Is all next generation hardware just hype?

[Hajime]

Thoreau: I can exceed the PCI bus limitations with a RAID consisting of 3 Seagate 'Cuda's with a bit of tuning.

Unfortunately, that was my exact point. A single hd, with 60 MB/s of transfer. A gigabit ethernet connection, transferring at 60 MB/s.

Oh, hey! We've pretty much saturated the PCI bus!

And let's not even get into PCI based-RAID. It's far easier to saturate the PCI bus nowadays then most people would believe..

 

[PingSpike]

Originally posted by: Pariah
Would you rather have hardware released before you need it and drop to mass market prices by the time you actually do need them, or wait for hardware to be released well after we actually need it, allowing companies to charge substantially higher prices due to demand created by everyone needing it?

Yep. You don't need this crap yet. But you will eventually want it. And by the time you do, it should already be almost everywhere...and cheap.

If you don't like it, its pretty easy to not be the beta tester...just don't buy the stuff until you need it.

 

[Zinn2b]

Although its true the performance benifits of the latest hardware don't seem to add much performance down the line it well. It doesn't help that reviewers who are prejuidice towards intel like Anandtech there latest motherboard review. They took the intel Abit board and tested it not at default setting as most would run it at and the speed its guarennted to run at and changed them that is pure bull.They said they want to compare apples to apples BS. If they would have tested at default settings as it should have been the comparisons between the AMD and Intel boards would have been much closer. Also for them to say that AMD is the Gaming king is more bull. I have a IC7 Max three That blows almost all AMD 64's away IN PC Mark 2004 PC mark 2003 PC mark 2005 there are a few AMD that best me but there are a lot of Intel that best me even though thats at higher clock speeds.Intel has the crown and they well keep it. To talk about gaming rigs and than say that AMD is king is pure bull. at stock speed amd is faster ???? But gamers O/C. And the intel plaform is faster if you O/C them period .If you can show me benchmarks on the web that the public post were AMD is king at any clocked speed show it to me .@3.6 things are very close but above that Intel starts walking away with the prise. So for all you AMD fans out there who cares about stock. O/C intel is No1 thats what a great processor can do for you.

 

[GoSharks]

Originally posted by: Thoreau
One more phrase - HDD bottleneck. Show me a hard drive that can push even one gigabit of data per second, and I'll show you my safe filled with three tons of solid gold bricks. =)

98MB/s

that will saturate most GigE controllers out there, remembering that there is overhead involved which takes max transfer rates down from the theoretical 120MB/s of GigE.

 

[Sideswipe001]

Originally posted by: Zinn2b
Although its true the performance benifits of the latest hardware don't seem to add much performance down the line it well. It doesn't help that reviewers who are prejuidice towards intel like Anandtech there latest motherboard review. They took the intel Abit board and tested it not at default setting as most would run it at and the speed its guarennted to run at and changed them that is pure bull.They said they want to compare apples to apples BS. If they would have tested at default settings as it should have been the comparisons between the AMD and Intel boards would have been much closer. Also for them to say that AMD is the Gaming king is more bull. I have a IC7 Max three That blows almost all AMD 64's away IN PC Mark 2004 PC mark 2003 PC mark 2005 there are a few AMD that best me but there are a lot of Intel that best me even though thats at higher clock speeds.Intel has the crown and they well keep it. To talk about gaming rigs and than say that AMD is king is pure bull. at stock speed amd is faster ???? But gamers O/C. And the intel plaform is faster if you O/C them period .If you can show me benchmarks on the web that the public post were AMD is king at any clocked speed show it to me .@3.6 things are very close but above that Intel starts walking away with the prise. So for all you AMD fans out there who cares about stock. O/C intel is No1 thats what a great processor can do for you.

1) This isn't an AMD vs Intel rant thread

2) Learn to use paragraphs.

3) Learn to spell.

4) At stock, the fastest AMD system beats the fastest Intel system at games. Try reading articles more carefully.


Now, in the argument of SATA vs PATA, one simple thing that I like is: no more master/slave. It eliminates those weird jumper problems you might have, as well as any incompatability of drives not liking to be on the same channel. To me, that combined with the smaller cables makes it a worthy upgrade.

 

[uOpt]

Regarding the PCI bus and disks.

Under Linux I get 133 MioBytes/sec netto out of the filesystem out of three Maxtor 160 GB (el cheapo drives) striped (software raid), with the SATA controller on my mainboard. No problem. Very cheap, very fast, no special hardware.

So that saturates the PCI bus already. If you want to serve all that junk out of the Ethernet interface, then you must not have the ethernet card on the same PCI bus. This is why Intel CSA is so important. Didn't test the NVidia out-of-PCI GbE stuff yet.

But even with a client with a PCI-connected GbE card I got 60 out of those 133 MioB/sec out to the client. I expect that the moment I switch to the new NVidia non-PCI GbE on the client I will be pretty close to the 100 MioB/sec that GbE can promise.

So all these limitations are very real. But that doesn't change the fact that PCIe is a joke for now. If you really want more than one CSA GbE and 32 bit PCI bandwidth you get a server board with 64 bit PCI slots or higher clocked PCI slots. Ethernet, IDE and SCSI cards for that are readily available, and neither the mainboard nor the cards are too expensive.

 

[Zinn2b]

I was not going amd vs. intel .I was referring to anandtechs methods of testing intels latest chipsets.They lowered the bus speed in order to scew the results .when u buy a motherboard you either run it at default speeds or you O/C it. This thread s ? is are the next gen . hardware better or not that was the ? So if you have reviewers testing at below default levels your not going to see the added benny's . Simple enough for you mate .AS for your statement That AMd beats Intel at stock speed thats really not the case. If you go to futuremark orb you well see that infact amd beats intel and intel beats amd they are infact very close. In pc mark 05 My score running cpu @ stock speed is 5935 there are many amd and intels ahead of me and many behind me .Granted @ 3.2 I have 1 of fastestest intels.But if you go threw the list you well see that AMD is atop today tomorrow it well be intel. they are very close to one another .SO even though you give the crown to AMD I say that it is to close to call. The reviewers come up with a lot of hype that is so much to do with nota. Nvidia vs. ATI for instance all the hype was the new generation was 2 as fast as the last well thats bull they were not even 2x faster than my old 9700 pro. so you go read the reviews I well check out the benchmarks and make my decisions based on what real people do with there PC performance . I have an X800XT its a nice card but does not live up to the reviewers hype. I smell money changing hands here.So forget the reviews checkout the benchmarks of every day people thats more inline with the facts.

 

[TechnoPro]

I will not allow my thread to be reduced to the superiority if AMD vs. Intel discourse. The answer is crsytal clear and does neccesitate any further time or energy. What is the answer, you ask? The answer is whichever one you like best. Simple.

Back on topic, when will we see speed improvements from these next-gen technologies. While I'm not into gaming, rendering and video encoding are activities that I'd like to see a real performance boost in.

 

[SonicIce]

I don't know about SATA2 or DDR2, but I have a feeling R500/NV50 is going to blow everyone away.

 

[Dennis Travis]

Zinn2b, Not to go off topic but show me one place Anand ever CHEATED on any benchmarks. That is a serious acusation and totally unfounded.

Back on Topic, Right now some of the new Tech does not seem to improve things that much but in the near future I think you will see a vast improvement in performance.

 

[Zebo]

IMO it's prudent to buy 6-12 months behind so you're not a beta tester and save considerable cash with minimal performance hit.

For example even today a 1.5 yr old ABIT AI7 and 2.8C overclocked to 3.6 is rock stable and smokin'. Buy a 74 gig raptor today is better because signifigant quieting and speed grades have been made to the drive making it still superior to anything out there. PLus it's $150 AR now instead of $250 when first came out. Buy a AGP 6800GT/X800 when the PCIe craze hits and you'll find these cards at signifigant discount at ebay and fosale forums due to people jumping on PCIe bandwagon.

How about a 1.5 yr old 754 AMD chip for $131 and a rock solid 754 board? This combo is only 1-5% slower than today's 939 and is way cheaper and more solid. Frankly there is no DFI 754 equivalent in 939 board world.

There are literally hundrends of examples of "old" is better.

The main thing is the new crap is'nt offering the kind of double performance gains seen in the past. It's slow and incremental now.

 

[elecrzy]

dual core, sata II w/ ncq and atapi support, pcie, and 100+ Mbps wifi are the only things i'm looking forward to include in my next system.