TFA spends a little time describing that Intel doesn't have enough package area to use this iteration of the Core 2 Duo to make a 4 die, 8 core part. So, my question is: Ignoring likely heat and bandwith issues, is there a SMP architectural reason they can't put 3 dies in one package?
Does anyone know why, with all the billions Verizon is spending, apartment buildings are "too difficult" for FIOS deployment at this time? I don't know that I want to switch away from my trusty cable modem, but I'd like the competition to spur higher upstream speeds from my cable provider.
If Intel could apply this technique to existing P4 chips that burn ~150 watts what would the savings be? 10,000 - 100,000x less leakage current is how much of the equation?
Not All Your Base Are Belong To Us Anymore
on
Google Base Launches
·
· Score: -1, Redundant
Given your partial solar and swamp cooler setup, and your commendable always-turn-off-everything habits, don't you think it's odd that you're using more than the stated average consumption? It's still likely that you're confusing (or the Pop Sci article is) KWH used per month versus KWH used per day.
Didn't you write that your bill reaches $110 some months. If we assume you spend something like $0.10 per KWH, then you're consuming 1100 KWH. That averages to roughly 37 KWH per day. Your numbers only make sense if you are actually stating average daily consumption for a month, not the monthly total use.
But, we both digress -- yes, it would be cool to capture lightning. Might even be able to light a big city like New York for a while with it.
Ok. My most recent bill tells me I used over 1000 KWH over a 29 day period. Averaging about 34KWH/day. I guess need to turn off a few computers, my fridge, A/C, and all but one 75W bulb. I realize my usage pattern may be a bit (a whole lot) above average, but are you sure the article you're quoting from is referring to people who actually are alive and using electricity to power anything?
Or, asked another way, did I really use 60x the electricity you did last month?
I don't get any of your calculations. Shouldn't your units be in KWh? And, having asked that, wouldn't a single 75W light bulb left on all the time consume 54KWh/month? I think an average household consumes a LOT more than 20KWh/month. Also, your household estimate may be a bit high -- there might still be 8M people in NYC, but I don't think they each live alone with only a single 75W bulb to keep them lit/warm/company.
The screenshots make it look like Intel isn't including HT with this next gen core. Is that because it's likely the pipeline is shorter? I thought it would be uber-cool to have a dual-core CPU with HT for some awesome synthetic 4-core action. But, I guess the real question is: Should I care about HT anymore?
I have a similar question: why hasn't anyone come out with a gas-turbine hybrid? Weren't there some jet cars in the 50's that were ultimately scrapped because, although they were fast and fuel efficient, the had crappy low-end torque and took a while to spool up? Aren't gas-turbines significantly more efficient than IC engines? Coupling that with a low-RPM high-torque electric sounds ideal.
Also on the plus side, those engines could burn anything -- I remember hearing the engineers tried scotch and perfume and they both worked fine.
These things seem self-contained (each has it's own engine/generator). Instead of thinking of 4,500 contiguous (and square) acres, how about putting these buggers along highways? Plenty of space and no delicate environment to crush. It would be easy to eliminate the danger of motorist blinding by reflected light by simply having the mirrors point to a neutral spot during "low sun" hours.
Or did I get this totally wrong, and there needs to be a centralized sterling engine as part of the facility?
B) OSX would be easier to support (sorry, 'sa truth)
In the long run, yes. But, in the short run, wouldn't all of Dell's OSX customers be switchers? There would be plenty of nuisance tech calls until the Dell user base got a little more Mac savvy.
Look, I got an iBook partly for the OSX eye candy. I assume the Mac mini has a similar GPU -- they're both ATI 9200, although I have no idea if the mobility moniker on mine makes it inferior.
Does this mean Apple might make the Tiger-uber-candy available for all of us GPU-challenged mac owners?
Slashdot Mirror
"The only way..." "...the only alternative." It's absolute language like this that makes it difficult...
And, as we all know, only the Sith deal in absolutes.
TFA spends a little time describing that Intel doesn't have enough package area to use this iteration of the Core 2 Duo to make a 4 die, 8 core part. So, my question is: Ignoring likely heat and bandwith issues, is there a SMP architectural reason they can't put 3 dies in one package?
Does anyone know why, with all the billions Verizon is spending, apartment buildings are "too difficult" for FIOS deployment at this time? I don't know that I want to switch away from my trusty cable modem, but I'd like the competition to spur higher upstream speeds from my cable provider.
They cause brain cancer twice as fast! Please mod +3:35AM Funny
If Intel could apply this technique to existing P4 chips that burn ~150 watts what would the savings be? 10,000 - 100,000x less leakage current is how much of the equation?
It's now: All our base are belong to Google.
Given your partial solar and swamp cooler setup, and your commendable always-turn-off-everything habits, don't you think it's odd that you're using more than the stated average consumption? It's still likely that you're confusing (or the Pop Sci article is) KWH used per month versus KWH used per day.
Didn't you write that your bill reaches $110 some months. If we assume you spend something like $0.10 per KWH, then you're consuming 1100 KWH. That averages to roughly 37 KWH per day. Your numbers only make sense if you are actually stating average daily consumption for a month, not the monthly total use.
But, we both digress -- yes, it would be cool to capture lightning. Might even be able to light a big city like New York for a while with it.
Ahh. That's what I figured. Original post must have confused average daily use and monthly use.
Ok. My most recent bill tells me I used over 1000 KWH over a 29 day period. Averaging about 34KWH/day. I guess need to turn off a few computers, my fridge, A/C, and all but one 75W bulb. I realize my usage pattern may be a bit (a whole lot) above average, but are you sure the article you're quoting from is referring to people who actually are alive and using electricity to power anything? Or, asked another way, did I really use 60x the electricity you did last month?
I don't get any of your calculations. Shouldn't your units be in KWh? And, having asked that, wouldn't a single 75W light bulb left on all the time consume 54KWh/month? I think an average household consumes a LOT more than 20KWh/month. Also, your household estimate may be a bit high -- there might still be 8M people in NYC, but I don't think they each live alone with only a single 75W bulb to keep them lit/warm/company.
I think even Joe Sliderule will have issues backing up that monster.
How about love? How about love? How about love? Measure in love. Seasons of love.... Wait, shouldn't we be quoting from SpamAlot?
The screenshots make it look like Intel isn't including HT with this next gen core. Is that because it's likely the pipeline is shorter? I thought it would be uber-cool to have a dual-core CPU with HT for some awesome synthetic 4-core action. But, I guess the real question is: Should I care about HT anymore?
or that remote-controlled laser will fry your ass... and they won't use the cooling spray.
Come on, doesn't everyone know they found all the golden tickets already?
I have a similar question: why hasn't anyone come out with a gas-turbine hybrid? Weren't there some jet cars in the 50's that were ultimately scrapped because, although they were fast and fuel efficient, the had crappy low-end torque and took a while to spool up? Aren't gas-turbines significantly more efficient than IC engines? Coupling that with a low-RPM high-torque electric sounds ideal. Also on the plus side, those engines could burn anything -- I remember hearing the engineers tried scotch and perfume and they both worked fine.
These things seem self-contained (each has it's own engine/generator). Instead of thinking of 4,500 contiguous (and square) acres, how about putting these buggers along highways? Plenty of space and no delicate environment to crush. It would be easy to eliminate the danger of motorist blinding by reflected light by simply having the mirrors point to a neutral spot during "low sun" hours. Or did I get this totally wrong, and there needs to be a centralized sterling engine as part of the facility?
Or, maybe it's a troll. Either way it's a stupid take on an old and reasonable practice.
B) OSX would be easier to support (sorry, 'sa truth) In the long run, yes. But, in the short run, wouldn't all of Dell's OSX customers be switchers? There would be plenty of nuisance tech calls until the Dell user base got a little more Mac savvy.
What about a hybrid car with a gas turbine engine? Aren't they even more efficient than Diesels? With a complimentary torque curve to boot!
Look, I got an iBook partly for the OSX eye candy. I assume the Mac mini has a similar GPU -- they're both ATI 9200, although I have no idea if the mobility moniker on mine makes it inferior. Does this mean Apple might make the Tiger-uber-candy available for all of us GPU-challenged mac owners?
How about a mac mini? It's pretty close on points 1, 4, and 7.