Go Back   Computer Forums > General Computing > Hardware
Click Here to Login
Join Computer forums Today


Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 02-09-2005, 09:17 PM   #431
BSOD
 
DarkBlade's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 3,355
Send a message via MSN to DarkBlade
Default Re: AMD vs Intel vs Apple (NO FLAMING!!!!)

I like colors, they make the place look cool, and makes my posts stand out. You do what you want, please respect my use of colors in my post. Even Lord K is using black now to make his posts stand out.
__________________

DarkBlade is offline  
Old 02-09-2005, 11:16 PM   #432
Daemon Poster
 
trance565's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 786
Send a message via AIM to trance565
Default Re: AMD vs Intel vs Apple (NO FLAMING!!!!)

www.ocforums.com, lots of contrast, red and blu text, with some ppl typing yello, white, red,green,etc. and the back ground is black, ncie frum if u like colors, anyways, how do u change text colors?
__________________

__________________
a64 3200+ sock 939 @2.5Ghz !!!! YES!! I DID IT!!!!!
msi k8n neo 2 plat
1 gig pc3300 ??. major brand? @ 208mhz x2...417mhz ... 17mhz over reg
radeon 9700(software says 9600) :(:( <---- pissin me off!!!
ram runs at 2-3-3-7
trance565 is offline  
Old 02-09-2005, 11:26 PM   #433
In Runtime
 
ComputerWizard's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 214
Default Re: AMD vs Intel vs Apple (NO FLAMING!!!!)

There should be a thing on the submit post page where you can add smilies or change your text color.
__________________
Desktop: P4 2.8Ghz HT/ 512mb ram /, ATI Radeon X300 SE 128mb
Laptop: AMD Athlon 4 1200+/ 512mb ram/ Cyber blade Xp vid card.
ComputerWizard is offline  
Old 02-10-2005, 01:14 AM   #434
BSOD
 
Giancarlo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 4,788
Send a message via AIM to Giancarlo
Default Re: AMD vs Intel vs Apple (NO FLAMING!!!!)

OCForums is like a 1999-era eyesore..
Giancarlo is offline  
Old 02-10-2005, 01:43 AM   #435
Golden Master
 
alvino's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 19,967
Send a message via AIM to alvino
Default Re: AMD vs Intel vs Apple (NO FLAMING!!!!)

It's not THAT bad.
alvino is offline  
Old 02-10-2005, 02:20 PM   #436
Guru
 
Lord Kalthorn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Britain
Posts: 13,293
Send a message via MSN to Lord Kalthorn
Default

I use black not to make my posts stand out but however to make them readable. On Quotes; it does not work I have found, the Italics make it look crazy.

Haha; it does look like somebody has thrown some kind of 'freakie deakie' style in there. But most of the reasonable people stick to the light grey which is the most readable - even if they have rainbow Signitures which is annoying.

Quote:
Originally Posted by AMD ZEN
Well, look at it this way. The P4 EE 3.46GHz use around 116 Watts, and look how much heat it produces!! Now, it is a fact that the more voltages and wattage put into the internal die of a processor, the more heat it will lose to entropy. With that in mind, image 33% more heat in the next P4 series.... That will be enormous, and it will require the use of the less effiecient Si8 (silicon with 8 bonds in a chain) Currently, Si4 is used in a lattice to make the wafers on die. It is very efficient (AMD uses Si3, a strange more energy effiecient variation chemically synthesized in the lab), while Intel uses the Si4 lattice to their work. Both are efficient, but Si3 uses less energy to entropy conversion, but cannot bear as much heat, and thus, AMD is unable to push their clock rates as high without chemical additives. The, 3800+. 4000+ and FX-53/55 use an additive in the Silicon wafers (I believe it is Si02 (also known as a form of glass or quartz) to assist in attaining higher clocks. Too much of the quartz like material can increase conductivity, thus ruining the die and wafers. So, AMD has to be very careful with what they do. Intel is going the wrong path here, shooting for higher and higher speeds , when they should focus on more efficiency.

Apparently 130 Watts is not so bad. Michael Kanellos from CNet has pointed out the Cell will have a Wattage of 130 - and its not as big, and in a smaller case tightly packed with other items. What makes you think they would use Silicon-8 instead of Silicon-4? The Itanium is not a great deal less in comsumption and it uses Si4 at least; probably something better considering the low speeds of the Itanium.

The consumption is just over 12% more than an EE; and these stats are based on the Dual EE anyway; so its a peak Wattage, not a mid-range Wattage. Even then; with dispersion technologies from the Pentium-M Range and knowledge from Centrino Technologies the heat is probably not going to be more than two or three degrees more. Not a great deal more than the Cell with have to Operate at And IBM have said it will be Air Cooled; so its a good sign for the VIIV - if you trust Cell as implicitly as yourself.

Efficiency without Higher Speeds is superfluous. Higher Speeds without Efficiency can only go so far but its the better high speeds with a good efficiency that is the better processor - not the highly efficient processor with a good speed. While in theory you'd think it would be - but in practice it's not going to be. You can only make something so efficient. If you dig yourself in with complex processes to increase efficiency that don't allow extreme speeds then you have more problems than somebody who allows extreme speeds, has great knowledge of efficient Processors in other ranges, and is all too keen to gain their lead back from you.
__________________
A Knight is sworn to Honour. His heart knows only Virtue. His blade defends the helpless. His might upholds the Weak. His word speaks only truth. His wrath undoes the Wicked.
Lord Kalthorn is offline  
Old 02-10-2005, 06:08 PM   #437
In Runtime
 
ComputerWizard's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 214
Default Re: AMD vs Intel vs Apple (NO FLAMING!!!!)

Lord Kalthorn always has something to smash Zen with.. lol zen can never win against Lord K
__________________
Desktop: P4 2.8Ghz HT/ 512mb ram /, ATI Radeon X300 SE 128mb
Laptop: AMD Athlon 4 1200+/ 512mb ram/ Cyber blade Xp vid card.
ComputerWizard is offline  
Old 02-10-2005, 08:01 PM   #438
BSOD
 
DarkBlade's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 3,355
Send a message via MSN to DarkBlade
Default Re: AMD vs Intel vs Apple (NO FLAMING!!!!)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lord Kalthorn
I use black not to make my posts stand out but however to make them readable. On Quotes; it does not work I have found, the Italics make it look crazy.

Haha; it does look like somebody has thrown some kind of 'freakie deakie' style in there. But most of the reasonable people stick to the light grey which is the most readable - even if they have rainbow Signitures which is annoying.


Apparently 130 Watts is not so bad. Michael Kanellos from CNet has pointed out the Cell will have a Wattage of 130 - and its not as big, and in a smaller case tightly packed with other items. What makes you think they would use Silicon-8 instead of Silicon-4? The Itanium is not a great deal less in comsumption and it uses Si4 at least; probably something better considering the low speeds of the Itanium.

The consumption is just over 12% more than an EE; and these stats are based on the Dual EE anyway; so its a peak Wattage, not a mid-range Wattage. Even then; with dispersion technologies from the Pentium-M Range and knowledge from Centrino Technologies the heat is probably not going to be more than two or three degrees more. Not a great deal more than the Cell with have to Operate at And IBM have said it will be Air Cooled; so its a good sign for the VIIV - if you trust Cell as implicitly as yourself.

Efficiency without Higher Speeds is superfluous. Higher Speeds without Efficiency can only go so far but its the better high speeds with a good efficiency that is the better processor - not the highly efficient processor with a good speed. While in theory you'd think it would be - but in practice it's not going to be. You can only make something so efficient. If you dig yourself in with complex processes to increase efficiency that don't allow extreme speeds then you have more problems than somebody who allows extreme speeds, has great knowledge of efficient Processors in other ranges, and is all too keen to gain their lead back from you.

Well, AMD is continuing on their Si3 path and adding SiO2 to aid in higher clocks. They are using a new purification process to aid in this as well. Let's put it this way Lord K, AMD Athlon64 Toldeo's will use only 82watts for dual core. 130 is enormous when you compare, and the Cell will use 130 watts because it uses 9 (NINE!!) cores LK!! HELLO?!?!? 9 cores versus 2!! 2 cores using the same as 9, that is a big difference.
DarkBlade is offline  
Old 02-10-2005, 08:03 PM   #439
BSOD
 
DarkBlade's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 3,355
Send a message via MSN to DarkBlade
Default Re: AMD vs Intel vs Apple (NO FLAMING!!!!)

Quote:
Originally Posted by ComputerWizard
Lord Kalthorn always has something to smash Zen with.. lol zen can never win against Lord K

And then I always smash Lord K, because Intel just sucks, and he cannot and will not admit his defeat. One of these days, when Intel is desperately trying to get their stocks up and make a decent profit, he will realize the error in his ways, but until then, LIVE AND LEARN (or don't LEARN in his case...)
DarkBlade is offline  
Old 02-10-2005, 08:14 PM   #440
BSOD
 
Giancarlo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 4,788
Send a message via AIM to Giancarlo
Default Re: AMD vs Intel vs Apple (NO FLAMING!!!!)

Quote:
Originally Posted by ComputerWizard
Lord Kalthorn always has something to smash Zen with.. lol zen can never win against Lord K
Unfortunately for LK, he's blinded by his own biases. And contradictory beliefs.
__________________

Giancarlo is offline  
Closed Thread

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:04 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.6.0