If the TDP is going to be lower than some of the Intel quads and they OC to 4ghz and beyond then I might yet stick with AMD for my quad build, if not I'm just gonna go with a Q6600.
Oh, and they're gonna have to be comparable to the INtel quads that are within 200 or so MHZ as I know AMD prob isn't anywhere near INtel's performance yet for mhz per mhz yet but if I can run 4ghz on AMD with a lower TDP and get similar performance as an Intel quad @ 3.6 - 3.8ghz then I'll stick with AMD.
Oh, and they're gonna have to be comparable to the INtel quads that are within 200 or so MHZ as I know AMD prob isn't anywhere near INtel's performance yet for mhz per mhz yet but if I can run 4ghz on AMD with a lower TDP and get similar performance as an Intel quad @ 3.6 - 3.8ghz then I'll stick with AMD.
Dadofamunky
Platinum Member
- Jan 4, 2005
- 2,184
- 0
- 0
Warning: totally off-topic. I just had to respond to this.
Yeah, OK, then you, Taltamir, can continue chopping your face into bloody hamburger with the old razors.
I myself had had absolutely none of the issues you describe. Shaving is immeasurably more comfortable; I don't get 5 o'clock shadow anymore; I have not cut myself even once with either the Gillette Fusion or Schick Quattro razors; razor burn is a thing of the past; using an electric razor is now a poor substitute. From being a daily chore I used to approach with a certain amount of fear, I now find something of a pleasure.I mean this, of course, all in good fun.
These are Halcyon days for Men Who Shave! In a funny way, I feel lucky to be alive when such things exist. Not so much as with microprocessors and hi-def, but a somewhat similar association.
I do agree about the Q6600; that CPU is not going to be obsolete for a long time. It is a superb product.
taltamir
Lifer
- Mar 21, 2004
- 13,576
- 6
- 76
Ok, let me clarify... The hair being cut below skin level is intentional, it gives you a closer shave that "lasts" longer, eliminating the 5 oclock shadow (since it has longer to grow), if you are a person with coarse curly hair (like most jews and blacks) you will get ingrown hairs from that, if your beard is soft and smooth you will not.
I am using "bump fighter", single blade and the blade is slightly raised, and it solved my ingrown hair problem (Which was "oddly enough" getting worse with each gilette revision which added more knives)
And electric razors are ALSO available in multiple knife configurations (doing the exact same thing... pulling the hair and then cutting it, causing it to shave below skin level)
Anyways, most 45nm intel quads have a low multiplier, meaning they OC worse than the Q6600, you have to pay over a 100$ extra to get a similarly ocing chip. So unless you have "spare money" Q6600 remains the king. (for the ~200$ and under quad core category).
Maybe some time in the future, after nehalem is released, prices on the Q9550 will go down.
I am using "bump fighter", single blade and the blade is slightly raised, and it solved my ingrown hair problem (Which was "oddly enough" getting worse with each gilette revision which added more knives)
a bump is a small ingrown hair, notice i never mentioned cutting myself or razor burns.
And electric razors are ALSO available in multiple knife configurations (doing the exact same thing... pulling the hair and then cutting it, causing it to shave below skin level)
Anyways, most 45nm intel quads have a low multiplier, meaning they OC worse than the Q6600, you have to pay over a 100$ extra to get a similarly ocing chip. So unless you have "spare money" Q6600 remains the king. (for the ~200$ and under quad core category).
Maybe some time in the future, after nehalem is released, prices on the Q9550 will go down.
Originally posted by: aigomorla
sign me up for an AMD 38749234932473298479283424 X50
Why are the numbers getting bigger and bigger?
Bigger means better, right?
90nm is better than 65nm. Oh, bad example cuz its true with AMD.
I mean 65nm is better than 45nm!
I'm still waiting for my flying car that gets 300mpg. I don't care what they call it, but until it shows up I am going to feel like this decade has just been an overclocked version of the 1980's.
I'm still waiting for my jetpack! When I was growing up, they promised us that we all would have jetpacks by the 21st century...
taltamir
Lifer
- Mar 21, 2004
- 13,576
- 6
- 76
Heh, good one idontcare... but in all seriousness...
there is a guy with a jetpack (but he requires air dropping). they make personal helicopters / car like thing (it can drive) with folding blades (so they can fit in a standard garage). 30k$ (and you can buy a kit to assemble your own mini copter for 25k, non folding). Those things though are too impractical, it will take LONGER to get somewhere that way (since you have to take all that effort to prep it)...
Considering I have never used even 50% of the speed of my car, and often go at 20% of it, I don't see how flying cars would help, the issue is TRAFFIC...
Which is why a GOOD public transport system (like in berlin) is so awesome. You can walk less than 2 minutes to get to a bus station, every 5 minutes a bus comes, every 3 stations you hit a subway/bus hybrid station, and the subway goes way faster than any car would... so you get places FAST.
there is a guy with a jetpack (but he requires air dropping). they make personal helicopters / car like thing (it can drive) with folding blades (so they can fit in a standard garage). 30k$ (and you can buy a kit to assemble your own mini copter for 25k, non folding). Those things though are too impractical, it will take LONGER to get somewhere that way (since you have to take all that effort to prep it)...
Considering I have never used even 50% of the speed of my car, and often go at 20% of it, I don't see how flying cars would help, the issue is TRAFFIC...
Which is why a GOOD public transport system (like in berlin) is so awesome. You can walk less than 2 minutes to get to a bus station, every 5 minutes a bus comes, every 3 stations you hit a subway/bus hybrid station, and the subway goes way faster than any car would... so you get places FAST.
Cheap electric razors are probably the best way to go. The heads dull within a few years and the batteries normally become less efficient within about a year, but if you leave it tethered to a power outlet all the time, it'll be ready to go when you need it to be. Plus, it's easier to shave one-handed while you fly a jet pack into work.
I know this is way off topic, but I am interested in the conversation anyway. Traffic is a problem mostly because we are bottlenecked by the roads. If we got rid of roads (flying cars) we would only be bottlenecked by the destination. If you have ever flown an airplane, you would understand this. Flying is much easier than driving, mostly because you don't have to worry about actually running into anything (obstructions are so far apart, and there are rules as to what altitude to fly depending on direction and other things). The only difficult part is landing (and to a lesser extent, taking off). So flying cars really would alleviate traffic. A Cesna that flys at a leisurely 50MPH can get to Howell from Pontiac in about 30 minutes, while taking the highway takes an hour, even though the speed limit is higher.
Actually on topic, I hear that the release is early January for Deneb. Is this right?
taltamir
Lifer
- Mar 21, 2004
- 13,576
- 6
- 76
no they will not martimus, the moment you start putting a lot of flying cars up there, its the moment you start having car crashes in the air. tall buildings are still in the way, birds and wires and other obstacles would be a disaster, etc...
The only thing it will give you is multi lane traffic, as in, you could stack 2 or 3 lanes, but that also has issues with accidents (switching lanes up and down). It makes much more sense to simply expand the highway system to alleviate traffic instead. (or build a mass transit system).
The only thing it will give you is multi lane traffic, as in, you could stack 2 or 3 lanes, but that also has issues with accidents (switching lanes up and down). It makes much more sense to simply expand the highway system to alleviate traffic instead. (or build a mass transit system).
- Sep 28, 2005
- 21,067
- 3,574
- 126
bwahahahaha..
taltamir, you need an award for the most offtopic drags this section has seen.
But your correct. Giving our already bad drivers 1 more dimension in which they can crash, up and down, = fail unless cars drive themselves.
the day cars fly is the day we discover medichlorians and start using the force alone with discoveries that there are many different types of ailen lifeforms that will co-exist with us , interplanetary travel will be the norm...
but i really hope that deneb delivers...
but i really hope that deneb delivers...
Originally posted by: aigomorla
bwahahahaha..
taltamir, you need an award for the most offtopic drags this section has seen.
But your correct. Giving our already bad drivers 1 more dimension in which they can crash, up and down, = fail unless cars drive themselves.
I haven't seen any 5000 ft tall buildings, or wires. You act like you need narrow corridors for aerial roads. It isn't like the Jetsons, you would be able to fly at any altitude within your designated area, and each is 500 ft apart to avoid collisions. You would fly a direct line from your departure point to the destination, and would not need to follow any road, and you could go as wide as you want. The congestion would be at the end points (both the departure and destination), so it would not be perfect by any means. It is more like Satelite televeision versus cable. There are only 2 points of failure for the Satelite signal (at the source, and at your dish), while there are infinite sources of failure along a cable route. that is why satelite signals are much more reliable than a cable signal. That said, I have no interest in a flying car, nor do I want to get back into flying airplanes either.
I don't really know. I wish I could tell you. Shanghai, I am pretty sure, is on track for this year, but I never knew what the Deneb schedule was to begin with. It could be on track for January 2009 as far as I know.
I think AMD 20550 should be faster than Intel 80562 but not Intel 80569???
EDIT:- ALso from what i can gather can ANYONE TELL ME THE RELEASES DATE FOR "Gillette deneb" ???
EDIT:- ALso from what i can gather can ANYONE TELL ME THE RELEASES DATE FOR "Gillette deneb" ???
waffleironhead
Diamond Member
- Aug 10, 2005
- 7,061
- 570
- 136
I would have preferred they named these things 9950+,9850+,etc. ala nvidia. That would have made things clearer. /sarcasm
waffleironhead
Diamond Member
- Aug 10, 2005
- 7,061
- 570
- 136
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 22K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
News NVIDIA and Intel to Develop AI Infrastructure and Personal Computing Products- Started by poke01
- Replies: 400
Facebook
Twitter