it to compare it against a P4, then go ahead, but that is not what it is meant for.
And don't forget the surface temp is 450 degrees C, and the atomosphere is acidic.
So basically, you get crushed, burnt and dissolved all at once.
Venus is not a nice place to go visit!
I had a go on this ages ago, it was my dream! It cost a lot as arcades were at the time but not so much now. Loved it, wish I'd had a few more goes.
Here is good link!
Intel does have a license for x86-64, there is nothing from stopping them from making one!
Other than shafting the Itanium of course!!
Why? The increase of memory usage and cache usage as stated above. If you don't need 64-bit, stick to 32-bits.
However, this is only the case if the 32-bit and 64-bit modes are the same. BUT....
On x86-64, this is not the case. In 64-bit mode you get double the number of registers
This is very important. x86 by default only has 8 register, and AMD kept it that way in 32-bit mode for compatability reasons. In x86-64 mode, you get 16 registers instead. So despite the extra memory & cache pressure, it is faster.
If you look around, you'll find benchmarks where LAME is 30% in 64-bit mode because of this!