If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#31
|
|||
|
|||
Fastest CPU in April
"George Macdonald" wrote in message news On Sat, 9 Dec 2006 09:54:05 -0800, "JAD" wrote: "wizzywiz" wrote in message oups.com... wrote: "wizzywiz" wrote in message ups.com... Howdy.....I know the Core Duo and Woodcrest are on top now......just wondering what people may know about things coming down the pike by April or May..... Thanks much..... For desktop systems, not much. With Intel's release of the quad-core QX6700 it's going to take software developers a few years (at least) to catch up. There's no need for more cpu power in the meantime. When my program takes days to execute, there is definately a need for more cpu power. Days? You are believing your own exagerations...it hasn't taken 'days' to execute a program since liesure suit larry on 6 / 5 1/4 floppys. Just be honest and tell the world that it is simply the need to have the bragging rights. Uhh, there *are* some people who still do real computing - there are numerial problems which run for hours and even days.... and no the economics do not justify the expense of adapting the algorithm and purchasing a "supercomputer". Uhhh He said *'execute'* . Geee and all i thought people did was read mail and run SETI...... |
#32
|
|||
|
|||
Fastest CPU in April
JAD wrote: "wizzywiz" wrote in message ups.com... wrote: "wizzywiz" wrote in message ps.com... Howdy.....I know the Core Duo and Woodcrest are on top now......just wondering what people may know about things coming down the pike by April or May..... Thanks much..... For desktop systems, not much. With Intel's release of the quad-core QX6700 it's going to take software developers a few years (at least) to catch up. There's no need for more cpu power in the meantime. When my program takes days to execute, there is definately a need for more cpu power. Days? You are believing your own exagerations...it hasn't taken 'days' to execute a program since liesure suit larry on 6 / 5 1/4 floppys. Just be honest and tell the world that it is simply the need to have the bragging rights. Sorry to disappoint you. With an 8 gig dual processor Opteron 248, days. You're welcome to write faster software for us though. |
#33
|
|||
|
|||
Fastest CPU in April
"wizzywiz" wrote in message ps.com... JAD wrote: "wizzywiz" wrote in message ups.com... wrote: "wizzywiz" wrote in message ps.com... Howdy.....I know the Core Duo and Woodcrest are on top now......just wondering what people may know about things coming down the pike by April or May..... Thanks much..... For desktop systems, not much. With Intel's release of the quad-core QX6700 it's going to take software developers a few years (at least) to catch up. There's no need for more cpu power in the meantime. When my program takes days to execute, there is definately a need for more cpu power. Days? You are believing your own exagerations...it hasn't taken 'days' to execute a program since liesure suit larry on 6 / 5 1/4 floppys. Just be honest and tell the world that it is simply the need to have the bragging rights. Sorry to disappoint you. With an 8 gig dual processor Opteron 248, days. Horse pucky..........I don't suppose you'll get around to telling us what it might be, That takes 'days' to 'execute'. You're welcome to write faster software for us though. never said I could.... |
#34
|
|||
|
|||
Fastest CPU in April
On Sat, 09 Dec 2006 15:47:36 -0500, George Macdonald
wrote: On Fri, 08 Dec 2006 23:04:33 -0500, Tony Hill wrote: Well, they already have all 3 product names. Core 2 Duo is primarily for the $200+ processor market, Pentium is primarily for the $100-$200 market and Celeron for the sub-$100 market. Changing the products but leaving the name and the price scheme the same seems like the plan here. My point is: I just don't see a future for anything lower than the Pentium E2000 mentioned in the article - I guess we'll see if maybe some wafer-edge chips come out at 512KB unified L2.:-) Now that I think of it, I haven't seen a mention of a Core Solo desktop chip. Now that I read aobut it, it actually makes perfectly good sense. The Core 2 Duo/Core 2 Quad can hold up the high-end with quad core and higher-end dual core systems, these "Pentium E2000" series chips can take up the middle ground of dual-core chips and Celeron will replace the "Core Solo" brand for single-core chips. Fairly neat market segmentation actually. I really expect them to get rid of the micro-architecture, it makes no sense to keep producing it. And *yet*! I can't imagine that Intel is in anything other than phase-out mode with the old Netburst core. Certainly they weren't about to switch 100% of production immediately to the new Core architecture, bu surely they must be moving in that direction! Assuming they've got all the bugs worked out of the process it gives them a faster processor with lower power consumption and a smaller die to boot. The die size of a Core 2 Duo chip with 4MB of cache is smaller than that of a Pentium D with 2MB of cache. Admittedly the Pentium D has a slight advantage in being two separate (smaller) dies instead of just one (bigger) die, but it seems unlikely that it would be any cheaper for Intel to produce the chips. Probably they are about even in terms of manufacturing costs, while performance STRONGLY favors the Core 2 Duo. Two separate dice? I thought that went away with even later 90nm Pentium Ds. The 90nm Pentium D (the 800 series) were a single die, the 65nm Pentium D (the 900 series) were two dies. The Pentium name though, that's another story. I beleive that it's expected to live on with a Core-based as a branding for future Core based processors (same goes for the Celeron brand). Yeah well the article said Pentium E2000 when previous indications were that the name might go away. Celeron?... like I said I don't see a slot for anything below the Pentium E2000. All I see indicate that the E2000 will still be a dual-core chip. That leaves lots of room for a single-core Celeron. The trick will be in pricing. The E2000 series will have a small price/performance niche to fill between the Core 2 Duo (which are already under $200 for the lowest cost E6300 model) and the Celeron. Keep in mind thought that the Celeron brand is mostly selling for $50-$75. The most expensive Celeron carried at Newegg is the Celeron 356 (3.33GHz, 533MT/s bus, 512KB cache) that they list at $65. There is definitely room for pricing between the $75 Celeron and the $150+ Core 2 Duo, but it's not huge. Viiv seems like a massive failure and VPro seems to have died before leaving the starting blocks. Intel's stuck in an odd position of having such a great brand but having trouble moving beyond it. Their new brands get judged against their old brands, just like their competitors, and often fail. Even Celeron was, at best, only a moderate success. Many people I know still associate the name with a less reliable chip than a Pentium-branded chip, despite the fact that they might very well be the exact same chip underneath the packaging. I think maybe Intel got a little carried away by the success of Centrino and figured that everything else would just automatically do the same. As mentioned elsewhere, even Centrino has lost some of its shine - diluted by more confusing terms for umm, "T"s, "Families" & "Platforms". I can't imagine how your average CompUSA/BestBuy store clerk is going to handle the kinds of questions such a multi-faceted array of choices presents to the non-expert buyer. Too many line items confuses the channel... top to bottom! Definitely. With products changing as fast as they do in computers it is tough for Intel to offer a competitive range of processors for all price points without making things too complicated. In some ways the Celeron line is probably where they are doing the best for this. People pretty much all recognize the Celeron line as being the low-cost value line where bigger numbers just mean a faster chip. Intel should have little trouble going from a Celeron D 375 up to a "Celeron E" 1015 or some such thing. Most people should recognize this as a better chip and therefore worth more than the previous Celeron, but still not as good as a Pentium. Simple, easy, fits the price/performance model nicely. It's everything else that gets complicated. I'm not really sure what the answer is. Intel tried clock speed but that became an absolute mess (especially from an OEM perspective, having 6 different chips that were marked mostly the same was terrible!). Then they tried model numbers, but there were just too many versions and therefore too many numbers. Simplifying the product line, offering fewer incremental choices, seems like an obvious solution. But then they run the risk that AMD will outmaneuver them and offer a better price/performance product until the next product refresh. Probably the solution will be a combination of the both. -- Tony Hill hilla underscore 20 at yahoo dot ca |
#35
|
|||
|
|||
Fastest CPU in April
"JAD" wrote in message ... Horse pucky..........I don't suppose you'll get around to telling us what it might be, That takes 'days' to 'execute'. Off the top of my head, weather simulations, Gene Folding (and a plethera of other medical related problems), simulation of the interations between atomic (and or sub-atomic) particals... I'm sure there are *many* more problems which could present run times of hours, days, months, years.... Just because your Athlon or Pentium can give you sweet graphics in games it doesn't mean we've run out of difficult to solve (or impossible) computing problems... Carlo |
#36
|
|||
|
|||
Fastest CPU in April
Don't take it personally.
This troll is just frustrated because his system sucks. Path: newssvr14.news.prodigy.net!newsdbm05.news.prodigy. com!newsdst01.news.prodigy.net!prodigy.com!newscon 04.news.prodigy.net!prodigy.net!pd7cy1no!shaw.ca!h wmnpeer03.lga!hwmnpeer01.lga!news.highwinds-media.com!hw-filter.lga!newsfe06.lga.POSTED!53ab2750!not-for-mail From: "JAD" kapasitor earthcharter.net Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips,alt.comp.hardware.p c-homebuilt,microsoft.public.windowsxp.general,alt.c omp.hardware.amd.x86-64 References: 1165084819.670651.92570 f1g2000cwa.googlegroups.com Ngnch.6866$wc5.332 newssvr25.news.prodigy.net 1165388526.657851.14980 j72g2000cwa.googlegroups.com eLCeh.153$sZ4.59 newsfe06.lga 1165712373.597558.70340 73g2000cwn.googlegroups.com Subject: Fastest CPU in April Lines: 54 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1409 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1409 Message-ID: CfJeh.224$sZ4.200 newsfe06.lga X-Trace: lalincmlnekeejjfkannfilpcpbbolnmhedplfnoglkcaldcln ijfcjfbjnkiolengboflaopmfmkopggbneeljgacigbijgankb coajbmhacoifmjifkddopaobafbgenfnojecgjgcfcij NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 09 Dec 2006 18:18:26 MST Date: Sat, 9 Dec 2006 17:18:14 -0800 Xref: prodigy.net comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips:463234 alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt:480662 microsoft.public.windowsxp.general:1679426 alt.comp.hardware.amd.x86-64:13230 "wizzywiz" jimkk umich.edu wrote in message news:1165712373.597558.70340 73g2000cwn.googlegroups.com... JAD wrote: "wizzywiz" jimkk umich.edu wrote in message news:1165388526.657851.14980 j72g2000cwa.googlegroups.com... blahblah_nospam sbcglobal.net wrote: "wizzywiz" jimkk umich.edu wrote in message news:1165084819.670651.92570 f1g2000cwa.googlegroups.com... Howdy.....I know the Core Duo and Woodcrest are on top now......just wondering what people may know about things coming down the pike by April or May..... Thanks much..... For desktop systems, not much. With Intel's release of the quad-core QX6700 it's going to take software developers a few years (at least) to catch up. There's no need for more cpu power in the meantime. When my program takes days to execute, there is definately a need for more cpu power. Days? You are believing your own exagerations...it hasn't taken 'days' to execute a program since liesure suit larry on 6 / 5 1/4 floppys. Just be honest and tell the world that it is simply the need to have the bragging rights. Sorry to disappoint you. With an 8 gig dual processor Opteron 248, days. Horse pucky..........I don't suppose you'll get around to telling us what it might be, That takes 'days' to 'execute'. You're welcome to write faster software for us though. never said I could.... |
#37
|
|||
|
|||
Fastest CPU in April
Tony Hill hilla_nospam_20 yahoo.com wrote:
Keep in mind thought that the Celeron brand is mostly selling for $50-$75. The most expensive Celeron carried at Newegg is the Celeron 356 (3.33GHz, 533MT/s bus, 512KB cache) that they list at $65. There is definitely room for pricing between the $75 Celeron and the $150+ Core 2 Duo, but it's not huge. At Newegg USA, the Celeron is $43 to $65 and the the Core 2 Duo is $180 to $650. -- Tony Hill hilla underscore 20 at yahoo dot ca Path: newssvr14.news.prodigy.net!newsdbm05.news.prodigy. com!newsdst01.news.prodigy.net!prodigy.com!newscon 04.news.prodigy.net!prodigy.net!newshub.sdsu.edu!n x02.iad01.newshosting.com!newshosting.com!216.196. 98.140.MISMATCH!border1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!bord er2.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!sn-xt-sjc-05!sn-xt-sjc-06!sn-post-sjc-01!supernews.com!corp.supernews.com!not-for-mail From: Tony Hill hilla_nospam_20 yahoo.com Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips,alt.comp.hardware.p c-homebuilt,microsoft.public.windowsxp.general,alt.c omp.hardware.amd.x86-64 Subject: Fastest CPU in April Date: Sun, 10 Dec 2006 02:07:38 -0500 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com Message-ID: um7nn2hh8u1nfsv89fl8nmjdcltdje1sje 4ax.com References: 1165084819.670651.92570 f1g2000cwa.googlegroups.com ssKdnbEs_oZe-u7YnZ2dnUVZ_s2dnZ2d comcast.com j1q6n25dm5bs9b3th4qv7tucap47saenub 4ax.com i7r6n21cp45q43jc8g9vulf9cpcvkt451j 4ax.com gs9en2pagp02h90im1c23gnomccntntcjf 4ax.com 57dhn294v7m12s7skad59d25f5v1a64nbo 4ax.com cipin2lc289n1l9sr5b208ejbniltss0oc 4ax.com pfckn2hn64dltvb4q4h0kum2asfh7q4qre 4ax.com o77mn2h24j98v7bv1nilqm8im15ab28er5 4ax.com X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 4.0/32.1071 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Complaints-To: abuse supernews.com Lines: 112 Xref: prodigy.net comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips:463238 alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt:480672 microsoft.public.windowsxp.general:1679533 alt.comp.hardware.amd.x86-64:13231 |
#38
|
|||
|
|||
Fastest CPU in April
On Sat, 9 Dec 2006 16:24:48 -0800, "JAD"
wrote: "George Macdonald" wrote in message news On Sat, 9 Dec 2006 09:54:05 -0800, "JAD" wrote: "wizzywiz" wrote in message oups.com... wrote: "wizzywiz" wrote in message ups.com... Howdy.....I know the Core Duo and Woodcrest are on top now......just wondering what people may know about things coming down the pike by April or May..... Thanks much..... For desktop systems, not much. With Intel's release of the quad-core QX6700 it's going to take software developers a few years (at least) to catch up. There's no need for more cpu power in the meantime. When my program takes days to execute, there is definately a need for more cpu power. Days? You are believing your own exagerations...it hasn't taken 'days' to execute a program since liesure suit larry on 6 / 5 1/4 floppys. Just be honest and tell the world that it is simply the need to have the bragging rights. Uhh, there *are* some people who still do real computing - there are numerial problems which run for hours and even days.... and no the economics do not justify the expense of adapting the algorithm and purchasing a "supercomputer". Uhhh He said *'execute'* . Geee and all i thought people did was read mail and run SETI...... SO?? What is it that *you* do with umm, executable programs? -- Rgds, George Macdonald |
#39
|
|||
|
|||
Fastest CPU in April
On Sun, 10 Dec 2006 02:07:38 -0500, Tony Hill
wrote: On Sat, 09 Dec 2006 15:47:36 -0500, George Macdonald wrote: On Fri, 08 Dec 2006 23:04:33 -0500, Tony Hill wrote: Well, they already have all 3 product names. Core 2 Duo is primarily for the $200+ processor market, Pentium is primarily for the $100-$200 market and Celeron for the sub-$100 market. Changing the products but leaving the name and the price scheme the same seems like the plan here. My point is: I just don't see a future for anything lower than the Pentium E2000 mentioned in the article - I guess we'll see if maybe some wafer-edge chips come out at 512KB unified L2.:-) Now that I think of it, I haven't seen a mention of a Core Solo desktop chip. Now that I read aobut it, it actually makes perfectly good sense. The Core 2 Duo/Core 2 Quad can hold up the high-end with quad core and higher-end dual core systems, these "Pentium E2000" series chips can take up the middle ground of dual-core chips and Celeron will replace the "Core Solo" brand for single-core chips. Fairly neat market segmentation actually. But Core Solo/Duo is the new naming within the Centrino and Viiv & VPro platform strategies which Mr. Otellini enunciated back in early summer. I really expect them to get rid of the micro-architecture, it makes no sense to keep producing it. And *yet*! I can't imagine that Intel is in anything other than phase-out mode with the old Netburst core. Certainly they weren't about to switch 100% of production immediately to the new Core architecture, bu surely they must be moving in that direction! Assuming they've got all the bugs worked out of the process it gives them a faster processor with lower power consumption and a smaller die to boot. And *yet*.... they just released a whole new Pentium D series with low power characteristics in August(?) or so. Someone just couldn't bear to trash the new masks after all the months of work?:-) The die size of a Core 2 Duo chip with 4MB of cache is smaller than that of a Pentium D with 2MB of cache. Admittedly the Pentium D has a slight advantage in being two separate (smaller) dies instead of just one (bigger) die, but it seems unlikely that it would be any cheaper for Intel to produce the chips. Probably they are about even in terms of manufacturing costs, while performance STRONGLY favors the Core 2 Duo. Two separate dice? I thought that went away with even later 90nm Pentium Ds. The 90nm Pentium D (the 800 series) were a single die, the 65nm Pentium D (the 900 series) were two dies. Hmph I missed that - they went backward... from a twin die to two separate dice glued together? The Pentium name though, that's another story. I beleive that it's expected to live on with a Core-based as a branding for future Core based processors (same goes for the Celeron brand). Yeah well the article said Pentium E2000 when previous indications were that the name might go away. Celeron?... like I said I don't see a slot for anything below the Pentium E2000. All I see indicate that the E2000 will still be a dual-core chip. That leaves lots of room for a single-core Celeron. The trick will be in pricing. The E2000 series will have a small price/performance niche to fill between the Core 2 Duo (which are already under $200 for the lowest cost E6300 model) and the Celeron. Keep in mind thought that the Celeron brand is mostly selling for $50-$75. The most expensive Celeron carried at Newegg is the Celeron 356 (3.33GHz, 533MT/s bus, 512KB cache) that they list at $65. There is definitely room for pricing between the $75 Celeron and the $150+ Core 2 Duo, but it's not huge. Well it goes against the new "announced" strategy, AIUI, but anything's possible I suppose. -- Rgds, George Macdonald |
#40
|
|||
|
|||
Fastest CPU in April
JAD wrote: "wizzywiz" wrote in message ps.com... JAD wrote: "wizzywiz" wrote in message ups.com... wrote: "wizzywiz" wrote in message ps.com... Howdy.....I know the Core Duo and Woodcrest are on top now......just wondering what people may know about things coming down the pike by April or May..... Thanks much..... For desktop systems, not much. With Intel's release of the quad-core QX6700 it's going to take software developers a few years (at least) to catch up. There's no need for more cpu power in the meantime. When my program takes days to execute, there is definately a need for more cpu power. Days? You are believing your own exagerations...it hasn't taken 'days' to execute a program since liesure suit larry on 6 / 5 1/4 floppys. Just be honest and tell the world that it is simply the need to have the bragging rights. Sorry to disappoint you. With an 8 gig dual processor Opteron 248, days. Horse pucky..........I don't suppose you'll get around to telling us what it might be, That takes 'days' to 'execute'. You're correct. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Fastest CPU for K8N/K8N-E | * * Chas | Asus Motherboards | 1 | June 7th 06 06:49 PM |
Newbie: OC Advice: AMDXP2200 CPU | Donald Bock | Overclocking AMD Processors | 2 | March 12th 05 12:14 AM |
ATI R420 slips from April to May ??? | John Lewis | Ati Videocards | 0 | April 25th 04 04:44 AM |
ATI R420 slips from April to May ??? | John Lewis | Nvidia Videocards | 0 | April 25th 04 04:44 AM |
Dim 2400 Fastest CPU??? | Simon | Dell Computers | 5 | November 13th 03 06:47 AM |