My single (older) Intel SSD will saturate a SATA channel, and come fairly close to saturating a SATA-2 channel. I know there are SSD's out there that are 2-3 times as fast as mine.
750K isn't considered high speed, and it isn't faster than what most in the US have. Bluray movies typically are more like 8-17GB depending on who made it, and with good compression you can get near bluray quality (1080p) at near instant (2-20 seconds) streaming over the internet. The throughput of my internet connection is many times what would be required to stream unaltered bluray content, and the only delay would be to buffer some in case of a temporary slow down.
For me (and 95% of the US population which live in a metro area), waiting for that 2-20 seconds of buffer is MUCH faster than hopping into my car, driving to the nearest store that carries bluray movies (5-15 minutes each way), stand in line while some tard wants to complain about something to the cashier, and then return home. Running to the store, is many time less "instant". Perhaps you should join the 21st century and get off your crappy DSL line (We get 22Mb/sec DSL out here, 100Mb/sec cable, or 40Mb/sec cellular out here -- in the Chicago suburbs).
Except that it's correct. When the iPhone was first released, the baseband code was misconfigured and it caused all iPhones to "scream" at the cell towers and the cell towers to "scream" back. This caused all other phones that weren't configured as such to start dropping calls. It was pretty well documented and there was quite a few stories on slashdot about it.
Intel is/has acquired Infineon Wireless, which is the manufacturer of ARM based CPUs in the iPhone and Android. Intel doesn't own ARM itself, just the (largest?) manufacturer of ARM based CPUs.
Seems Microsoft actually has people that know their market better than slashdot UID #646467.
Snirk. Yeah, that would totally explain Vista and Kin, Plays For Now, Zune and Bing. They have Vision. They have Skills. They are Learned in the arts of the graphs and the Powerpoints. If they only spend a few more tens of $Billions on awkward ads, they can put it over. You so totally dominated me with your argument I must defer to your superior knowledge.
Ah yes, and I see your vast fortunes outweigh Microsofts, and all the great things you've done make Microsoft seem insignificant. How foolish of me to have compared you to them.
When you're finding in the charts the information you want to find regardless of the later outcome, you might as well be looking at Tarot cards or bird entrails. It's clear you and I are not going to agree on how to project the uptake curve of W7 against XP. I see W7 at 15 to 20% at the end of July, nearly a year after RTM, and having gotten nearly all of that from the much reviled and structurally similar Windows Vista.
I see W7 at 20.68% at the end of August, and Vista at 24.67%, with a combined total of 45.35%. XP having a share of 40.61%, does mean that currently IE 9 supports over 50% of the windows market, with that market increasing every month.
The plateau is plain as day.
What plateau? XP has gone from 51.82% to 40.61% over the past year, noone in their right mind would call that a plateau.
Though the Vista base continues to erode, adoption by XP users is levelling off and it never was much. To expect to get from 20% to 50% in another year would presume an upward curve to the line rather than the levelling one that is shown. I'll go ahead and project that W7 will not achieve 50% share on an average of the top five metrics in CY2011. Hell, I'll go ahead and say it won't get 40% as measured in the single month December 2011 in an average of the top five metrics. I'd go as far as to bet a beer on it. A risky thing, this fortune telling is. I can't delete this slashdot comment, so if I'm wrong you'll be able to throw it in my face forever after, and that means a lot to me.
I didn't say W7 would have a market share of it's own of 50% my dec 2011. I said the combined Vista + Win7 is already larger than the XP market share. I don't care about your prediction, what you think will happen over the course of the next year, and I sure as heck won't remember this thread 15 months from now.
Microsoft has renewed the family pack offer for W7, but you still have to have W7 capable hardware in order to be even slightly interested. Some people may be buying new hardware and unable to avoid W7, but they're handing their old hardware down mostly, so each unit should count only as a half-step rather than a whole one.
First, most hardware running XP is capable of running Win 7, not all, but the vast vast majority, and most will run it very well if you add some memory when you upgrade. Second, that is exactly how the units are counted, so I don't see your point.
And then there's the migration to mobile. We're going to ARM. We're giving up on Intel, the storied company that brought forth the computer revolution, founded by the inventor of the transistor, just to get away from you. That's got to make you proud.
As a side note, Intel owns ARM.
But yeah, internally in Redmond go ahead and spread the word that W7 is being embraced by the masses, that XP is seen by the bloggerati as completely croaked. We need you to be oblivious to Android on the desktop and as a VDI solution so that when it's time to lead you out behind the barn you come along meekly. The more you make your own apps incompatible with your own operating systems the better off we are.
Ah, the year of Android on the desktop. That's the year after linux on the desktop, right?
Stopping speeders has never made me feel safe. I have in the past, and probably always will just consider speeding tickets nothing more than a gas guzzling tax. Now, if the police would pull over reckless drivers, ones driving the left lane, ones wolfpacking, that would be great.
Actually, the rule is that insurance won't cover you if you are committing a crime at the time. Because it is a crime (and not just a traffic violation) to be driving in excess of 25 miles and hour (wasn't 35 miles an hour a couple years ago??), and most highways are 55, is where you get that 80mph from. If they make it legal to drive up to 90 mph, insurance will still cover you under most currently policies. In fact, they will cover you up to 115 mph.
I would say that it runs on the current majority of Windows platforms (outside of China). Most windows systems in North America and Europe are currently running either Windows Vista or Windows 7 with Windows XP market share continuing to drop 1-2% each month. Since IE 9 isn't expected to be released until sometime in 2011, XP market share will likely drop another 6-10% before then. Seems Microsoft actually has people that know their market better than slashdot UID #646467. But I understand, your post wasn't about what the market wants, just that you can't afford $50 every 8 years to upgrade your OS. Sorry, but XP isn't supported any more, please stop trying to hold back progress and upgrade.
Most people aren't geeks that know how to change their User Agent String (Other than perhaps Safari which has it right in the menu). While technically true, your statement is so highly unlikely that it isn't not even worth pursuing.
If you can't do anything reliably on a windows XP machine, I suspect it isn't really the OS's fault. It's true that there are a lot of really bad IT techs out there, but that is more than likely because the companies you are freelancing to have chosen to only pay a pittance, and anyone worth anything isn't working there.
I too freelance for a living, and when I walk in, there is typically a bunch of people that don't have a clue, but I've seen that on both the mac and windows side. They call me in, because they simply don't have the expertise to do what they want, so every job I take I'm doing things no one in the company can do themselves, or they probably would.
I would start with teaching them bits, bytes, words, longs. Perhaps spend a chapter on the actual hardware itself. This is a CPU, and it's responsible for.. This is RAM. Video card, etc etc. Then teach them how to do simple math, add, subtract, and how to do multi-byte/word math with carry. Then move into high level data concepts, queues, stacks, trees, linked lists, double linked lists. Teach them to work with stings from a high level, so they understand why string concatenating in a loop is bad. Then start with a few procedural routines, and then finally move into simple OOP concepts, perhaps.
Microsoft often donated the software FREE to academic facilities, and when it wasn't totally free, they got huge discounts often paying 1/6th (or less) of the normal price. Somehow I fail to see how this is "overcharging" unless you take the view that all software should be completely free. I guess $10 for an office sweet is "overcharging" if you see things that way.
I'm starting a revolution, I call it "lawn care should be free", or "open source lawncare". Perhaps you wouldn't mind coming over to my house and cutting my lawn for free. You obviously don't have a wife/girlfriend let alone a family to feed. Once you are done cutting my lawn and trimming my bushes, please GET OFF MY LAWN.
ASP wasn't even released until 2002. That's even two years after PHP 4.
Actually ASP 1.0's first public (full) release was in 1996, and was available in various beta forms as far back as 1994 (May be earlier, however, that is as far back as I personally know). PHP first arrived in 1996, as had a very similiar syntax to the ASP betas that were floating around at the time.
A complete rewrite of ASP started in 1997, had the first betas in 2000, and first release in 2002 which is now known as ASP.NET.
I believe you are thinking of compiled vs interpreted languages. The grandparent is correct. Dynamic languages refer to dynamically typed languages, not an interpreted one as you suggest.
Rockoon, I said i930s were easy to overclock to 4.2GHz, yes. I also said MINE is overclocked to 4.5GHz, also on air. Well, was on air, I moved to watercooling after a bit to reduce noise and keep the system running even cooler.
All performance benchmarks on stock CPU's show that in most cases an i920/i930 out performs the 1090T, with a few exceptions, mainly h.264 encoding, which I personally never do. And that is with the i920 at a stock 2.66GHz (i930 @2.8), and a stock 1090T @3.2/3.6GHz.
I also linked to you performance benchmarks of overclocked 930's and 1090T's. So I'm not pulling shit out of the air like you. I've also done my own testing.
Meanwhile you moved the goalpost from 4.2ghz to 4.5ghz because you previously didnt know that 1090T's are easily overclockable to 4ghz and beyond, which you claimed wasn't true before. You made it up.
No, I never said that it was impossible to overclock 1090T's to 4GHz and beyond. I did however say that the 1090T's weren't even close. I wasn't trying to write a complete article dissecting each system, so I did leave out many details. Since you feel like I "made them up", I'll go into more detail so even you can understand.
(I am going to use the i930 as an example here, but you can do the same with the i920 but since the i920 runs stock at 2.66 vs i930's 2.8 it will be even worse). If a i930 typically beats a 1090T at stock speeds, and I can overclock the i930 so that it runs at 161% (4500/2800 = 1.61) of it's normal speed, then given everything else being equal, you would need a 1090T running at more than 161% of it's normal clock speed to "even be close" (Which is what I said). Now with the 1090T running at 3.6GHz (with turbo on), you'd have to have a 1090T that is easily overclockable on air to well over 3.6*1.61=5.8GHz, which the 1090T "doesn't even come close", even assuming you get an unusual 1090T that can do 4.5, where 4.0-4.2 is more likely. I can safely say 5.8GHz isn't "easy", and likely impossible on air for any normal definition of air (65-75 degrees) for a 1090T.
Now with that said, let's delve into the details even further. Remember when I said "given everything else being equal"? Well, they aren't. The 1090T has abysmal memory bandwidth, especially for a 6 core CPU, approximately 13.6GB/s (actual measured), while the i930 runs around 28GB/s (actual measured). At these high speeds, the 1090T will quickly become memory bandwidth starved for any load that can't fit within its CPU cache. Taking it one step further, the i930 is even more efficient with it's branch prediction (and therefore needs to flush it's L1 cache less often) which makes the i930 use it's memory bandwidth even more efficiently so it won't be nearly as constrained by memory speed even further widening the performance gap when doing mediocre overclocks.
I don't need you to "clue me in on why machines are so overclockable today". I know enough about electronics and processor designs that I can make my own conclusions, thank you. I'll suffice to say you are mostly right on that aspect however, there actually is more to it than that. Namely reliability, longevity, and overvoltage wearing.
As for the e-peen, I don't find it necessary to brag about what other people have done, nor do I then try and associate their accomplishments with the size of my virtual ego.
This is my last response in this thread. I think I've cleared it up enough that any further discussion is pointless.
I'm sorry rockoon, but a 1090T overclocked to 4GHz on air cooling won't out perform my i930 running at 4.5GHz on air cooling.
I spoke because I had first hand experience with both machines. While you are obviously an AMD zealot, I actually tested both myself and found that not only did the i930 perform better than the 1090T in most of my personal applications at stock speeds, but the i930 overclocked better as well giving it an even further advantage. If that wasn't enough, the i930, according to anandtech also drain less power at both idle and at full load than a comparable 1090T system.
Rockoon, how did your testing go between both systems, because I'm sure everyone would really like to hear it. Here's another link for you to follow: http://www.cpubenchmark.net/overclocked_cpus.html While I wouldn't consider that the end-all-be-all for performance comparison, it is better than anything you've posted other than your foul mouthed zealot response.
I would take that bet having owned both systems. The i930, which is the likely the best sub-$300 CPU from intel, easily overclocks to 4.2GHz, while the AMD doesn't even come close. Any game using a reasonable graphics card (295, 470, 480) on most games will favor the i7 greatly over the AMD solution.
I don't know if they still do, but Fry's had a sale with a MSI motherboard, and i930. With that combination, you could get a stable 4.2GHz overclock, semi-stable 4.5GHz overlock, for $289.
The problem described by blizzard is the cut scenes, and menus are drawing hundreds of frames per second, so limiting to your LCD's framerate, even the 120 FPS ones would solve this particular problem.
On another note, limiting to VSYNC, does not make a 58FPS capable system drop to 30FPS. It may drop it some, but typically it is just a frame or two, unless you hit the absolute worst case scenario, which would be highly uncommon in the real world.
Slashdot Mirror
My single (older) Intel SSD will saturate a SATA channel, and come fairly close to saturating a SATA-2 channel. I know there are SSD's out there that are 2-3 times as fast as mine.
750K isn't considered high speed, and it isn't faster than what most in the US have. Bluray movies typically are more like 8-17GB depending on who made it, and with good compression you can get near bluray quality (1080p) at near instant (2-20 seconds) streaming over the internet. The throughput of my internet connection is many times what would be required to stream unaltered bluray content, and the only delay would be to buffer some in case of a temporary slow down.
For me (and 95% of the US population which live in a metro area), waiting for that 2-20 seconds of buffer is MUCH faster than hopping into my car, driving to the nearest store that carries bluray movies (5-15 minutes each way), stand in line while some tard wants to complain about something to the cashier, and then return home. Running to the store, is many time less "instant". Perhaps you should join the 21st century and get off your crappy DSL line (We get 22Mb/sec DSL out here, 100Mb/sec cable, or 40Mb/sec cellular out here -- in the Chicago suburbs).
There isn't any browser that is 100% compliant and implements all possible elements, properties, and events of HTML 5.
Except that it's correct. When the iPhone was first released, the baseband code was misconfigured and it caused all iPhones to "scream" at the cell towers and the cell towers to "scream" back. This caused all other phones that weren't configured as such to start dropping calls. It was pretty well documented and there was quite a few stories on slashdot about it.
Sorry, I guess I should make the distinction.
Intel is/has acquired Infineon Wireless, which is the manufacturer of ARM based CPUs in the iPhone and Android. Intel doesn't own ARM itself, just the (largest?) manufacturer of ARM based CPUs.
Seems Microsoft actually has people that know their market better than slashdot UID #646467.
Snirk. Yeah, that would totally explain Vista and Kin, Plays For Now, Zune and Bing. They have Vision. They have Skills. They are Learned in the arts of the graphs and the Powerpoints. If they only spend a few more tens of $Billions on awkward ads, they can put it over. You so totally dominated me with your argument I must defer to your superior knowledge.
Ah yes, and I see your vast fortunes outweigh Microsofts, and all the great things you've done make Microsoft seem insignificant. How foolish of me to have compared you to them.
When you're finding in the charts the information you want to find regardless of the later outcome, you might as well be looking at Tarot cards or bird entrails. It's clear you and I are not going to agree on how to project the uptake curve of W7 against XP. I see W7 at 15 to 20% at the end of July, nearly a year after RTM, and having gotten nearly all of that from the much reviled and structurally similar Windows Vista.
I see W7 at 20.68% at the end of August, and Vista at 24.67%, with a combined total of 45.35%. XP having a share of 40.61%, does mean that currently IE 9 supports over 50% of the windows market, with that market increasing every month.
The plateau is plain as day.
What plateau? XP has gone from 51.82% to 40.61% over the past year, noone in their right mind would call that a plateau.
Though the Vista base continues to erode, adoption by XP users is levelling off and it never was much. To expect to get from 20% to 50% in another year would presume an upward curve to the line rather than the levelling one that is shown. I'll go ahead and project that W7 will not achieve 50% share on an average of the top five metrics in CY2011. Hell, I'll go ahead and say it won't get 40% as measured in the single month December 2011 in an average of the top five metrics. I'd go as far as to bet a beer on it. A risky thing, this fortune telling is. I can't delete this slashdot comment, so if I'm wrong you'll be able to throw it in my face forever after, and that means a lot to me.
I didn't say W7 would have a market share of it's own of 50% my dec 2011. I said the combined Vista + Win7 is already larger than the XP market share. I don't care about your prediction, what you think will happen over the course of the next year, and I sure as heck won't remember this thread 15 months from now.
Microsoft has renewed the family pack offer for W7, but you still have to have W7 capable hardware in order to be even slightly interested. Some people may be buying new hardware and unable to avoid W7, but they're handing their old hardware down mostly, so each unit should count only as a half-step rather than a whole one.
First, most hardware running XP is capable of running Win 7, not all, but the vast vast majority, and most will run it very well if you add some memory when you upgrade. Second, that is exactly how the units are counted, so I don't see your point.
And then there's the migration to mobile. We're going to ARM. We're giving up on Intel, the storied company that brought forth the computer revolution, founded by the inventor of the transistor, just to get away from you. That's got to make you proud.
As a side note, Intel owns ARM.
But yeah, internally in Redmond go ahead and spread the word that W7 is being embraced by the masses, that XP is seen by the bloggerati as completely croaked. We need you to be oblivious to Android on the desktop and as a VDI solution so that when it's time to lead you out behind the barn you come along meekly. The more you make your own apps incompatible with your own operating systems the better off we are.
Ah, the year of Android on the desktop. That's the year after linux on the desktop, right?
Stopping speeders has never made me feel safe. I have in the past, and probably always will just consider speeding tickets nothing more than a gas guzzling tax. Now, if the police would pull over reckless drivers, ones driving the left lane, ones wolfpacking, that would be great.
There are many places in the midwest where 150mph would be perfectly reasonable with light traffic.
Would make the drivers test entertaining. Can you retake the test after you pass for a small fee?
Actually, the rule is that insurance won't cover you if you are committing a crime at the time. Because it is a crime (and not just a traffic violation) to be driving in excess of 25 miles and hour (wasn't 35 miles an hour a couple years ago??), and most highways are 55, is where you get that 80mph from. If they make it legal to drive up to 90 mph, insurance will still cover you under most currently policies. In fact, they will cover you up to 115 mph.
I would say that it runs on the current majority of Windows platforms (outside of China). Most windows systems in North America and Europe are currently running either Windows Vista or Windows 7 with Windows XP market share continuing to drop 1-2% each month. Since IE 9 isn't expected to be released until sometime in 2011, XP market share will likely drop another 6-10% before then. Seems Microsoft actually has people that know their market better than slashdot UID #646467. But I understand, your post wasn't about what the market wants, just that you can't afford $50 every 8 years to upgrade your OS. Sorry, but XP isn't supported any more, please stop trying to hold back progress and upgrade.
Market share taken from: http://gs.statcounter.com/#os-na-monthly-200908-201008 and http://gs.statcounter.com/#os-eu-monthly-200908-201008
Most people aren't geeks that know how to change their User Agent String (Other than perhaps Safari which has it right in the menu). While technically true, your statement is so highly unlikely that it isn't not even worth pursuing.
I think you mean that it'll run on every version of windows released in the past 8 years.
If you can't do anything reliably on a windows XP machine, I suspect it isn't really the OS's fault. It's true that there are a lot of really bad IT techs out there, but that is more than likely because the companies you are freelancing to have chosen to only pay a pittance, and anyone worth anything isn't working there.
I too freelance for a living, and when I walk in, there is typically a bunch of people that don't have a clue, but I've seen that on both the mac and windows side. They call me in, because they simply don't have the expertise to do what they want, so every job I take I'm doing things no one in the company can do themselves, or they probably would.
I would start with teaching them bits, bytes, words, longs. Perhaps spend a chapter on the actual hardware itself. This is a CPU, and it's responsible for.. This is RAM. Video card, etc etc. Then teach them how to do simple math, add, subtract, and how to do multi-byte/word math with carry. Then move into high level data concepts, queues, stacks, trees, linked lists, double linked lists. Teach them to work with stings from a high level, so they understand why string concatenating in a loop is bad. Then start with a few procedural routines, and then finally move into simple OOP concepts, perhaps.
Microsoft often donated the software FREE to academic facilities, and when it wasn't totally free, they got huge discounts often paying 1/6th (or less) of the normal price. Somehow I fail to see how this is "overcharging" unless you take the view that all software should be completely free. I guess $10 for an office sweet is "overcharging" if you see things that way.
I'm starting a revolution, I call it "lawn care should be free", or "open source lawncare". Perhaps you wouldn't mind coming over to my house and cutting my lawn for free. You obviously don't have a wife/girlfriend let alone a family to feed. Once you are done cutting my lawn and trimming my bushes, please GET OFF MY LAWN.
Rich Humour indeed from a nation that whants the economic advantages that go with having an empire without the responsiblities that also tag along.
You were speaking of the EU here, right?
ASP wasn't even released until 2002. That's even two years after PHP 4.
Actually ASP 1.0's first public (full) release was in 1996, and was available in various beta forms as far back as 1994 (May be earlier, however, that is as far back as I personally know). PHP first arrived in 1996, as had a very similiar syntax to the ASP betas that were floating around at the time.
A complete rewrite of ASP started in 1997, had the first betas in 2000, and first release in 2002 which is now known as ASP.NET.
I believe you are thinking of compiled vs interpreted languages. The grandparent is correct. Dynamic languages refer to dynamically typed languages, not an interpreted one as you suggest.
you simply cannot build a 48-core server built on Intel
Thanks for the laugh.
Rockoon, I said i930s were easy to overclock to 4.2GHz, yes. I also said MINE is overclocked to 4.5GHz, also on air. Well, was on air, I moved to watercooling after a bit to reduce noise and keep the system running even cooler.
All performance benchmarks on stock CPU's show that in most cases an i920/i930 out performs the 1090T, with a few exceptions, mainly h.264 encoding, which I personally never do. And that is with the i920 at a stock 2.66GHz (i930 @2.8), and a stock 1090T @3.2/3.6GHz.
I also linked to you performance benchmarks of overclocked 930's and 1090T's. So I'm not pulling shit out of the air like you. I've also done my own testing.
Meanwhile you moved the goalpost from 4.2ghz to 4.5ghz because you previously didnt know that 1090T's are easily overclockable to 4ghz and beyond, which you claimed wasn't true before. You made it up.
No, I never said that it was impossible to overclock 1090T's to 4GHz and beyond. I did however say that the 1090T's weren't even close. I wasn't trying to write a complete article dissecting each system, so I did leave out many details. Since you feel like I "made them up", I'll go into more detail so even you can understand.
(I am going to use the i930 as an example here, but you can do the same with the i920 but since the i920 runs stock at 2.66 vs i930's 2.8 it will be even worse).
If a i930 typically beats a 1090T at stock speeds, and I can overclock the i930 so that it runs at 161% (4500/2800 = 1.61) of it's normal speed, then given everything else being equal, you would need a 1090T running at more than 161% of it's normal clock speed to "even be close" (Which is what I said). Now with the 1090T running at 3.6GHz (with turbo on), you'd have to have a 1090T that is easily overclockable on air to well over 3.6*1.61=5.8GHz, which the 1090T "doesn't even come close", even assuming you get an unusual 1090T that can do 4.5, where 4.0-4.2 is more likely. I can safely say 5.8GHz isn't "easy", and likely impossible on air for any normal definition of air (65-75 degrees) for a 1090T.
Now with that said, let's delve into the details even further. Remember when I said "given everything else being equal"? Well, they aren't. The 1090T has abysmal memory bandwidth, especially for a 6 core CPU, approximately 13.6GB/s (actual measured), while the i930 runs around 28GB/s (actual measured). At these high speeds, the 1090T will quickly become memory bandwidth starved for any load that can't fit within its CPU cache. Taking it one step further, the i930 is even more efficient with it's branch prediction (and therefore needs to flush it's L1 cache less often) which makes the i930 use it's memory bandwidth even more efficiently so it won't be nearly as constrained by memory speed even further widening the performance gap when doing mediocre overclocks.
I don't need you to "clue me in on why machines are so overclockable today". I know enough about electronics and processor designs that I can make my own conclusions, thank you. I'll suffice to say you are mostly right on that aspect however, there actually is more to it than that. Namely reliability, longevity, and overvoltage wearing.
As for the e-peen, I don't find it necessary to brag about what other people have done, nor do I then try and associate their accomplishments with the size of my virtual ego.
This is my last response in this thread. I think I've cleared it up enough that any further discussion is pointless.
I'm sorry rockoon, but a 1090T overclocked to 4GHz on air cooling won't out perform my i930 running at 4.5GHz on air cooling.
I spoke because I had first hand experience with both machines. While you are obviously an AMD zealot, I actually tested both myself and found that not only did the i930 perform better than the 1090T in most of my personal applications at stock speeds, but the i930 overclocked better as well giving it an even further advantage. If that wasn't enough, the i930, according to anandtech also drain less power at both idle and at full load than a comparable 1090T system.
Rockoon, how did your testing go between both systems, because I'm sure everyone would really like to hear it. Here's another link for you to follow: http://www.cpubenchmark.net/overclocked_cpus.html While I wouldn't consider that the end-all-be-all for performance comparison, it is better than anything you've posted other than your foul mouthed zealot response.
I would take that bet having owned both systems. The i930, which is the likely the best sub-$300 CPU from intel, easily overclocks to 4.2GHz, while the AMD doesn't even come close. Any game using a reasonable graphics card (295, 470, 480) on most games will favor the i7 greatly over the AMD solution.
I don't know if they still do, but Fry's had a sale with a MSI motherboard, and i930. With that combination, you could get a stable 4.2GHz overclock, semi-stable 4.5GHz overlock, for $289.
The problem described by blizzard is the cut scenes, and menus are drawing hundreds of frames per second, so limiting to your LCD's framerate, even the 120 FPS ones would solve this particular problem.
On another note, limiting to VSYNC, does not make a 58FPS capable system drop to 30FPS. It may drop it some, but typically it is just a frame or two, unless you hit the absolute worst case scenario, which would be highly uncommon in the real world.