If you were to sum up the Bulldozer concept with just one word, it’d have to be scalability. AMD put the bulk of its effort into designing a building block that’s small enough to be duplicated over and over in silicon, and yet capable enough to handle both integer- and floating-point-based workloads as deftly as possible. Indeed, the company confirms this was a from-scratch project started several years ago after considering some of the target markets its next-gen architecture would end up addressing: everything from mainstream clients to the top of the server range.
this.
now amd can just go adding cores/modules, all the way up to 30 and beyond. this would be unbeatable in multi threated applications.
- First, there is the huge delay intel caused by engaging in fraud by paying pc makers to not use amd chips, right at the time amd was at an advantage.
- Then there is the fact that these synthetic benchmarks use intel's proprietary libraries, which were proven to work ineffectively when 'non genuine intel' architecture was detected.
- Then there is the fact that this is a new platform, and its just out, and the main deal with this is being easily increasable in cores. so amd will just add more cores without any research being needed. expect 32 core cpus in a year or so. 16 cores already out.
- As you can understand these cpus are geared more for server environment, and will take that environment over.
- Amd is moving to trinity in one year or so. Trinity is the APU format that all amd cpus will take from then on. Llano apus have been quite successful in gaming fro example 50-80 fps in starcraft 2 (crossfired and not) -> you dont need to buy an external card anymore, and if you do you can crossfire it with the cpu contained one. http://www.anandtech.com/show/4476/amd-a83850-review/6http://techreport.com/articles.x/21730/8 intel is worlds behind in this one.
and then there is the ultimate question of what the fuck i am going to do if i grab a powerful processor. really. i bought an overclockable board, and an unlocked cpu. and when i played games, i found out that it was mostly the video card i added that did most of the thing. the cpu i had was way, way over any potential requirements and needs of these games. i didnt need to buy a powerful one at all.
i went about hardware/software forums asking what i could do with a powerful computer. answers have been 'video encoding', 'benchmark', 'seti'. as it seems, any daily usage for cpus are WAY behind the power of modern cpus. to utilize your cpu power at all, you need to do unorthodox, unnecessary shit, or be in a profession that works on these.
so i think all this performance talk is bullshit. there is no way in hell you will use that performance, even in hardcore gaming with an eyefinity 3 monitor setup in 5000x resolution, with 2x antialiasing and full detial. (and i just have 2x 5670 cards).
future is in the heterogeneous chips i think. llano already has been a success, and its possible to save 30% on the cost of cpu + mobo + graphics card if you go the llano way over anything intel, and gaming performance is incomparable. when trinity comes, i think there will be a big change in computing. especially when amd puts out a computing platform like cuda.
No, no. I am better off than a serf in nearly every way. I just spent the last hour applying gold-leaf to my living room lamp, as a personal craft. What serf could do that? I am easily in the top 1% [globalrichlist.com]. Wealth inequality is at best only a single component of social justice.
So, what you are saying is, you actually WOULD prefer to be a serf?
the value and accessibility of gold leaf you applied to your ramp in your, fool, cannot be compared to the value and accessibility of gold leaf back in middle ages.
you dont even know the relative value of economic items change according to which period you are examining, due to the size of the economy at that point in time, and the level of technology available.
just because gold is more accessible and cheaper COMPARED TO the size of economy and technology level than it was in middle ages, does NOT mean that you are taking more of the share of TOTAL ECONOMY and amenities you have in your OWN TIME, than a serf.
if you looked at it, a king in middle ages had to crap outside.
content is never easily pageable on the web. there is a lot of different kinds of stuff to present in a web page. contrary to what people conclude from big corp websites like google, apple etc, most of the web still has to stuff content onto websites. example below.
For, you are saying that you are ok now despite you are WORSE OFF than a serf in all kinds of things. just because you are titled 'free'.
you are not. your wealth is worse off than a serf, and now EVERYTHING in your society is tied to how much wealth you can spend. if you dont have the money to do something YOU DONT HAVE THAT FREEDOM. even if they allow you.
moron. people like you, who cant see past the illusion through the practicality of things make world worse off.
In capitalism you sell your mother if there is a good bidder. Or if you cant sell a tree for example, you cut it down so noone will use it for free and reduce the price of other trees you are wanting to sell. so asking a corporation to justify their shit is pointless. they will just lie.
80% of american news are owned by subsidiaries of 2 corporations in the chain. they can make anything that you dont want to know, remain unseen. like ron paul.
All of the above assumes the ones to be replaced, be politician or corporation, are inactive and dumb to act. and wont leverage their power for control.
And it seems to be shit -> for, in the end what he seems to be demonizing is copyleft license. So then entire thing becomes a veiled statement for proprietarization of previously open licenses.
Every other day we are seeing another example of how the ones who were supposed to exercise power on behalf of the people have become enemies of the people.
Some people utter empty stuff like "vote em' out" and whatnot - but, if it has been possible, we wouldnt have been in this situation have we ? whomever you vote, result is the same. the machine has been usurped by those who serve the few. laws work differently for the rich and the poor.
can you say with a rational mind that, things like occupy movement are unnecessary in such a world ?
You're not making sense. Those 100k people are paid for their work.
slaves were paid for their work with food and shelter too. that did not make the payment just and proper, and the practice ethical.
those 100 k people are paid only 15% at most, out of the 100% they produce. 85% goes to 7% of society.
its basically making OTHER people work, and taking their stuff. there is no difference in between feudalism, or slavery and this - only, the storefront is different.
But by all means, maybe the 100k people working at some megacorp can all quit and go form their own corporation and share all the profits, right?
yes, and the 5% which control the economy can rightout buy or push them out of the market, making them employees again.
Its for us. its for us, 'the people' to wake ourselves up from the 'hard work' lie that has been used to fool us. the ones hard working are us. the ones getting rich, are them.
and 'hard work' is a lie that the bloodsuckers use to fool the morons.
show me ONE person who accrued a megacorporation by hard work of himself/herself - NOT by getting the proceeds from 100,000 people s/he employs. BUT, if you mean 'making other people work and sucking off 70% of what they produce' as hard work, yeah - you can be a hardworker in that. and THAT's the problem.
the percentage of who are considered 'nobles' and 'churchmen' goes way higher than the percentage we consider as elites today. nobles were in a spectrum ranging from a small knight (which were a plenty) to dukes. if you consider that, anyone who was not a serf could own and rent out land just like nobles in old england, you could easily say that the 'noble' class ranged from a normal sergeant-at-arms (they were allocated land) or any random peasant to duke. churchmen was much more numerous, ranging from your average monk to bishop. not to mention church had a task of feeding people with its proceeds, further correcting the income distribution.
the only difference in between being serf or being a peasant was, the latters' well being and life was not guaranteed. being a serf guaranteed livelihood, and especially in early middle ages (from 600 to 1200), many people wanted to become serfs. only after more freedom was garnered in cities, people wanted to run away to cities.
even worse, the means for wealth generation, the tools are totally on the off side on the hands of minority, so this means the income/wealth disparage will only grow bigger.
85% of people dont have enough from economy, despite they are being worked to generate that economy. as a result, they are not able to spend. economy suffers. education dives down. culture is neglected. people dont care for anything outside survival.
the top 0.1% of society, which owns and controls entire scheme on the other hand, just hoards. more and more. naturally, as a single person cannot want and spend for an endless amount of things, after a certain point spending on the side of the rich declines, and it turns to extreme luxury and afterwards just hoarding. insurmountable wealth stays in assets and keeps getting bigger through investment tools that do not produce anything solid in stock and fund trading schemes.
situation now is worse than the situation in middle ages. no duke could dream of having 72% of wealth in the nation. all serfs would laugh at modern man taking only 15% of available amenities in the society. and serfs had their livelihood guaranteed by law.
we progressed technologically. we regressed socially.
Google+..... and i still understand shit. i am still using facebook but its privacy, setting options are nowhere near and understandable as google. and im a programmer that programs interfaces myself. go figure what the mom in idaho can do with those privacy options..
Slashdot Mirror
http://hardware.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2471688&cid=37690040
If you were to sum up the Bulldozer concept with just one word, it’d have to be scalability. AMD put the bulk of its effort into designing a building block that’s small enough to be duplicated over and over in silicon, and yet capable enough to handle both integer- and floating-point-based workloads as deftly as possible. Indeed, the company confirms this was a from-scratch project started several years ago after considering some of the target markets its next-gen architecture would end up addressing: everything from mainstream clients to the top of the server range.
this.
now amd can just go adding cores/modules, all the way up to 30 and beyond. this would be unbeatable in multi threated applications.
http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/AMD/A8-3850_Fusion_GPU_Performance/5.html
http://techreport.com/articles.x/21730/8
http://www.anandtech.com/show/4476/amd-a83850-review/6
ntel intends doing that, admittedly, and even they want to charge for overclocking.
- First, there is the huge delay intel caused by engaging in fraud by paying pc makers to not use amd chips, right at the time amd was at an advantage.
- Then there is the fact that these synthetic benchmarks use intel's proprietary libraries, which were proven to work ineffectively when 'non genuine intel' architecture was detected.
- Then there is the fact that this is a new platform, and its just out, and the main deal with this is being easily increasable in cores. so amd will just add more cores without any research being needed. expect 32 core cpus in a year or so. 16 cores already out.
- As you can understand these cpus are geared more for server environment, and will take that environment over.
- Amd is moving to trinity in one year or so. Trinity is the APU format that all amd cpus will take from then on. Llano apus have been quite successful in gaming fro example 50-80 fps in starcraft 2 (crossfired and not) -> you dont need to buy an external card anymore, and if you do you can crossfire it with the cpu contained one. http://www.anandtech.com/show/4476/amd-a83850-review/6 http://techreport.com/articles.x/21730/8 intel is worlds behind in this one.
and then there is the ultimate question of what the fuck i am going to do if i grab a powerful processor. really. i bought an overclockable board, and an unlocked cpu. and when i played games, i found out that it was mostly the video card i added that did most of the thing. the cpu i had was way, way over any potential requirements and needs of these games. i didnt need to buy a powerful one at all.
i went about hardware/software forums asking what i could do with a powerful computer. answers have been 'video encoding', 'benchmark', 'seti'. as it seems, any daily usage for cpus are WAY behind the power of modern cpus. to utilize your cpu power at all, you need to do unorthodox, unnecessary shit, or be in a profession that works on these.
so i think all this performance talk is bullshit. there is no way in hell you will use that performance, even in hardcore gaming with an eyefinity 3 monitor setup in 5000x resolution, with 2x antialiasing and full detial. (and i just have 2x 5670 cards).
future is in the heterogeneous chips i think. llano already has been a success, and its possible to save 30% on the cost of cpu + mobo + graphics card if you go the llano way over anything intel, and gaming performance is incomparable. when trinity comes, i think there will be a big change in computing. especially when amd puts out a computing platform like cuda.
not everything can be dissected through stylesheets.
Fuck it up, then blame china. its the new scapegoat for i.t. incompetency.
No, no. I am better off than a serf in nearly every way. I just spent the last hour applying gold-leaf to my living room lamp, as a personal craft. What serf could do that? I am easily in the top 1% [globalrichlist.com]. Wealth inequality is at best only a single component of social justice. So, what you are saying is, you actually WOULD prefer to be a serf?
the value and accessibility of gold leaf you applied to your ramp in your, fool, cannot be compared to the value and accessibility of gold leaf back in middle ages.
you dont even know the relative value of economic items change according to which period you are examining, due to the size of the economy at that point in time, and the level of technology available.
just because gold is more accessible and cheaper COMPARED TO the size of economy and technology level than it was in middle ages, does NOT mean that you are taking more of the share of TOTAL ECONOMY and amenities you have in your OWN TIME, than a serf.
if you looked at it, a king in middle ages had to crap outside.
content is never easily pageable on the web. there is a lot of different kinds of stuff to present in a web page. contrary to what people conclude from big corp websites like google, apple etc, most of the web still has to stuff content onto websites. example below.
http://www.racinglab.com/
Would be a bitch to design and develop for.
For, you are saying that you are ok now despite you are WORSE OFF than a serf in all kinds of things. just because you are titled 'free'.
you are not. your wealth is worse off than a serf, and now EVERYTHING in your society is tied to how much wealth you can spend. if you dont have the money to do something YOU DONT HAVE THAT FREEDOM. even if they allow you.
moron. people like you, who cant see past the illusion through the practicality of things make world worse off.
In capitalism you sell your mother if there is a good bidder. Or if you cant sell a tree for example, you cut it down so noone will use it for free and reduce the price of other trees you are wanting to sell. so asking a corporation to justify their shit is pointless. they will just lie.
80% of american news are owned by subsidiaries of 2 corporations in the chain. they can make anything that you dont want to know, remain unseen. like ron paul.
because, if you live under worse conditions than a serf compared to its times, then it doesnt matter what you are named.
as the last person voted into office shows. he did the opposite of everything he promised. leave aside leaving promises unfulfilled. he did opposites.
All of the above assumes the ones to be replaced, be politician or corporation, are inactive and dumb to act. and wont leverage their power for control.
And it seems to be shit -> for, in the end what he seems to be demonizing is copyleft license. So then entire thing becomes a veiled statement for proprietarization of previously open licenses.
Every other day we are seeing another example of how the ones who were supposed to exercise power on behalf of the people have become enemies of the people.
Some people utter empty stuff like "vote em' out" and whatnot - but, if it has been possible, we wouldnt have been in this situation have we ? whomever you vote, result is the same. the machine has been usurped by those who serve the few. laws work differently for the rich and the poor.
can you say with a rational mind that, things like occupy movement are unnecessary in such a world ?
You're not making sense. Those 100k people are paid for their work.
slaves were paid for their work with food and shelter too. that did not make the payment just and proper, and the practice ethical.
those 100 k people are paid only 15% at most, out of the 100% they produce. 85% goes to 7% of society.
its basically making OTHER people work, and taking their stuff. there is no difference in between feudalism, or slavery and this - only, the storefront is different.
But by all means, maybe the 100k people working at some megacorp can all quit and go form their own corporation and share all the profits, right?
yes, and the 5% which control the economy can rightout buy or push them out of the market, making them employees again.
Its for us. its for us, 'the people' to wake ourselves up from the 'hard work' lie that has been used to fool us. the ones hard working are us. the ones getting rich, are them.
and 'hard work' is a lie that the bloodsuckers use to fool the morons.
show me ONE person who accrued a megacorporation by hard work of himself/herself - NOT by getting the proceeds from 100,000 people s/he employs. BUT, if you mean 'making other people work and sucking off 70% of what they produce' as hard work, yeah - you can be a hardworker in that. and THAT's the problem.
the percentage of who are considered 'nobles' and 'churchmen' goes way higher than the percentage we consider as elites today. nobles were in a spectrum ranging from a small knight (which were a plenty) to dukes. if you consider that, anyone who was not a serf could own and rent out land just like nobles in old england, you could easily say that the 'noble' class ranged from a normal sergeant-at-arms (they were allocated land) or any random peasant to duke. churchmen was much more numerous, ranging from your average monk to bishop. not to mention church had a task of feeding people with its proceeds, further correcting the income distribution.
the only difference in between being serf or being a peasant was, the latters' well being and life was not guaranteed. being a serf guaranteed livelihood, and especially in early middle ages (from 600 to 1200), many people wanted to become serfs. only after more freedom was garnered in cities, people wanted to run away to cities.
albeit this is not behaving badly. rms just pointed out something that people did not want to hear. even if it is true.
Middle Ages income distribution per law :
33% lord, 33% church, 33% peasant.
Modern income/wealth distribution :
5% gets 72% of everything. 85% gets 15% of everything.
http://sociology.ucsc.edu/whorulesamerica/power/wealth.html
even worse, the means for wealth generation, the tools are totally on the off side on the hands of minority, so this means the income/wealth disparage will only grow bigger.
85% of people dont have enough from economy, despite they are being worked to generate that economy. as a result, they are not able to spend. economy suffers. education dives down. culture is neglected. people dont care for anything outside survival.
the top 0.1% of society, which owns and controls entire scheme on the other hand, just hoards. more and more. naturally, as a single person cannot want and spend for an endless amount of things, after a certain point spending on the side of the rich declines, and it turns to extreme luxury and afterwards just hoarding. insurmountable wealth stays in assets and keeps getting bigger through investment tools that do not produce anything solid in stock and fund trading schemes.
situation now is worse than the situation in middle ages. no duke could dream of having 72% of wealth in the nation. all serfs would laugh at modern man taking only 15% of available amenities in the society. and serfs had their livelihood guaranteed by law.
we progressed technologically. we regressed socially.
Google+..... and i still understand shit. i am still using facebook but its privacy, setting options are nowhere near and understandable as google. and im a programmer that programs interfaces myself. go figure what the mom in idaho can do with those privacy options..