Don't call a horse dead tell its glue

[Jeff7181]

Originally posted by: Intelia

Originally posted by: ZobarStyl

Originally posted by: Budman

Don't call a horse dead tell its glue

What are you saying? that sentence makes no sence to me.
??
???

QFT - I'm relatively sure Intelia could find a hardware forum that's based in its native language and troll there. That's not too much to ask, I think.

And back on-topic, claiming that the Cell SPE's (or a similar implementation) are the answer to our CPU performance per watt problems is utterly moronic. People love to flaunt all the things Cell can do at once, but the list of the things Cell's SPE's can't do well is definitely longer than the handful of things Sony likes to show off. Like Furen said above, the performance on paper for things like Cell looks phenomenal but that really doesn't translate to much real-world power. If Intel's answer to NetBurst's failure is an attempt to turn the processor world on its head with something like Cell they are definitely shooting in the wrong direction; I would much rather see what Intel can do simply by learning from all their NetBurst mistakes than see them try something off the wall like SPE's.

I thought this was a forum were new topics get introduced and talked about openly without bias. Zinn2b was the OP how is that Trolling . Why don't you stick your head back in the sand and keep it there.
You have the nerve to talk about trolling.

No, YOU are the OP. Stop making up stories, it's really annoying.

 

[Jeff7181]

Originally posted by: bunnyfubbles
Performance per watt means Pentium-M. They currently use less than A64s, which would give intel the lead according to their future marketing and advertisments. As far as Apple, the P-M makes sense. Only their tower rigs (far from their most popular systems) would bennefit from P-M technology. Their iBooks, PowerBooks, iMac, and MacMini are all perfect candidates for a direct P-M varient, if not a desktop oriented one (for the iMac and MacMini).

It isn't going to be the P-M slapped into the desktop world "as is", but reworked to keep up in areas where current P-Ms show glaring weakness.

Actually if Intel rates the Pentium M's wattage the same way they rate the Pentium 4 and Pentium D and Xeon, then the Pentium M's are pretty equal to single core Athlon 64's.

 

[ZobarStyl]

Originally posted by: Intelia
I thought this was a forum were new topics get introduced and talked about openly without bias. Zinn2b was the OP how is that Trolling .

Correct me if I'm wrong, but wouldn't account sharing with a banned member be a bannable offense?

 

[Intelia]

It might be Zebo . SO get it done . I get a bang out of you high school boys that can't get a date.

Zinn2b is not banned from here any longer . He just goes to other forums were people are less rude.

I on the other hand am waiting for the day when what Zinn2b was Banned for comes into being which Starts with Crossfire and ends with conroe, And than you will find out how many people actually do back Zinn2b. You will be amazed.

I get special privey because I am his wife and get to be a thorn until that time.
Also this Thread has a lot to do with why he was banned he was stating a lot of the things that this article says . If intel can get rid of the Compilers Itanic will be awsome .But it will also take on a new form. Intel has assured the Itanium name will be there.

 

[Intelia]

Originally posted by: Jeff7181

Originally posted by: Intelia

Originally posted by: ZobarStyl

Originally posted by: Budman

Don't call a horse dead tell its glue

What are you saying? that sentence makes no sence to me.
??
???

QFT - I'm relatively sure Intelia could find a hardware forum that's based in its native language and troll there. That's not too much to ask, I think.

And back on-topic, claiming that the Cell SPE's (or a similar implementation) are the answer to our CPU performance per watt problems is utterly moronic. People love to flaunt all the things Cell can do at once, but the list of the things Cell's SPE's can't do well is definitely longer than the handful of things Sony likes to show off. Like Furen said above, the performance on paper for things like Cell looks phenomenal but that really doesn't translate to much real-world power. If Intel's answer to NetBurst's failure is an attempt to turn the processor world on its head with something like Cell they are definitely shooting in the wrong direction; I would much rather see what Intel can do simply by learning from all their NetBurst mistakes than see them try something off the wall like SPE's.

I thought this was a forum were new topics get introduced and talked about openly without bias. Zinn2b was the OP how is that Trolling . Why don't you stick your head back in the sand and keep it there.
You have the nerve to talk about trolling.

No, YOU are the OP. Stop making up stories, it's really annoying.

What ever you say jeffy or is it jippy

 

[Intelia]

This statement right here says it all the sig fits perfectly


Actually if Intel rates the Pentium M's wattage the same way they rate the Pentium 4 and Pentium D and Xeon, then the Pentium M's are pretty equal to single core Athlon 64's.

-------------------------
"Freedom of speech is ultra important so stupid people will make their stupid statements so we know how stupid they are." - Ted Nugent

 

[Intelia]

Originally posted by: Jeff7181

Originally posted by: Intelia

Originally posted by: BlingBlingArsch
nice find. cant wait for these babies to hit the market in 2008-9 😉.

These babies are due to hit the market in the middle of 06. However Intel is way ahead of schedule. So sooner is better than later in my book.

Without a source to back that up, I have to call it bullsh!t.

Here is 1 link
http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=24586

Here is another
http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=24932

There is also one that shows merom taped out 30 days earlier than expected . that 1 you can find its at the same place

 

[Markfw]

First that does not say which chips wil be in middle of 2006, next, its still gossip, the inquirer.