C.R.A.C.K.E.R. Fest Gaming Network Forums
It is currently Mon Sep 24, 2018 2:29 am

All times are UTC - 5 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 92 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5 ... 7  Next
Author Message
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Jul 05, 2005 12:52 pm 
Offline
Kikkoman
Kikkoman
User avatar

Posts: 2391
Location: 127.0.0.1
Joined: Fri Mar 19, 2004 3:51 pm
Sounds like a bottleneck to me~

_________________
Current Computer System
Image


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Jul 05, 2005 3:39 pm 
Offline
Rev. of Gnomeforest Baptist
Rev. of Gnomeforest Baptist
User avatar

Posts: 832
Location: The Forest of Gnomes
Joined: Thu Mar 25, 2004 8:04 pm
maybe.... hard to say without a diagram and more information about the architecture. I've never really look at architectures extensively but they would have to make the added FPUs run as pipeline extension to graphic processing so it doesn't impede performance. Meaning that if you have uber graphics card but low-end processor(with these new FPUs) it wouldn't bog down bandwidth as the graphic card wouldn't run through the FPUs, the FPUs would only run parallel processes and merge with graphic pipeline at some later point. If that is fesible...

_________________
I put on my robe and wizard hat.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Jul 05, 2005 5:57 pm 
Offline
Pimp
Pimp
User avatar

Posts: 373
Location: ATL
Joined: Mon Oct 11, 2004 8:52 pm
we'll the cell processor is pretty nice, but the die size will be quite large compared to Intel's and AMD's cores which are about 1-2 CM square. Bigger die size=Less yeild=higher prices. The each of the Cells FPUs have a dedicated SRAM memory block, and each FPU is attached to a main bus which lets them communicate with the PowerPC core.

There are a bunch of reasons Apple went with Intel. First off, is hardware, since IBM makes the chips and Apple makes the motherboard, case, power supply, monitors, keyboards, mice, ect ect, it costs alot of money to put a Mac together (note their rediculously high price), this is because Apple gets their stuff from various no-name OEM manufactureres, each of every item.

The reason Apple went with Intel and not stick with IBM is similar to the reason they rejected AMD.

1) AMD couldn't put out enough hammer/clawhammer chips to meet Apples needs
2) AMD's chips are geared more from rendering and math, especially the FX series, Apple needed a good all around chip. Intel with HT would help with multitasking and office apps, while still having that umph in the rendering dept.
3) Intel had a lower power chip. Their Dothan core laptop chips consume about 12-15 Watts less than AMD's laptops chips, and both consume a shitload less than any PowerPC chip.

_________________
Image
Yeormom wrote:
you make children in china cry.

Yeormom wrote:
you make children in china cry.

DFI Lan Party Jr P45 T2RS
Intel Core 2 Quad Q9300 @ 3.49Ghz (466x7.5)
2x1GB HyperX DDR2-1066 + 2x2GB G.Skill DDR2-1066
2xWD1600 160GB in RAID0
2xVisiontek Radeon HD4850 512MB in CrossfireX voltmodded @ 750/2000
Coolmax 950W
Microsoft Windows Vista Business 64-bit
Samsung SATA DVD-RW w/ Lightscribe
Altec Lansing 121i 2.1 Speakers


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Jul 05, 2005 5:59 pm 
Offline
Pimp
Pimp
User avatar

Posts: 373
Location: ATL
Joined: Mon Oct 11, 2004 8:52 pm
To summarize why Apple didn't use cell, it would be overkill

_________________
Image
Yeormom wrote:
you make children in china cry.

Yeormom wrote:
you make children in china cry.

DFI Lan Party Jr P45 T2RS
Intel Core 2 Quad Q9300 @ 3.49Ghz (466x7.5)
2x1GB HyperX DDR2-1066 + 2x2GB G.Skill DDR2-1066
2xWD1600 160GB in RAID0
2xVisiontek Radeon HD4850 512MB in CrossfireX voltmodded @ 750/2000
Coolmax 950W
Microsoft Windows Vista Business 64-bit
Samsung SATA DVD-RW w/ Lightscribe
Altec Lansing 121i 2.1 Speakers


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Jul 05, 2005 6:28 pm 
Offline
Kikkoman
Kikkoman
User avatar

Posts: 2391
Location: 127.0.0.1
Joined: Fri Mar 19, 2004 3:51 pm
so in the battle of the processors, one of the world's largest computer manufact, they pick Intel~ does that say anything? hehe

_________________
Current Computer System
Image


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Jul 06, 2005 6:30 am 
Offline
Pimp
Pimp
User avatar

Posts: 373
Location: ATL
Joined: Mon Oct 11, 2004 8:52 pm
lol yeah... you could say they compromised, threw quality out the wiondow and went for quantity

_________________
Image
Yeormom wrote:
you make children in china cry.

Yeormom wrote:
you make children in china cry.

DFI Lan Party Jr P45 T2RS
Intel Core 2 Quad Q9300 @ 3.49Ghz (466x7.5)
2x1GB HyperX DDR2-1066 + 2x2GB G.Skill DDR2-1066
2xWD1600 160GB in RAID0
2xVisiontek Radeon HD4850 512MB in CrossfireX voltmodded @ 750/2000
Coolmax 950W
Microsoft Windows Vista Business 64-bit
Samsung SATA DVD-RW w/ Lightscribe
Altec Lansing 121i 2.1 Speakers


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Jul 06, 2005 6:53 am 
Offline
Rev. of Gnomeforest Baptist
Rev. of Gnomeforest Baptist
User avatar

Posts: 832
Location: The Forest of Gnomes
Joined: Thu Mar 25, 2004 8:04 pm
SPD010273 wrote:
lol yeah... you could say they compromised, threw quality out the wiondow and went for quantity


AMD whore! Intel pwnz! :P

_________________
I put on my robe and wizard hat.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Jul 06, 2005 1:17 pm 
Offline
Kikkoman
Kikkoman
User avatar

Posts: 2391
Location: 127.0.0.1
Joined: Fri Mar 19, 2004 3:51 pm
Over the history of time, you know as well as I do that AMD has put out less quality~ it doesn't matter now though because both companys are on different paths of life so they are getting harder and harder to compare. AMD is searching after recognition in the end user market, focusing mainly on consumer end computers while Intel has said screw that since they're name is already huge in that market and is now doing probably 75% of their development in industrial grade systems.

What does AMD make? Processors and flash memory. What does Intel make? Processors, motherboards, chipsets, networking electronics, and more flash devices. The only news I've seen from Intel lately has all had to do with their Xeons and Itanium processors and motherboards and very little with their Pentium 4s other than EMT64 or whatever it is.

Either way, it's gonna be interesting to see who's on top of the consumer market in another 5 years because it's anyones game.

_________________
Current Computer System
Image


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Jul 06, 2005 1:38 pm 
Offline
Pimp
Pimp
User avatar

Posts: 373
Location: ATL
Joined: Mon Oct 11, 2004 8:52 pm
Yeah, Intel sort of ditched the CPU market ever since hitting the 90nm speed barrier. 4Ghz for it's Prescott core. Impressive. But, this comes with a price, seeing that Prescotts can put out enough heat to run a smelting furnace.

_________________
Image
Yeormom wrote:
you make children in china cry.

Yeormom wrote:
you make children in china cry.

DFI Lan Party Jr P45 T2RS
Intel Core 2 Quad Q9300 @ 3.49Ghz (466x7.5)
2x1GB HyperX DDR2-1066 + 2x2GB G.Skill DDR2-1066
2xWD1600 160GB in RAID0
2xVisiontek Radeon HD4850 512MB in CrossfireX voltmodded @ 750/2000
Coolmax 950W
Microsoft Windows Vista Business 64-bit
Samsung SATA DVD-RW w/ Lightscribe
Altec Lansing 121i 2.1 Speakers


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Jul 06, 2005 6:52 pm 
Offline
Kikkoman
Kikkoman
User avatar

Posts: 2391
Location: 127.0.0.1
Joined: Fri Mar 19, 2004 3:51 pm
At least Intel is putting out heat because the developers are speed crazed and don't know when to stop instead of just putting out heat because it was poorly designed *cough* AMD Mission Statement 2-3 Years Ago *cough*

Image
bling bling

_________________
Current Computer System
Image


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Jul 07, 2005 6:40 am 
Offline
Pimp
Pimp
User avatar

Posts: 373
Location: ATL
Joined: Mon Oct 11, 2004 8:52 pm
no, they aren't speed crazed. Havent you noticed Intel's chips arent getting any faster? Intel's Fastest processor is 3.8 Ghz, and some of their chips can be overclocked as high aas 4.2-4.5. AMD has a 2.6 Ghz chip, which would outperform a 4 Ghz chip, if Intel had it. These chips can go as high as 3 Ghz and literally spank anything Intel has.

Why do you think Intel is taking the dual core road? What? "Out of steam?", can't get any faster, so you're putting 2 regular 2.8-3.2 Ghz chips into one, hoping two heads are better than one? Yeah, that's what they are doing. Remember the 90nm speed block I was talking about earlier? Intel's chips can't go any faster. Is this due to the fact they put out more heat than the sun, or that their pipeline, which gives them so much speed, is too long? Face it, you own a chip made by a company where both the customer and the company still share the psyche that the higher the number, the better it must be. Wow, you have a 100 Ghz processor. What, It performs on par with a 1 Ghz AMD? AMD's PR numbers aren't just so they can stay in the game, because of their processor's efficiency, they can perform on the same par as an Intel processor of up to 2/3 faster. So get the idea out of your head that your 3.2 Ghz processor beats anything AMD has because their fastest processor is 2.6 Ghz. That would be saying that a Semi truck can beat a Ferrari because it's bigger.

_________________
Image
Yeormom wrote:
you make children in china cry.

Yeormom wrote:
you make children in china cry.

DFI Lan Party Jr P45 T2RS
Intel Core 2 Quad Q9300 @ 3.49Ghz (466x7.5)
2x1GB HyperX DDR2-1066 + 2x2GB G.Skill DDR2-1066
2xWD1600 160GB in RAID0
2xVisiontek Radeon HD4850 512MB in CrossfireX voltmodded @ 750/2000
Coolmax 950W
Microsoft Windows Vista Business 64-bit
Samsung SATA DVD-RW w/ Lightscribe
Altec Lansing 121i 2.1 Speakers


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Jul 12, 2005 11:56 pm 
Offline
Ninja King
Ninja King
User avatar

Posts: 419
Location: Statesboro, GA
Joined: Mon Sep 20, 2004 9:06 pm
Amd Blows... NiNja!

_________________
http://www.crystalinks.com/bigbang2.jpg

"Sporks are outdated"


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Oct 05, 2005 11:56 pm 
Offline
Kikkoman
Kikkoman
User avatar

Posts: 2391
Location: 127.0.0.1
Joined: Fri Mar 19, 2004 3:51 pm
Image

_________________
Current Computer System
Image


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Oct 06, 2005 11:26 am 
Offline
Rev. of Gnomeforest Baptist
Rev. of Gnomeforest Baptist
User avatar

Posts: 832
Location: The Forest of Gnomes
Joined: Thu Mar 25, 2004 8:04 pm
Yeormom wrote:
Image


We have a winner!

_________________
I put on my robe and wizard hat.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Oct 06, 2005 2:36 pm 
Offline
Kikkoman
Kikkoman
User avatar

Posts: 2391
Location: 127.0.0.1
Joined: Fri Mar 19, 2004 3:51 pm
Yup~ Google says so.

_________________
Current Computer System
Image


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 92 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5 ... 7  Next

All times are UTC - 5 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron

Fatal error: Not able to open ./cache/data_global.php in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\crackerfest.com\httpdocs\forums\includes\acm\acm_file.php on line 106