| |
| |
| |
|
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78
<TV_> FreeTrade: it's crack, you can not help it, you gotta have it and you know you will own it!
<CometBaby> FreeTrade me too. I never purchase yesterdays technology.
<bmc> we should start preparing, letting developers drop backward compatability
<bmc> etc,etc
<CometBaby> it's a waste of money.
<gopp> tweek but will it give error
<gopp> if I put -8
<tweek> bmc: already being done.
<CometBaby> unless you want to buy a new computer every year or two.
<gopp> or negative number
<FreeTrade> Scarface, Well it works with programs that do not have dual core capabilities. It uses the CPU and Ram differently so I presume it effects all programs
<suna> ah, maybe bmc
<suna> to all stuff like that with comps
<FreeTrade> It did on the computer I tested.
<suna> i say i'll believe it when i see it
<Scarface-> i havent seen one computer game that has dual core capability
<tweek> x86 is (finally) being dropped in two generations of Intel's new chips.
<suna> becasue
<tweek> gopp: so give it 8.
<suna> people have been preaching that with ipv6 hardcore a decade ago
<tweek> you know already that the real answer will be i times something.
<gopp> then it will work since d is postive
<bmc> ipv6 is almost a reality
<suna> and the only place ipv6 is seriously used is private networks and irc
<tweek> so just add an i to the number :)
<Lotec> The Quad Macs not only have all the cores but the Altivec engines
<Scarface-> the program has to know how to distribute the load between both cores
<Scarface-> otherwise it will just use 1
<tweek> Scarface-: exactly. any non-threaded app is worthless in a parallel architecture.
<tweek> and even then, threading can only be done to a point.
<haku1> scarface what do you mean
<haku1> doesnt the os take care of that
<tweek> haku1: ha! no.
<Scarface-> no
<gopp> good night
<KoooK> china got a huge ipv6 network
<haku1> anyway
<FreeTrade> Look,. I dont have to know the white sheet on the chip, I just need to use it. and test it.
<suna> ipv6 has been in near-implementable form for what 10 years?
<tweek> haku1: a single process runs one thread, unless threaded manually by the programmer.
<bmc> the kernel handles memory management
<tweek> TV_: holy ****.
<haku1> i just got a dual core computer at work with 2 gigs of ram
<bmc> wouldnt the OS need to be aware also?
<FreeTrade> And when I run as many intensive programs as possible it kept up.
<haku1> it's pretty sweet
<bmc> nothing happens without going through the kernel
<FreeTrade> Haku, its very noticeably different isnt it ?
<haku1> i dont know
<FreeTrade> You dont know ?
<haku1> i just used it for simple stuff
<TV_> tweek: just say no to intell right now!
<haku1> lolz
<TV_> :)
<FreeTrade> I thought you bought one
<FreeTrade> have you used it ?
<Scarface-> the OS can ***ign one core to one program, and another core to another program, so that you can multitask faster, BUT, the program itself cant use both cores unless it is designed to
<haku1> hell no
<tweek> FreeTrade: exactly. a parallel architecture with a parallel program, or lotsa threads at once, will blow by anything with a ****ing big clock speed :)
<haku1> my work bought it
<haku1> my old computer was total crap
<FreeTrade> Tweek yep
<haku1> so how can i compare it?
<tweek> if you need to be convinced, find someone with a dual-core chip
<haku1> hehe
<bmc> my current comp is total crap
<bmc> no thats not it
<TV_> Dual and Quad Core is the Future for now!
<tweek> haku1: benchmarks.
<haku1> anyway you can see some of the benchmarks
<tweek> tomshardware.com has a lotta great tests.
<FreeTrade> QuaD CORE IS NOT
<haku1> and the dual core chips dont do that great on a lot of stuff
<bmc> compare dual cpu v dual core single cpu vs. dual core dual cpu
<bmc> then you can see
<FreeTrade> From what Ive been told, Quad is Literally 2 Dual Core Chips
<haku1> so dual core performs the same as dual cpu?
<FreeTrade> 2 seperate chips
<bmc> no
<FreeTrade> So its kind of a misnomer.
<tweek> FreeTrade: XP is only capable of two ...
<bmc> now from what i have read
<haku1> is it better or worse?
<bmc> not*
<bmc> slightly worse
<haku1> oh
<FreeTrade> Tweek, I am only capable of two.
<Scarface-> QUAD CORE cpu with SLI would be cool
<haku1> only slightly
<tweek> heh
<bmc> from what i read
<FreeTrade> I dont do any work for nasa
<FreeTrade> :)
<tweek> Scarface-: that's overdoing it
<TheTailor> AMD is talking about 16 core.
<Scarface-> hehe
<haku1> what accounts for the slight decrease
<TheTailor> That's what you need
<tweek> TheTailor: that's also overkill.
<FreeTrade> 16 core on one chip ?
<TV_> TheTailor: *** on Silicon!
<bmc> its one cpu
<FreeTrade> Thats crazy
<TheTailor> yep
<TheTailor> why?
<tweek> like, even if there could be 16 different threads going at once.
<Scarface-> trust me, computers games coming out nowadays are very resource intensive
<tweek> you have a mini-cluster in your box.
<FreeTrade> I would rather have two xeon
<bmc> one memory pipe or htf ever they describe it
<TheTailor> naa
<TheTailor> 16 is better than 4
<tweek> the efficency rate drops with extra procs...
<FreeTrade> I am saying that 2 is better than 4 for my purposes.
<bmc> but the computing capability increases
<bmc> heh
<TheTailor> NO way
<TV_> TheTailor: I don't know how soon we will see a 16 core.
<tweek> I think, to the rate of 1/(s + 1/p) or something
<bmc> ifi got dual core, id want dual cpu dual core
<FreeTrade> MAC just wants to have the fastest chip, but you will pay a lot for it.
<TheTailor> You need 16 core~~~~~~~~~
<tweek> where s is the percentage of synchronous instructions
<bmc> best of both worlds
<FreeTrade> And most mac users dont even use thier machines much differently than I do
<TV_> TheTailor: But all it means to me is Dual and Quads should drop in prices if we do see them.
<Scarface-> computers ar etoo slow
<FreeTrade> and I am not a true power user
<tweek> and p is the number of procs ... and ... err, should be a P over that, for the percentage of parallel instruction
<Scarface-> there should be 10GHZ on the market right now
<tweek> s/instruction/instructions/
<TheTailor> TV_, yep
<bmc> i need compiling power and gaming power
<haku1> anyway
<TV_> TheTailor: I run 3d render farm... I need them :)
<haku1> i got a dual core 3.2 ghz with 2 gB of ram
<FreeTrade> I am a wannabe computer geek who wants to know a lot and so consequently I dont know very much but I do know more than the avg guy on the street.
<haku1> and x600 ati graphics card my computer is real fast hehe
<TV_> TheTailor: even if I can not afford them, the push the price down for lesser chips.. more fun for me!
<CometBaby> haku1 a dell?
<FreeTrade> But a true Computer techie knows a hell of a lot more, usually though a lot of times they are full of ****..
<haku1> yeh it's a dell
<tweek> FreeTrade: read ars technica for a bit. you'll fit right in
Return to politics
or
Go to some related
logs:
canada
rock
html
chatzone
chatzone
rikstafer
|
|