- Oct 9, 1999
- 72,636
- 46
- 91
didn't expect him to say anything different
Originally posted by: BoberFett
Intel loves to play the numbers game. If they can sacrifice a few IPCs for a higher clockspeed, they're more than happy to because they know that Joe Schmoe can tell the Intel is faster. I mean, the Pentium's got 3 giggihertz and the Athalon only has 2. That's half again as fast!
Originally posted by: dexvx
Originally posted by: BoberFett
Intel loves to play the numbers game. If they can sacrifice a few IPCs for a higher clockspeed, they're more than happy to because they know that Joe Schmoe can tell the Intel is faster. I mean, the Pentium's got 3 giggihertz and the Athalon only has 2. That's half again as fast!
Then explain to me why Centrino Pentium-M laptops are so damn popular and why the Itanium II 1.5/6MB is the highest single processor in the world.
Your logic is flawed.
Originally posted by: BoberFett
Originally posted by: dexvx
Originally posted by: BoberFett
Intel loves to play the numbers game. If they can sacrifice a few IPCs for a higher clockspeed, they're more than happy to because they know that Joe Schmoe can tell the Intel is faster. I mean, the Pentium's got 3 giggihertz and the Athalon only has 2. That's half again as fast!
Then explain to me why Centrino Pentium-M laptops are so damn popular and why the Itanium II 1.5/6MB is the highest single processor in the world.
Your logic is flawed.
Uh oh, little boy wants to play with the big kids. Sigh.
... blah blah blah....
Come back with some ammo, fanboy.
Originally posted by: dexvx
Originally posted by: BoberFett
Originally posted by: dexvx
Originally posted by: BoberFett
Intel loves to play the numbers game. If they can sacrifice a few IPCs for a higher clockspeed, they're more than happy to because they know that Joe Schmoe can tell the Intel is faster. I mean, the Pentium's got 3 giggihertz and the Athalon only has 2. That's half again as fast!
Then explain to me why Centrino Pentium-M laptops are so damn popular and why the Itanium II 1.5/6MB is the highest single processor in the world.
Your logic is flawed.
Uh oh, little boy wants to play with the big kids. Sigh.
... blah blah blah....
Come back with some ammo, fanboy.
Lets get to the point of the arguement instead of straying, little kid.
You said Intel would sacrifice high IPC for high clock speed. I pointed out 2 products in Intel's line that has low clockspeed but high IPC. I have disproven your lovely theory about Intel loving high clock speeds.
So come back with some ammo, fanboi and prove me wrong.
Originally posted by: BoberFett
And what exactly do you mean by "the Itanium II 1.5/6MB is the highest single processor in the world"? The highest what? It returns the highest benchmarks in TPC tests? Highest framerate in Half Life 2? It can smoke more ganja than any other chip? Please, quantify your statement.
...
Come back with some ammo, fanboy.
Originally posted by: miniMUNCH
Scientific and entainment apps are driving the 64 bit computing platform onto the desktop...with hardware advances in the desktop come new apps for the masses... for example: direct real-time rendering of animated movies (imagine being able to download a animated moive in 10 Mb of compressed openGL, etc. scripts and watch final fantasy or something rendered real time).
Also, the big iron concept or the huge cluster is becoming somewhat passe. Instead of buying a 1 million dollar linux cluster composed of X number of processors...why don't we use all our desktops (which in total are 10X processors) at night to run the computations? There is software available today that does this and the systems can be a variety of different operating systems.
Mr. CTO is talking about how windows and word wont consume 4GB...no duh...word better not consume 4GB of space in 4 years or people will burn Microsoft top brass at the stake.
Scientific and entainment apps are driving the 64 bit computing platform onto the desktop...with hardware advances in the desktop come new apps for the masses... for example: direct real-time rendering of animated movies (imagine being able to download a animated moive in 10 Mb of compressed openGL, etc. scripts and watch final fantasy or something rendered real time).
Originally posted by: dexvx
Originally posted by: BoberFett
Intel loves to play the numbers game. If they can sacrifice a few IPCs for a higher clockspeed, they're more than happy to because they know that Joe Schmoe can tell the Intel is faster. I mean, the Pentium's got 3 giggihertz and the Athalon only has 2. That's half again as fast!
Then explain to me why Centrino Pentium-M laptops are so damn popular and why the Itanium II 1.5/6MB is the highest single processor in the world.
Your logic is flawed.
Originally posted by: Excelsior
Originally posted by: dexvx
Originally posted by: BoberFett
Originally posted by: dexvx
Originally posted by: BoberFett
Intel loves to play the numbers game. If they can sacrifice a few IPCs for a higher clockspeed, they're more than happy to because they know that Joe Schmoe can tell the Intel is faster. I mean, the Pentium's got 3 giggihertz and the Athalon only has 2. That's half again as fast!
Then explain to me why Centrino Pentium-M laptops are so damn popular and why the Itanium II 1.5/6MB is the highest single processor in the world.
Your logic is flawed.
Uh oh, little boy wants to play with the big kids. Sigh.
... blah blah blah....
Come back with some ammo, fanboy.
Lets get to the point of the arguement instead of straying, little kid.
You said Intel would sacrifice high IPC for high clock speed. I pointed out 2 products in Intel's line that has low clockspeed but high IPC. I have disproven your lovely theory about Intel loving high clock speeds.
So come back with some ammo, fanboi and prove me wrong.
No you haven't disproven the theory that Intel loves high clock speeds. Its a fact. We are talking about desktop chips here, not the Itanium. Now, in desktop chips, does Intel favor high mhz and low IPC or high IPC and lower mhz? You lose.
Originally posted by: dexvx
Yes I have disproven it. Pentium-M and Itanium are low clock high IPC. Do you understand that?
Note the original poster said "Intel loves to play the numbers game. If they can sacrifice a few IPCs for a higher clockspeed, they're more than happy to..." He did not say Intel loves to play blah blah blah with desktops. So next time how about taking some reading classes before you stumble again?
Originally posted by: jbond04
And Excelsior, I don't think the high MHz, low IPC strategy is necessarily a bad one. I don't know if you've taken a look at the P4 lineup lately, but the 3.2GHz P4 is definitely faster than the low MHz, high IPC Athlon XP 3200+. Granted, the Athlon 64 is rumored to be pretty impressive, but Prescott is waiting just around the corner (early November), running at 3.4GHz with several architectural advantages over the Northwood. I doubt the "high MHz, low IPC" Prescott will be an easy processor to beat...