Computer HW CPU - Berkeley CSUA MOTD
Berkeley CSUA MOTD:Computer:HW:CPU:
Results 301 - 367 of 367   < 1 2 3 >
Berkeley CSUA MOTD
2021/10/17 [General] UID:1000 Activity:popular

2012/3/29-6/4 [Computer/HW/Memory, Computer/HW/CPU, Computer/HW/Drives] UID:54351 Activity:nil
3/29    A friend wants a PC (no mac). She doesn't want Dell. Is there a
        good place that can custom build for you (SSD, large RAM, cheap video
        card--no game)?
        \_ As a side note: back in my Cal days more than two decades ago when
           having a 387SX made me the only person with floating-point hardware,
           most machines were custom built.
           most machines were custom built.  -- yuen
           \_ did that make you a better programmer/gamer/etc?
              \_ No.  I was writing a pre-emptive multi-threading library as
                 part of an effort to port some floating-point-heavy Unix code
                 to DOS for CS199.  I couldn't figure out how to save the
                 "context" of Borland C++'s floating-point emulation library.
                 The options were to either mask context switching around all
                 floating point operation or get a co-processor.  I ended up
                 getting the co-procoessor.  -- yuen
                 to DOS for CS199 (
                 mypubs/bilmes1992-icmcmood.pdf).  I couldn't figure out how
                 to save the "context" of Borland C++'s floating-point
                 emulation library.  The options were to either mask context
                 switching around all floating point operations or get a
                 co-processor.  I ended up getting the co-procoessor.  -- yuen
        \_ Why not Dell? What is it about Dell she doesn't like?
        \_ Fry's? HP? Lenovo? The only place I have done this is Lenovo.
2011/11/15-30 [Computer/HW/CPU] UID:54229 Activity:nil
11/15   40th Anniversary of the 4004: [arstechnica]
        \_ When is the 40-year-and-4-month anniversary?
2010/3/9-30 [Computer/HW/CPU, Computer/SW] UID:53748 Activity:nil
        I failed to see why you must starve the CPU of electricity. Why
        can't you just simulate that in software?
        \_ And if you can simulate that in software, why not just single-
           stepping the simulated CPU and get the key out?
2009/6/30-7/15 [Computer/HW/CPU, Computer/SW/Unix] UID:53101 Activity:nil
6/30    Thanks very much for all the volunteer work on soda!  Two questions:
        1. When will HTTP be up again?
          \_ Probably not this week - 4th and all that.  Next week?
        2. There used to be a web page that describes the historical hardware
           for soda machine.  What's the URL again?  I forgot.
          \_ It's on the wiki now -
                Not up to date with the most recent rev yet
        Thanks again.
2009/6/1-3 [Computer/HW/CPU] UID:53068 Activity:high
5/31    History of winners and losers by *popularity*:
        VHS > Beta Max
        USB2 > Firewire
        x86 > PowerPC > Everything Else > DEC Alpha > Itanium
        BlueRay > HDDvd
        \_ It's too early to tell RE: "Blue"Ray. They may both turn out to be
           losers. If BluRay never catches on, the wrong format won or they
           both turned out to be losers. Consumers may stick with DVDs as
           good enough and in 5 years move to True HD netflix/ms/apl downloads.
        \_ PC (DOS/Windows) > Mac
           \_ XP > Vista
              iPod > Zune (this isn't really fair)
                                \_ why not? Zune sucked so much...
              IE > Netscape
           QWERTY > Dvorak
           135 > 126
           Windows > Unix/Linux/etc. > NetWare
           RISC > CISC
           (p.s. Sorry! I typed it backward yesterday.  Should be CISC > RISC.)
           \_ This is not clear at all.
              \_ It's quite clear that the above is wrong.  Where are all the
                 RISC machines?  Since CPU speed has outpaced memory and bus
                 speed, fetching is very expensive, which makes CISC a
                 performance win for now.
                 \_ It's still very unclear which will win. For mobile
                    devices, RISC is still very much alive.
                    \_ RISC is very much alive everywhere.  Even king CISC
                       Intel is really RISC with a translation layer for
                       crappy CISC instructions that only still exist for
                       backwards compatability.
           Ethernet > Token Ring
           I suppose you're only talking about winning and losing, not about
           which ones are actually better.
        \_ Get your dates right.
        \_ Nintendo > Sega
        \_ Atari > Coleco
        \_ Wii <?> PS3
2009/5/26-30 [Computer/HW/CPU] UID:53045 Activity:nil
5/26    Engineering is HOT man! Super hot co-inventor of USB at Intel:
2009/5/13-20 [Computer/HW/CPU] UID:52993 Activity:nil
5/12    THE AMD! USA! USA!
2021/10/17 [General] UID:1000 Activity:popular

2009/5/6 [Computer/HW/CPU] UID:52952 Activity:moderate
5/5     Any idea why the AMD only added 8 more registers with the AMD64 arch.?
        Why 16 registers and not, say, 32?
        \_ To double the accessible register count, you need one more bit
           in the instruction stream _per_ register field.  x86 instruction
           set is already packed like rat's nest as is.
2009/5/2-6 [Computer/HW/CPU] UID:52936 Activity:nil
5/2     why would my php application chew up 20-30 percent of my CPU when
        run on a real machine, but will consitently take up 60-70 percent
        of CPU when run in a vmware vm ?
        \_ the real CPU has more capacity.
           \_ Yes, did you allocate all of your CPU to the VM? Maybe you only
              gave it one CPU or something like that.
        \_ Overhead from VMWare using cycles. If you don't have vm extensions
           for your CPU that's liable to make things slower too.
2009/4/11-20 [Computer/HW/CPU, Computer/HW/Display] UID:52842 Activity:low
4/10    What consumes less power on a LCD screen, showing an
        all white scren or showing an all black screen?
        \_ Depends what kind of LCD it is.  Twisted-nematic displays (used in
           everything from digital watches to good-quality monitors) use more
           power for black, as you can guess by looking at a watch.  In-plane
           switching displays (popular in more expensive monitors) use more
           power for white.  Either way, it's a pretty small effect; most of
           an LCD's power usage is the backlight.  Here are some actual power
        \_ Depends on the LCD technology.  Twisted-nematic displays (found
           in everything from digital watches to good-quality monitors) use
           more power for black, as you can guess by looking at a watch.
           In-plane switching displays (popular in more expensive monitors)
           use more power for white.  Either way, it's a pretty small effect;
           the main power consumption is from the backlight.  Here are some
           actual power comparisons:
           \_ Some LCD screens (ones with "dynamic contrast ratios") will dim
              the backlight for dark/black images.
2009/2/25-3/3 [Computer/HW/CPU, Computer/SW/OS/Linux] UID:52632 Activity:nil
2/25    $100 Plug  computer:
        \_ Kind of cool, but also a bit misleading.  Still,
           outside of file serving that should be able to do
           almost everything a home server needs to do
2009/1/16-23 [Computer/HW/CPU] UID:52404 Activity:nil
1/16    AMD to layoff 9%, suspend 401(k) match, cut engineer salaries 10%
        \_ Awwww, too bad                                       -Intel
           \_ My heart bleeds for you. --transmeta.
              \_ Wait, another sodan worked there? --ex-transmeta
                 \_ Hello transmeta-coward, meet another transmeta-coward.
2008/12/10-16 [Computer/HW/CPU, Computer/HW/Drives] UID:52220 Activity:moderate
12/9    Another idea for the CSUA that lets you spend money and maybe get some
    cool toys. Instead of buying a beefy server (like say, a massive server
    with 20 386DX processors), buy a few cheap machines (like the ones
    mentioned below) that have good disks and work on failover / load
    balancing. A netscaler or other piece of hardware is complete overkill,
    but maybe hacking an OpenBSD box could do the trick. The idea is that
    this project:
    - Lets you learn a lot about failover/redundancy/scalability, which
      are real-world, relevant skills and also interesting. The fake
      CSUA head-hunter would be all over these real skills.
    - Increases the reliability/performance of soda / csua machines.
    - Gives a justification for buying new hardware.
    - Give a cause for the CSUA.
    Good idea: ..
    Bad idea:
        \_ 386DX is cool:
        \_ Too late, the server has already been ordered. We already have cheap
           machines, and we're note exactly getting pounded on the web, nor do
           we have sites to scale up. We already have stuff on FreeBSD as well
           as backup LDAP. The point of failure is keg and the fact that we have
           16 small disks. We've also ordered new disks to rectify that. I gat
           16 small disks. We've also ordered new disks to rectify that. I got
           the idea that you'd rather we work around a lack of resources than
           exploit more than we think we need...or at least, that's what I keep
           hearing. I don't think that's really going to help. --t
           as backup LDAP. The point of failure is keg and the fact that we
           have 16 small disks. We've also ordered new disks to rectify that.
           I got the idea that you'd rather we work around a lack of resources
           than exploit more than we think we need...or at least, that's what
           I keep hearing. I don't think that's really going to help. --t
           \_ Good decision. Especially good to just make a decision and
              start fixing things, instead of debating endlessly.
           \_ I like what you did more than my proposal! Stability, not speed,
              should be the first factor. Good disks and stable builds are
              two of the biggest contributors to stability. Do you still hit
              up alums for donations? -op
              \_ We were going to hit up alumni for donations for the server
                 before we got it, but the stability was (literally) getting us
                 down and so we decided to get the new server. Steven, last I
                 heard, plans on installing ESXi (the free one) on it setting
                 it up. It should be in place by mid-to-late-January, possibly
                 heard, plans on installing ESXi (the free one) on it setting it
                 up. It should be in place by mid-to-late-January, possibly
                 earlier. --t
2008/12/4-10 [Computer/HW/CPU, Computer/HW/Drives] UID:52163 Activity:nil
12/4    A question to you old crufy alumni: So lately we've suggested
        VMs, and been asked why it's necessary. We've suggested top-of-the-line
        hardware and been told we don't need that much power. So I'd like to
        ask -- what exactly do you think the CSUA is supposed to _be_?
        \_ Noone said VMs weren't needed.  They suggested you use the
        \_ No one said VMs weren't needed.  They suggested you use the
           there is quality, free VM software out there that you could
           use.  Asking for the for pay stuff is fine, but you aren't
           likely to actually get it, so take what's free and works.
           \_ I guess...would it hurt that much to ask for the expensive stuff,
              \_ When the company supplies a free version that works quite
                 well you will get a lot more traction towards getting the
                 expensive version if you have used the free version, shown
                 that it's actually getting some use beyond "we installed
                 it cause it was kewl" and that there would actually be
                 some advantage to having the pay version.  VM stuff IS
                 really cool and worth playing with.  The free version
                 exists because really, until you have a large install
                 there's really no need for expensive management tools.
        \_ Offering a rant, then an answer for my own question:
           Sure, VMs aren't strictly necessary, or people can go to
           OCF if they want access to computing resources or practice
           with sysadminning. But they'd be supported by OCF, which
           has basically nothing to do with the CSUA (anymore), not
           to mention they're bound by whatever the OCF is willing to
           allow/install/support on their servers. VMs let us tinker w/o
           worrying about giving root, or a bad program taking down the
           server or monopolizing server resources. As a consequence
           it is also useful for stability's sake, independently of
           offering students VMs, as we can separate services out and
           move them between servers as load necessitates. Do we need
           the speed? We'd certainly see some benefit. Mail processing
           is pretty laggy, and even with my donation of vermouth (with an
           Athlon 64 2800+; it replaced a 500Mhz computer) it struggles
           to keep up. Upgrading away from our failing 16-disk ~5TB array
           to something newer and less failure-prone may not be manly -
           but it certainly seems sane to me. If we're going to spend
           $2k to replace our servers, why not spend $3k to replace our
           servers and move the CSUA forward?

           I doubt anyone objects to getting equipment so the servers
           suck less, but I think that in order to keep the CSUA from
           stagnating, we need to seriously move forward in what we offer
           students. Attendance to helpsessions isn't what it once was,
           and the computing services the CSUA currently offers simply
           aren't as attractive to students anymore. Anyone can find a
           UNIX login server offered by the campus with webspace (w/
           CGI) and shell access. Most people now join the CSUA as a
           social group or to use the office machines and hang out. At
           this rate we're going to lose our technical relevance,
           and what then? Regardless of overlap with the OCF, we
           need to move our technical resources forward and attract
           technically-minded students again, because at the moment,
           we're not. The CSUA is wandering at the moment, without a
           clearly-defined direction. If you guys are suggesting that we
           don't need to do more for students in this area, then I'd like
           to hear your thoughts on what we do (other than the obvious
           'build better student-alumni relations' line).
           \_ I dunno, the CSUA hasn't had a clear direction since I joined
              in '98.  (Web and email hosting wasn't terribly relevent then
              either.) We started mentoring in 2002, but I it always seemed
              either.) We started mentoring in 2002, but it always seemed
              like a bit of a flop to me.  I've noticed video games have been
              more important since I left.  Anyway, the CSUA is always trying
              new things.  I don't think that's a bad thing.  I just don't
              know if we need an i7 fileserver.
              know if we need an i7 fileserver.  I guess I don't really see
              how improving the HW -> more members.  I don't mind, really,
              I'd like soda to work better, but I don't know who's going to
              join because we have a nice fileserver or VMs for sys admining.
              It's not a bad thing, but it's all stuff people can do at home
              now.  It's good for current members, but I don't really see it
              as attractive to new members.
           \_ I already talked about this down below.  The primary function
           of the CSUA is to be a social, community-building organization.
           The machines exist to support that function.  It used to be that
           the services the CSUA provided on its hardware were directly
           contributing to the community--there was a time when having an
           email server and web hosting was a really cool thing, and people
           would join the CSUA just for that.  Then they'd get sucked into
           using wall and MOTD and become part of the community.  But now
           most of the services the CSUA historically provided are no longer
           interesting; everyone's got more email addresses than they want,
           web hosting is free and better elsewhere, and wall and MOTD are
           dead.  Providing virtual machines isn't an inherently bad idea,
           but what's the upshot?  How will you use it to help build
           community?  What services will you provide that contribute to
           community?  -tom
              I guess I don't really see how improving the HW -> more members.
              I don't mind, really, I'd like soda to work better, but I don't
              know who's going to join because we have a nice fileserver or VMs
              for sys admining. It's not a bad thing, but it's all stuff people
              can do at home now.  It may be good for current members, which is
              fine, but I don't really see it as attractive to new members.
           \_ I already talked about this down below.  The primary
              function of the CSUA is to be a social,
              community-building organization.  The machines exist to
              support that function.  It used to be that the services
              the CSUA provided on its hardware were directly
              contributing to the community--there was a time when
              having an email server and web hosting was a really cool
              thing, and people would join the CSUA just for that.
              Then they'd get sucked into using wall and MOTD and
              become part of the community.  But now most of the
              services the CSUA historically provided are no longer
              interesting; everyone's got more email addresses than
              they want, web hosting is free and better elsewhere, and
              wall and MOTD are dead.  Providing virtual machines
              isn't an inherently bad idea, but what's the upshot?
              How will you use it to help build community?  What
              services will you provide that contribute to community?
              \_ perhaps having VMs available would make more interesting
                 helpsessions feasible, as we could go in-depth on some topic
                 and provide an avenue for students to go further in-depth
                 after the fact (i.e. helpsession setting up X piece of cool
                 software and giving them a sandbox to play in). --toulouse
        \_ As a crufty alum, I think the CSUA should encourage undergrads
           to learn about software, cs, computing, &c. by providing ugs
           with opportunities to try out and develop new things in a friendly
           When I was an ug there were several CSUA projects, such as the
           lottery scheduler, that offered such opportunities.  I think
           that the VM proposal would offer a similar opportunity and should
           be pursued.
           Re VM software - I agree with a pp that setting up a free sol'n,
           such as Sun's virtual box, is probably a better idea than asking
           for a VMWare donation. IMO, the process of learning how to make
           free software work for one's needs teaches one about much more
           about software and computing than installing and configuring a
           pre-packaged commercial sol'n does.
           Re HW - While I understand the attraction of getting the latest,
           1337est hardware, my experience suggests that going with a sol'n
           of the previous gen hardware is always preferable in terms of
           maintainability and reliability.
           maintainability and reliability. -crufty-alum
           \_ :| Well, the Core i7 Xeons as I understand it will be coming out
              some time after the Core i7 has been out, so perhaps that will
              positively affect their quality? I see what you're saying, but
              I've never really been burned by new hardware, other than lack
              of drivers and the like. Care to share some stories? --toulouse
              \_ Well, mostly the problems I've had are with the drivers for
                 the motherboards that are required to run the most recent
                 cpus.  We had no end of problems with an Intel MB for the
                 first round of Xeon chips (there were no reliable linux
                 drivers for the onboard gig-e ethernet, the sata controller,
                 the scsi controller, or the lights out management module).
                 I had similar problems with nforce boards for AMD chips and
                 recall similar problems when the PPros and P2s first came
                 out as well.
                 For the record, I'm not opposed to the CSUA buying the latest
                 hardware.  I'm just not convinced that the projects you want
                 to do (e.g. VM) require it, i.e., what is the difference btwn
                 getting a 4 core C2D system (or 2 C2D systems) and getting one
                 Core i7 system?  [If there is a big difference, I apologize
                 for my ignorance - I am not an engineer anymore and have lost
                 touch with the details of recent cpu performance] -crufty-alum
                 \_ It seems practicality and wisdom are prevailing over our
                    nerd-rections, and we may go with a Dual C2Q Xeon server. We
                    await final word from the pupp--er, President. While we're
                    at it, we'll probably get new, better hard drives.
                    nerd-rections, and we may go with a Dual C2Q Xeon server.
                    We await final word from the pupp--er, President. While
                    we're at it, we'll probably get new, better hard drives.
2008/12/3-8 [Computer/HW/CPU] UID:52157 Activity:kinda low
12/3    Are any of you CSUA alums working at Intel?  Is it possible that we
        might be able to hit Intel up for donated/partially donated (reduced
        price) Core i7 Xeons when they come out?  Who would be a good person
        to contact about something like that?  We're of course willing to put
        out for them - perhaps we'll tattoo an Intel logo on toulouse if that's
        what they want :-p  -- steven
        \_ fyi my wife recently started there and they eliminated the employee
           discount on CPUs a few months ago
        \_ I work at Oracle and I can get you 25% discount on our license
           and bronze level support. How many CPUs are you thinking? With
           a 25% discount, each CPU support is only $75,000/year.
           \_ Why are you guys so obsessed getting an i7-based machine?
              You look like salivating hardware dweebs, rather than people
              with a plan.
              \_ Well, this is the CPU-Salivating Undergrad Association,
                 isn't it?
                 \_ Drool
              \_ I love Oracle and Larry Ellison is my master. We're trained
                 samurais and we'll obliterate anyone who makes us lose
                 face. Shut up and buy Oracle. You have no choice.
              \_ Because they're shiny.  What, are you saying we should buy old
                 stuff?  Because, as best I can tell, buying ghetto/janky
                 equipment is most of the reason our stuff goes down so often.
                 Why so much hate?  Do you want us to buy more secondhand or
                 outdated gear that can't stay up for more than five minutes
                 at a time?  If you're so convinced we don't have a plan,
                 why don't you suggest one?
                     \_ stop having  a "cpu centric view" instead of a
                        "what problem are you trying to solve" centric view.
                        what is the csua's hardware budget? is you want
                        an i7 to play games, that makes logical sense although
                        seems politically objectionle, but all this stuff about
                        virtual machines and zfs etc doesnt make sense.
                        you arent trying to replicate the ocf on a single
                        \_ I don't imagine we'd buy Core i7 Xeons for the
                           purpose of playing games.
                           \_ So what are you going to do? Linear algebra
                 \_ On the contrary, it's often the shiny stuff that doesn't
                    have all the bugs worked out. Old/outdated and shiny/new
                    are not the only options here. I sense a third choice...
                    \_ Seconded.  I was around when we bought a shiny new dual-
                       Xeon for (the current) soda.  FreeBSD didn't support
                       some of the HW, so now we run Linux and it breaks all
                       the time.
                    \_ Seriously.  You can go out today and spend < $1000 and
                       get a brand new computer with quality timetested
                       hardware that will fulfill csua's hardware needs
                       10x over.  Spend a little more and you can get some
                       lower end machines to play with/learn how to sysadmin.
                 \_ Ironically, right now the two machines with the most problems
                    are keg and scotch.  Those are our two remaining FreeBSD
                    machines.  Soda has a month of uptime, which is definitely
                    not great, but it's certainly not crashing all the time.
                    I do like FreeBSD but it's certainly not being the all-star
                    right now.  I suspect that scotch has a hardware problem but
                    keg is unclear whether it's a hardware or software problem.
                 \_ Ironically, right now the two machines with the most
                    problems are keg and scotch.  Those are our two remaining
                    FreeBSD machines.  Soda has a month of uptime, which is
                    definitely not great, but it's certainly not crashing all
                    the time. I do like FreeBSD but it's certainly not being
                    the all-star right now.  I suspect that scotch has a
                    hardware problem but keg is unclear whether it's a
                    hardware or software problem.
                    \- the freebsd machine with problems isnt fbsd7+multicore
                       is it? we are trying to solve a diffcult problem with
                       that combination and would be interested in other cases.
                       although i assume this is ancient hw with bugs. btw in
                       my fairly long experience linux does worse things on
                       buggy hw than freebsd. like corrupt data without
                       detection. this may have gotten better in linux-recent
                       [i admit linux-recent doesnt drive me insane daily
                       like it used to]. --psb
        \_ I miss those days when soda was a 20 * 386DX-25 machine.
           \_ I certainly learned a lot.  I remember when it was a big
              deal that I had soda up for 100 days in a row.  (wow!)
              But that setup was due to necessity; I agree that a big
              honking hardware purchase isn't really necessary.  Start
              by trying to get experience developing and sizing a
              scalable configuration--that'll be more valuable than
              throwing a huge piece of hardware at the problem.  -tom
              \_ Agreed. Sysadm is NEVER about getting the equipment and
                 the people you need. You almost NEVER get the resources
                 you requested for. Sysadm is taking what you have at hand
                 and try to make the best out of it while not bringing down
                 the organization.
                 \_ Scotch - broken. Keg - overloaded, and 16 disks amounting
                    to about 5TB of data; Lifesaver - dead. Making do with
                    broken computers is not a viable plan. Buying a server now
                    means it will be obsolete in a few months, and will be a
                    waste of money.
                    waste of money. --toulouse
                          \- so is buying a $3k computer to do a job
                             better done by 2 $1k computers.
                    \_ High end brand new computer components depreciate a
                       hell of a lot faster than middle of the road workhorse
                       components.  Cheap computer hardware is insanely fast
                       these days.
                    \_ Look, it's your network to run, I'm not going to tell
                       you how to do it.  But I think you probably haven't
                       looked at where your bottlenecks are; does CPU really
                       matter to the services you're running?  I always buy
                       servers with CPUs two and three generations removed
                       from the cutting edge, unless the application will
                       be CPU-bound, which it rarely is.  A server doesn't
                       become obsolete just because someone came out with
                       a new chipset; it becomes obsolete when it no longer
                       works for your application.  -tom
                       \_ I rarely agree with tom because he's such a
                          stubborn ass but this is one time I'll say...
                          +1 to tom's advice.           -anon sysadm
                       \_ I have to agree with Tom on this. The CPUs and
                          memory are unlikely to be the bottleneck. --jwm
                          memory speed are unlikely to be the bottleneck.
                          A slightly older chip would is likely to be fine
                          and more stable. --jwm
                          \_ On the other hand, the CSUA is a place for people
                             to experiment and try out the new stuff, even if
                             it is to a certain extent at the cost of
                             some reliability. -ausman
                             \_ "we want to 'try out' a really fast
                                processor because it is cool" isnt a
                                serious project. this smacks of geekery
                                not leadership. now if you spent a modest
                                amount on say a ps3 to get exposure to the
                                cell, i could see that might be interesting
                                [eventhough more likely than not such a
                                purchase would be to "test" video games].
                    \_ Computers are always obsolete "in a few months".
                        \_ Intel doesn't release a shiny new architecture that
                           finally catches up to AMD in many respects every few
                           \_ Have you been hiding the last few processor
                              cycles?  AMD hasn't exactly been on top of
                              its game.
                           \_ What difference does it make?  How would the
                              services be different on a new processor?
                              Are CSUA people writing assembly code?  This
                              isn't like a new game console where the
                              supported applications are totally different;
                              the applications won't care what the underlying
                              processor architecture is.  -tom
2008/9/20-23 [Computer/HW/Memory, Computer/HW/CPU] UID:51241 Activity:low
9/20    I am running NAT on an Extreme Networks switch connected to a
        Cisco switch at GigE speeds. Copying a file across the same link
        w/o using NAT gets about 25 MB/sec, but with NAT turned on I get
        2.5 MB/sec. The CPU is 98% idle and there is plenty of RAM. I know
        that NAT in s/w has an overhead but could it realistically be a
        factor of 10 slower?
        \_ what kind of file copy?
           \_ NFS or SFTP. Same symptoms with either.
        \_ Are you sure it is not your test platform that is slower? This
           seems really crappy. Are you perhaps having a duplex mismatch
           problem on the switch the NAT is connected to?
           \_ What test platform? You mean the one I am copying with? I
              said that I get 25 MB/sec with NAT off and 2.5 MB/sec with
              NAT on - using the exact same hardware. Therefore, I doubt
              it is a duplex problem or it would be present both times.
2008/9/16-19 [Computer/HW/CPU, Computer/HW/Display] UID:51184 Activity:nil
9/16    Tim Sweeney on the future of GPUs
        I like Sweeney, I don't care about Unreal, but ZZT was a heck of a
        \_ Interesting. Co-processor-like units have come and gone
           throughout the history of computing. GPU, co-processor, what-not,
           will all be obviated by advances in processors and systems
           integration. I've no doubt GPU-like units will come back in
           time, but not for another decade or so.
        \_ Unreal's renderer is pretty shit.  Everything looks plastic,
           polygon counts are pretty low, and framerate is very peaky.
           It's amazing how much Unreal engine games all look the same.
2008/8/14-21 [Computer/HW/CPU] UID:50872 Activity:nil
8/14    WTF SUNW got renamed into JAVA? Even after a 1 for 4 shares _reverse_
        stock split, JAVA trades at around $10. Nothing has changed.
        Still trying to cling onto Java(TM). Losers.
        \_ Any thoughts on AMD?  I bought in around 4.5 a few weeks ago
           after Ruiz kicked out.  Debating whether to get out around +15%.
           But a lot of new announcements, but in areas I don't understand
           (GPUs).  And now there is the "fabless" plan.
           \_ Very high risk, but I doubt that Intel will want to kill their
              only competitor and risk DoJ wrath.
              \_ Intel can totally crush AMD any time it wants to. I worked
                 there for a while and the basic strategy is Intel always
                 has benchmarks and projects ahead of its time, and whenever
                 competitors release a new benchmark, they'd release an
                 even better one. They keep competitors around like cats
                 playing with 1/2 dead mice. It's no fun when you kill
                 them, so let them live a little.
                 \_ Yes, I agree with that ... that's what I told my
                    engineering friends: Intel can complete on two
                    axes, performance and price, while AMD only had
                    one hope ... combine that with the management and
                    operational disfunction.  On the other hand, I think
                    it's a reasonable question to ask "Is AMD worth more
                    than $3.5 billion".  Well, it's nice to be up another
                    6% today.  It's a small position, since when I bought
                    in I was staring at the abyss.
           \_ AMD has a very sexy atom competitor coming out soon.  If
              notebooks do take off like they are threatinging it could be
              good news for amd.
        \_ This was announced a year ago, wasn't it?
2008/6/12-13 [Computer/HW/CPU] UID:50242 Activity:moderate
6/12    Guantanamo Inmates May Seek Release, High Court Says
        Hot damn.
        \_ Yah, now we'll just have to kill them on the battlefield without
           getting intel from them.
        \_ Yah, now we'll just have to play Battlefield 2 to kill
           using my awsome Intel processor.
        \_ yah, now we'll just have to kill them on the battlefield without
           getting intel from them. [don't delete my post asshole]
        \_ Yah, now we'll just have to play Battlefield 2 to kill time
           using my awsome Intel processor. [love wiping out assholes]
                                             \_ Wipe your own asshole
        \_ yah, now we'll just have to kill them on the battlefield without
           getting intel from them. [don't delete my post asshole]
        \_ Damn that rule of law.
           \_ Which is ignored by the left when it's inconvenient, and lauded
              when the courts change law to make them happy.
              \_ Baseless claims are so much fun to make.
2007/12/3-6 [Computer/HW/CPU, Computer/SW/OS/VM] UID:48736 Activity:kinda low
12/3    Has anyone seen this VMware problem before?  When I have one or two
        VM session running, Task Manager on my host machine shows that the
        vmware-vmx.exe processes uses 0% CPU time when the VMs are idle.
        However, when I have more sesssions (maybe 4 or more) running, Task
        Manager shows that each of the vmware-vmx.exe processes is using
        10-20% CPU time even though all the VMs are idle.  This eats up CPU
        cycles from my other processes.  I'm using VMware Server 1.0.3.  I
        have a HyperThread CPU and the "Number of processors" setting for my
        VMs are set to 2.  Thx.
        \_ What do you think of VMWare in general? We are evaluating it now
           for possible purchase.
           \_ What are you going to use it for?
              \_ Almost everything.  Production servers, dev and test
                 environment. Probably not for the database servers though.
                 Does that answer your question?
                 \_ No. It doesn't. What are you hoping to gain by using
                    \_ Server consolidation, better ability to manage
                       dev and test environments, hopefully a better DR plan.
                       \_ Sounds like VMware might work for you then. I've
                          used VMware since version 3 and I've been pretty
                          happy with it. I don't know if I'd transition
                          all of my hosts to VMs just yet, but it excels
                          in meeting the needs you have.
        \_ I've used VMware for about 4 years with debian as the host OS.
           it is fantastic. on my new intel macbook i use VMware Fusion.
        \_ Does TM say if this if kernel or user time?  Are you swapping?
           \_ Kernel time.  No the host machine is not swapping.  It has 2GB
              RAM, and the Commit Charge Total is around 1.8GB.
2007/11/30-12/6 [Computer/SW/Compilers, Computer/HW/CPU] UID:48719 Activity:moderate
11/29   From the CSUA minutes:
        - Next Gen Console
        -- If we have $1800 in our accounts, should we buy a console:
           4 votes passes.
        -- Console voting: 2 votes each, neither passes
           * 360 = 600, more games
           * PS3 = 650, not as many games
        Does this mean the CSUA already has a Wii?
        Since when is, "more expensive, fewer games" an argument for something?
        I guess if they're gonna install Linux and try some Cell development,
        THAT would be cool, but I don't think that's what they want it for.
        \_ Netrek is free.. but you need to have skills
        \_ I think the decision should be based on which you can hack and/or
           boot alternate OS's on.   I think there is a clear answer here...
           \- YMWTS: KYELICK et al paper "The potential of the cell processor
              for scientific computing" on the POWER of the CELL. Interesting
              and quick read. Note: KYELICK now the Director of NERSC.
              \_ Yeah, but Roadrunner (A combo Opteron/Cell cluster proposed
                 at Los Alamos) is still a dumb idea.
                 \_ Why do you say that?  I'd be more concerned about using
                    /panfs as the storage system. Panasas might be ok by the
                    time it is deployed. A lot of impressive people there,
                    but mixed experiences in practice.
                    \_ The Cell already has a perfectly good general processor
                       attached to it.  (A dual core power 5).  What's the
                       Opteron doing there?  The last thing the Cell
                       development tool kit needs is another totally different
                       processor to work with.  Yea! A third compiler!  For
                       hevean's sake, they don't even have the same endianness!
                       processor to work with.  Yeah! Another compiler!  For
                       hevean's sake, the don't even have the same endianness!
                       \- ibm and amd are working together on a few things
                          like socket compat between POWER-tng and Opteron,
                          and Torrenza(sp?)/HTX rather than PCIe. the HPC space
                          is very different from the rest of the world ...
                          on a $100m computer you have a legion of programers
                          to work on tweaking code, compilers because they
                          are no longer dominated by "expensive programmer
                          time costs".
                          \_ While everything you say is true, I can't see how
                             that excuses creating a totally wacky, needlessly
                             difficult architecture.  Even Los Alamos
                             doesn't have infinite resources, programmer time
                             still costs money, money Los Alamos doesn't have.
                             Not to mention, they're buying the whole machine,
                             whole hog.  No small test prototype.  On a totally
                             untestest architecture.
                             \- no offense intended here, but are you just
                                reading articles on the net or do you have
                                some experience with how large HPC procurements
                                are done? i dont have any specific knowledge
                                of Los Alamos/Roadrunner but two things dont
                                ring true: 1. los alamos being on the hook for
                                all the dev and tuning work 2. ibm just being
                                responsible for dropping the machine off at
                                the loading dock and being done ... the "whole
                                machine whole hog" part. usually there are
                                lots of partial milestones involved. although
                                the somewhat dirty not that secret part of
                                this is those milestones are never missed
                                with major consequences. [well maybe once,
                                but not with one of the main *hpc* vendors.
                                i cant mention which well known vendor it was].
                                \_ Sorry, I didn't mean to imply what you've
                                   read into the 'whole hog' statement.  I
                                   guess that was really poor word choice.  I
                                   just meant that Los Alamos didn't buy a
                                   small prototype cluster to see how well this
                                   thing will work in production, as is
                                   normally done.  I'm aware IBM has milestones
                                   and will support the cluster.
2007/7/19-21 [Computer/HW/CPU] UID:47345 Activity:moderate
7/19    75 year old Swedish women makes every soda geek green with envy, she
        gets the world's fastest residential internet connection at 40
        \_ and just uses it to check email...
          \_ at the rate spam growth is happening, you'll need 40gb/s to keep
             up with all the spam soon enough...
           \_ I remember when I worked at Sun and the new Sparc-10s came out
              (lighting fast compared to Sparc-2) -- the first person in my
              department who got one was a manager who only used it to read
              \_ But he read e-mail very fast!
              \_ And no one logged in remotely to take advantage of the
                 unused hardware?
                 \_ That used to be the meanest thing you could say back when
                    differences in hardware speed actually made a huge difference
                    differences in hardware speed actually made a huge impact
                    in things like compiling:
                    "You can log in remotely to do a compile if you want" (smirk)
                    \_ In a place I used to work where we used a mixture of
                       Sparcs to do cross-compiling, the default setting for
                       the make tool was to export compilation jobs to 4 other
                       machines (chosen by current load and CPU speed) and
                       only link locally.  (One could adjust the number
                       according to taste, or set it to 0 to compile locally.)
                       So having a fast machine means jobs would more likely go
                       to your machine.
2007/7/9-12 [Computer/HW/CPU, Computer/SW/OS/Solaris] UID:47240 Activity:high
7/9     Are 64-bit Linux servers popular compared to 32-bit ones?  My company
        has a server product that supports 32-bit, and we're trying to see if
        it's worth supporting 64-bit as well.  Thanks.
        \_ in my company, everything linux is 64bit except the handful of
           redhat satellite servers, because redhat's sat server product
           doesn't support running on 64bit systems (yet).  DOH!
        \_ Compared to 32bit? No. Whether it is worth it to support or not
           depends on a lot of things, but mostly the desires of your
           customers and the cost of doing supporting it.
           customers and the cost of supporting it.
        \_ It has more bits so it must be better!  Seriously though, now that
           64 bit is here I think you'll find most places doing 64 bit.  The
           best people to ask are your current customers.  Unless you're
           making a pre-packaged toaster product, then it doesn't matter.
           \_ No, you will not find most places doing 64bit. It's still early.
              \_ Maybe at your place.  See the person below for an exmaple.
                 \_ I went to USENIX recently and 64bit is still far from
                    the norm.
                    \_ No 64bit at all in most of the places of USENIX
                       attendees?  You know this how?
                       \_ Did I say: "No 64bit at all?" No, I did not. However,
                          the topic came up in a session and only a few
                          people said they used it in production.
                          \_ Representing how many servers and which companies?
                             Was this the "64 bit linux" session?
                             \_ How many are represented by you and two other
                                MOTD trolls?
                                \_ Oh, ah, personal attack!  Way to go!  You
                                   are right, 64 bit is DOA.  How many?  Like
                                   the other poster we have been building only
                                   64 bit boxes in the last few months and
                                   have the remaining non-64 bit scheduled for
                                   termination over the coming months.  Maybe
                                   your place of business is just too small or
                                   doesn't do real work?
                                   \_ I never said it was DOA. It will
                                      gradually become the standard.
                                      However, it is currently not the
                                      standard. Even you admit that you
                                      only started to switch over a few months
                                      \_ You trolled.  I sarcastically trolled
                                         back with the DOA overstatement.  I
                                         admit nothing.  I told you we've been
                                         at it for a few months which started
                                         last year and continues forward as we
                                         have time for it and new machines come
                                         online.  I expect most places will be
                                         doing similar gradual rollouts.  The
                                         idea that a few usenix attendees at
                                         a single session is representative of
                                         industry is no more likely than your
                                         'motd trolls' as you call us are
                                         representative of industry.  Less so
                                         since we're actually here to discuss
                                         it with you, not a vague 'please
                                         raise your hand' at a session.  Again,
                                         this isn't rocket science stuff.  64
                                         bit linux is a big thing for some
                                         people, nice for most and harmless to
                                         most of the rest.  Only a few with
                                         custom apps or low loads won't get
                                         anything from it.  Unless you *know*
                                         you don't want 64 bit, you want 64
                                         bit.  And just because it isn't being
                                         rolled out in bulk doesn't mean it
                                         isn't the thing to do.  Quite the
                                         opposite, that means it is the thing
                                         that is being done right now as we
                                         speak and doing a gradual rollout is
                                         the smart way to go in most shops.
                                         \_ I was disputing the "most
                                            places are doing 64 bit" statement
                                            above. Most places are not
                                            doing 64 bit for production. You
                                            allude to that above with your
                                            gradual rollout statement. 32
                                            bit is still far more pervasive
                                            than 64 bit at this time.
                                            \_ If they've got 64 bit in
                                               production right now as part of
                                               a long term roll out then they
                                               are doing 64 bit in production.
                                               Just because they didn't flip
                                               1000+ machines in a day doesn't
                                               mean they're not doing 64 bit.
                                               They're being smart.  Any place
                                               with that many machines is going
                                               to do almost any change like
                                               this in a gradual rollout.  Why
                                               is 'production' so hard to
                                               grasp?  What is your tech focus?
                                               Programming?  Sysadmin?  Manage-
                                               ment?  Something else?
        \_ We are 3/4 the way to converting to 64-bit everywhere. We should
           be done by end of year. -Ops guy at company with 1000+ servers
           \_ Why are you converting?
              \_ Because the 32 bit limits suck for real computing.  !gp
                 \_ Then you should've been running Solaris all along. Why
                    was 32 bit okay 12 months ago and suddenly not good
                    enough now? I can think of some reasons why you'd have
                    to upgrade to a 64 bit OS on a 32 bit processor, but they
                    are not common ones - mostly a need to address massive
                    files or memory - hardly a reason to upgrade every
                    server at a company for the hell of it.
                    \_ Solaris = not free.  32 bit 12 months ago = sucked then
                       with lots of work arounds.  64 bit now = it just works.
                       Convert everything because it is easier to maintain
                       fewer images/builds.  This isn't rocket science.  Why
                       do you think a place with 1000+ servers doesn't have
                       'a need to address massive files or memory'?  2 gigs
                       is hardly 'massive'.  I've got games that require more
                       ram than that..
                       \_ Solaris is free. You can have more than 2GB of
                          RAM or a 2GB file with a 32 bit OS. You don't
                          need a 64 bit OS for that.
                          \_ Solaris is not free when you have to buy real
                             hardware to run it and you knew that.  If you're
                             talking the x86 version, get off the motd.
                             \_ I didn't know Linux came with free hardware.
                             \_ The OS is now free, x86 or not. The hardware
                                is not free, but neither is Intel hardware. If
                                you are worried about x86, what does Linux
                                64 bit buy you?
                                \_ The OS has been 'free' for years but
                                   useless without the hardware.  And Sun
                                   hardware is way more expensive than x86.
                                   If I want a production quality system
                                   running Solaris it will cost more than
                                   a linux 64 bit system.  That is why Sun
                                   is dead and linux continues to grow.
                                   \_ You can run Solaris on x86 and the
                                      hardware costs will be the same. If
                                      \_ Solaris x86?  Whatever.  We are
                                         talking about production 24/7 systems
                                         that real people support, not your
                                         Quake4 server.
                                         \_ The code is the same. I repeat,
                                            this is not x86 circa 1992.
                                            \_ Quake4 server.  2007.
                                      you want the Sun hardware then the
                                      premium is not as bad as it used to
                                      be. An Ultra45 costs maybe $6K
                                      versus almost $5K for a high-end Dell.
                                      \_ Great, I just spent an extra $1k for
                                         what exactly?  And how much does Sun
                                         support cost on that box?
                                         \_ For a true 64 bit CPU.
                                      A Linux 64 bit system running on a
                                      32 bit chip is not true 64. If you
                                      \_ Who said these are 32 bit chips?
                                         Where'd you get that idea from?
                                         \_ Which 64 bit chip are you
                                            running on then?
                                            \_ So you're going to claim that
                                               the current gen Intel/AMD x86
                                               chips aren't 64 bit?  This is
                                               going to turn into a philosophy
                                               debate on instructions sets now,
                                               \_ Yes, I would claim that
                                                  the current gen chips
                                                  are not true 64 bit chips.
                                                  They are 32 bit chips
                                                  with 64 bit extensions.
                                                 \_ distinction being? as in,
                                                    why should I care?
                                      want 64 bit Linux you need to run on
                                      something like Itanium and that's
                                      not cheap either. However, did you
                                      \_ Who said Itanium?  Did we flash back
                                         to 1998?  This is 2007.  Both AMD and
                                         Intel are selling true 64 bit chips.
                                         \_ Yes, and Intel's is called the
                                            Itanium - IA64.
                                            \_ See above.
                                      realize that Solaris x86 is not the
                                      same crappy product it was 15 years ago?
                                   \_ Sun is hardly dead. You can get a 16
                                      \_ Solaris x86 is the same crappy
                                         product it always was.  It is a niche
                                         product which makes no sense in 99%
                                         of the real world.
                                         \_ Solaris has a lot of features
                                            that Linux does not have.
                                            \_ Solaris does but who is running
                                               Solaris x86 in a real production
                                               environment?  I'd be surprised
                                               to hear of any place with more
                                               than a handful in 24x7 and have
                                               a heart attack plus a stroke if
                                               anyone is doing thousands of
                                               solaris x86 anywhere.
                                               \_ Why does Solaris x86
                                                  bother you so much? It's
                                                  the same OS as Solaris
                                                  SPARC. A lot of Canadian
                                                  companies are using it,
                                                  FWIW. I would consider
                                                  using it in order to use
                                                  some Solaris features
                                                  like ZFS (until Linux
                                                  gets it), the scheduler,
                                                  and containers.
                                   \_ Sun is hardly dead. You can get a 8
                                      core T1000 for $5k these days and its
                                      operating costs will be less than 1/4th
                                      what 4 dual core Intel boxes would be.
                                      \_ What about 1 dual chip quad box? :)
                                         The T1000 is not so useful for
                                         floating point, but it was good
                                         to mention it. I had almost
                                         forgotten, since I mostly care
                                         about floating point. Also, IBM's
                                         new Power6 chip will run Linux,
                                         too. To claim you need 64 bit
                                         computing and then run it on a 32 bit
                                         CPU is laughable. I will
                                         eventually run 64 bit Linux on
                                         i386, too, but to think that most
                                         people (or even a sizeable fraction)
                                         are doing so now is deluded. We
                                         are just now starting to port over
                                         most of our major s/w, although
                                         we started a year ago, and it
                                         will probably be another two or
                                         three years before we can drop 32 bit
                                         entirely because of all the testing.
                                         A rule of thumb is that it takes
                                         about 5 years to throw old
                                         hardware/software out the door,
                                         so I expect there will be a lot
                                         of 32 bit Linux for some time
                                         yet. Realize that there are companies
                                         still running VMS and DOS.
           \_ Our older 32-bit servers needed to be upgraded, so we decided
              to roll out new 64-bit servers with 16GB of RAM. We have lots
              of apps that need to address more than 2GB of RAM, or we can
              make better use of the new faster boxes by addressing more
              RAM in the java container. It is easier in the long run to
              only have to support one platform, rather than two, also.
2007/4/17-19 [Computer/HW/CPU] UID:46347 Activity:nil
4/17    Intel to release new chips about 40% faster!!!!!!! Go Penryn
        processors YAY BABY!!!!!!!!!! It's the WORLD'S FIRST 45 nm processor!!!
        \_ I know you're all jazzed, but what is the big deal?  Are you an
           Intel employee?  Did you work on this chip line?
2007/3/29-4/2 [Computer/HW/Laptop, Politics/Domestic, Computer/HW/CPU] UID:46140 Activity:nil
3/28    A kind reminder that CSUA stands for Computer Science Undergrad
        Association. It is not the Political Science [aka I hate Democrats
        and I hate Republicans] Undergrad Association.
        In other news AMD is releasing a new laptop chip! EXCITING!!!
        \_ that's chipset.  and CS students like to talk politics.
        \_ Piss off.
           \_ Well someone is pissy.  If this is representative, I think I
              know why I chose to hang out with CS types as opposed to
              poli-sci types. -dans
2007/3/1-3 [Computer/HW/CPU, Computer/HW/Scanner] UID:45842 Activity:nil
3/1     Backup MX servers: should I have one (y/n, given that most isps
        spool mail for a couple of days), and if so, how should I go about
        having one (are there commercial backup MX servers, and if so,
        how much?) - linxu
        \_ Yes, you should have one.  You're right that most ISPs spool
           mail for a couple days, but the situation where I've found a
           backup MX server to be most useful is when I relocate a mail
           server.  I'd be happy to run a secondary for your domains on
           my box if you'll do the same for me, assuming, of course, we
           don't share the same upstream provider. :)  See also:
           Probably one of the best, most elegant anti-spam measures anyone
           has come up with in years. -dans
2006/11/7 [Computer/HW/CPU] UID:45223 Activity:nil
11/7    Yay, Dell unveils OptiPlex 740 with Athlon 64 X2, although it's
        rated at the same speed as Pentium D dual core (but still naturally
        lower than Core 2 Duo)
2006/10/27-11/1 [Computer/HW/CPU, Computer/SW/OS/VM] UID:45019 Activity:nil
10/30   Can a hyper-threading CPU run two threads in two separate apps at the
        same time?  How does it handle the two different virtual memory
        mapping?  If I mostly run processes where only one thread is active,
        (e.g. compilation, SETI@home in background, VirtualPC or VMware
        instances), does hyper-threading help or hurt performance?  (I know I
        really should profile to find out, but I want to know the theoretical
        answer.)  Thx.
        \_ They get interleaved the same as anything else.  Go look up Intel's
           *very* well written white papers on the topic.  You won't find
           better answers anywhere else.
        \_ Intel has published several white papers on their site that explain
           in easily read English exactly how HT works.  You are unlikely to
           find a better explanation anywhere else.  Kudos to their doc
           writers on that one.
        \_ Virtual memory is not an issue.  As to the rest, unless you are
           doing stuff where getting about 1 percent more out of your cpu
           matters, don't worry about it.  Hyperthreading has a bit of
           performance hit in most cases but makes up for it by making
           the computer much more responsive at high load.  In a gui environment
           this makes you computer feel zippier and is worth the performance
           \_ Actually, it makes the computer less responsive under a high
              load. Why? Because the CPU is trying to execute more
              processes than it has processors. Try this experiment: Run
              three jobs with a nice level of 20. Then run one interactive
              job. See how (un)responsive it is? Now turn off HT and
              repeat the experiment. I guarantee you it will be more
              responsive in the latter case.
2006/10/24-26 [Computer/HW/CPU] UID:44947 Activity:moderate
        "With the exception of a few rare 80486 systems, the x86 SMP market
        began with the Intel Pentium processor supporting up to two processors
        Wasn't soda an 8-CPU 386SX machine more than a decade ago?
        \_ I think at peak it had 20 processors, and yes, they were 386.  -tom
        \_ Yes, that would be the Sequent era (1992-1997). Soda Mark 2 had
           8 386s, Soda Mark 3 had 16 386s and Soda Mark 4 had 20 386s.

           "[W]e must mustn't forget the days when the dry and cracked skin
            that we just shed were vigorous and bright with new colors. The
            next chance you have, hold a glass high to the past and drink to
            Soda MkIV, the last of the great Sequents."
           \_ I'm obviously too young.  22 386s in one machine?  In 1995?
              Huh?  I guess it was really good a multi-tasking.
              \_ Remember that it was *free* in 1995.  The machine was
                 built the late 80s, when the 386 was top-of-the-line.
              \_ and yes, those sequent systems were awesome at multitasking.
                 Unfortunately the slow-ass cpu's were very slow at single
                 tasks. However, it was ideal for its use as a multi-user,
                 multi-purpose system.
                 \_ Did the fastest Pentium-something CPU in 1995 perform
                    twenty times as fast as a 386DX 20MHz (in terms of mips, I
                    guess)?  I don't remember which Pentium was top-of-the-line
                    back then.
                    \_ iirc, 1995 the fastest Pentium was 133 MHz. This was
                       about as fast as a 486 running at 266 MHz or a 386
                       running at 533 MHz (ie nearly 25x faster than a 386
                       running at 20MHz).
        \_ I google'd for "8088 SMP", and I found "The SNC is an Intel 8088
           based SMP system ..." in a non-free article.  Can 8088 really
           support SMP???
           \_ Why not?  SMP is an old old old concept in CS.
              \_ I was just puzzled because Intel advertised one of the recent
                 Pentium-whatever chip as the first x86 chip to support SMP.
2006/10/24-26 [Computer/HW/CPU] UID:44943 Activity:nil
10/24   Why does hyperthreading slow things down?  I can imagine why it may not
        be faster than a one-thread CPU (maybe too many bottlenecks), but how
        can it be even slower than a one-thread CPU?
        \_ When two procs are doing the same thing, they'll gain no benefit
           from HT and HT simply adds overhead.  Two dissimilar procs will do
           \_ (Where pp says 'proc', read 'process', not 'processor')
        \_ Useless overhead.
           \_ Did Intel not test its own design before releasing it to the
              \_ Of course they did.  In most circumstances HT is worth using
                 but for some applications it is just overhead and should be
                 disabled.  *In general* HT is good for applications where UI
                 responsiveness is more important than shaving over a few
                 microseconds or increasing FPS by 1.5.  It is bad for a
                 situation where your single threaded application is cpu
                 bound and the only process running on a machine.  There are
                 many other in between cases of course and YMMV but overall
                 HT is a good thing and should be turned on unless you know
                 it will hurt your use.  Profile and test if you care.
                 \_ We found the opposite. We found that in most instances
                    HT hurt performance and so by default we turn it off.
                    \_ What was Intel thinking???
2006/10/13 [Computer/HW/CPU] UID:44813 Activity:nil
10/13   This goes back to the last Intel cpu release and everyone's #s on
        temps, etc.  Just a reminder that those #s are based on a clean box.
        I just cleaned out a ton of dust and fluff from my case and temps
        dropped about 8F back to about what they were when it was all new.
2006/10/12-14 [Computer/HW/CPU] UID:44789 Activity:nil
10/12   On a dual-processor PC, the two CPUs can concurrently run one thread
        and one interrupt handler, or two interrupt handlers.  Can a dual-core
        processor PC and a hyperthreading processor PC do the same things?
        \_ Dual-core is basically dual processor sharing the same socket, so
           I don't see why not.  Hyperthreading is weird, I dunno.
2006/9/15-19 [Computer/HW/CPU, Computer/HW/Drives] UID:44395 Activity:nil
9/15    Dell once again stocks AMD consumer-grade boxes (
2006/9/10-12 [Computer/HW/CPU, Computer/HW/Drives] UID:44341 Activity:nil
9/11    For those who run his/her own server.  Has any of you tried to run a
        fanless system that uses AMD Operon or Pentium M that is clocked more
        than 1GHz?  where to get chassis like these?  can't find it at Fry's.
        \_ No, but I have a fanless 800 MHz Via C3, with a big Zalman heatsink.
           Got the CPU on ebay for about $50 and got the heatsink (CNPS-6000AlCu
           Flower Cooler) from for about $40.. Runs great.
           There is one fan in the system, the power supply exhaust, because
           unless you are conducting heat to the case, you need some airflow to
           keep things cool. If you want zero fans, take a look at Hush.
        \_ No, but I have a fanless 800 MHz Via C3, with a big Zalman copper
           heatsink. Got the CPU on ebay for about $50. and got the heatsikn
           (Zalman CNPS-6000AlCu Flower Cooler) from for about
           $40.. Runs great. There is one fan in the system, the power supple
           exhaust, because unless you are conducting heat to the exterior, you
           need some airflow.. If you wanted zero fans, take a look at Hush.
           \_ I used to run on 600MHz VIA C3 in Antec ARIA.  It was
              incredibly slow.  I now have a bunch of K8 systems
              (RevCG Mobile Athlon64 0.9V 1GHz, RevE6 Turion64 800MHz,
              RevE6 Sempron64 256kL2 1.1V 1GHz).  Due to other factors
              like power supply inefficiency and northbridge power
              consumption, power draw measured using Fluke meter at
              the plug is virtually the same for the VIA C3 vs Sempron64.
              Turion64 800MHz may even eat less power (7.8W) than the
              VIA.  Even at 800MHz, K8 kicks C3's arse!  I'd say it's
              over 5x faster!  To me, even 800MHz K8 is plenty fast
              for most things.  I also used to have a HUSH system.  It
              was noisier than ARIA because HDD whine (Seagate 7200.7)
              dominated.  And in the end, the unreliability the heat
              added was not worth it.  My quietest system (C3 fanless,
              HDD-less using CF->IDE converter) is slow, but it has
              its uses.  Basically, except for the exceptional cases,
              one slow fan won't be a bad thing at all.  Just hide it
        \_ I've been very happy with my Kurobox:
           It's a small PPC system that runs Linux -- Gentoo and Debian are the
           best supported. It's $150 without a harddrive -- which is nice if you
           have one lying around. It's a little tight on the RAM, but it can
           happily do streaming and serving and such. And it's only got one
           very-quiet fan -- the harddrive is the louder part. Plus it's cute!
           \_ Nice link, thx.  I was thinking of something like this, but I
              could never find a reasonably priced external SATA RAID-5 drive
              array/enclosure.  -John
           \_ Out of curiosity, what do you use it for?
2006/9/7-12 [Computer/HW/CPU] UID:44314 Activity:nil
9/7     FYI, the Athlon 64 X2 4600+ 65W (energy-efficient) retail CPU is now
        available on for $250 (zipzoomfly has been advertising $295+
        for several weeks, newegg doesn't have it)
        \_ Nooo!  It's all about the E6600!  /me rubs his E6600 all over his
           pale, naked body.
           \_ Well the E6600 is somewhat faster than the 4600+.  A fairer
              comparison would probably be the E6300 which should be available
              under $200.
              \_ don't forget mobo cost for Core 2 Duo and quality being
                 a concern (basically all the "my e6300 is 50+ deg C" wtf
                 posts on and the C2D being the fastest ramp
                 Intel has ever had to perform and a major architectural
                 change).  AMD has had no quality issues recently.
                 fyi, if you do get C2D, get E6600 or above, I don't see as
                 many posts about temp issues.  dgies maxes @ 40C at load.
                 I'm speculating, but I think there are many e6300/e6400's out
                 there that are e6600+'s with the shitty half of 4MB-shared-
                 cache turned off.  You will need to research a reasonable
                 price/perf mobo (for non-overclockers) which is the other
                 1/2 of the eqn.
                 \_ Why would I want to put it in my computer?  I'm too busy
                    pleasuring myself with it.
                    \_ ob what you do with the thermal gel is your business
                       \_ my chip runs at 37C, baby.
2006/9/1-5 [Computer/HW/CPU] UID:44240 Activity:nil
9/1     How many of you bought one of those new Intel CPUs, whatd you pay
        and what are you doing with it?  --Just curious
        \_ E6600, $380 on release day, games and replacing old machine mostly.
        \_ didn't buy, leery of initial CPU/mobo releases and especially the
           strange mobo pricing for Core 2 Duo.  The dev and ramping of C2D
           seem unusually rushed.
           seem worryingly rushed.  Also, review sites need to perform reviews
           on anonymously ordered CPUs, not on CPUs donated by Intel which
           probably have lowest power draw for its stepping, the donations
           occurring far in advance of widespread product availability.
2006/8/31-9/5 [Computer/HW/CPU] UID:44222 Activity:nil
8/31    Intel to have internal webcast Tuesday, presenting results of 90-day
        efficiency review.  <= 10,000 or 20,000 employees rumored to be laid
        \- clever headline. nice use of "decimate" in the classical sense
           ["to kill one in 10"]. worthy of the e'ist. --psb
        \_ INTC up $0.17.
2006/8/30-9/3 [Computer/HW/Memory, Computer/HW/CPU] UID:44208 Activity:nil
8/30    I just configured a Dell XPS M1710 with the 2.0-GHz 4MB-cache
        Core 2 Duo with WinXP Pro and 3 years warranty.  $3,106 after tax!
        Dang, some rich kids will be spending bux on their computer for
        undergrad WoW.
        \_ Excuse my lameness, but it this faster than a 3GHz Pentium D ?
           I know MHz doesn't matter anymore, but it doesn't feel right.
           \_ I believe all Pentium D's up to 3.6 Ghz are blown out of the
              water by a 2.0-GHz C2D with 4MB-cache.
              The above has desktop Core 2 Duo vs. Pentium D, not mobile C2D,
              but you also need to consider the 1.86 C2D desktop has only
              2MB of cache.
           \_ In my (limited) experience, Core (1) Duo 1.86GHz >> Dual Xeon 3.0
2006/8/21-24 [Computer/HW/CPU] UID:44082 Activity:nil
8/21    So I was looking for a good distributed computing project to join.
        SETI@Home looks like a waste of effort (just my opinion)
        Folding@Home is poorly set up for multiproc systems.
        Can someone suggest a project that is worthwhile, has a multithreaded
        computation, doesn't use boatloads of RAM, and preferably has a
        halfway decent screensaver?
        \_ If we can harness all the idle computers to render 3D graphics
           porn, like Final Fantasy Porn, imagine all the wonderful
           changes we'd make to mankind!
        \_  It _is_ a screensaver.
           \_ Looks neat but all the main work is done in a single thread
              according to their research paper.
              \_ It doesn't even use all of a single CPU -- it's currently
                 limited by the network bandwidth of the server, not by the
                 processing speed of the clients.  But hey, that means you
                 could run Electric Sheep as your screensaver and something
                 more useful in the background.
        \_ I have a dual-processor XP machine, and I run one instance of
           SETI@home (BOINC) and one instance of FightAIDS@home (World
           Community Grid).
        \_ Why is seti a waste?
           \_ I have pessimistic paramaters for the Drake Equation.
2006/8/17-22 [Computer/HW/CPU] UID:44058 Activity:nil
8/17    Predictions on much down in % that DELL will open at tomorrow morning
        compared to today's close?  It's already down 5.8% in after-hours.
        \_ Maybe they should liquidate the company and give the money back to
           the share holders - SJOBS
        \_ And that's all because of the Sony batteries!!!
           \_ I thought Sony was paying for that
        \_ In other news, Dell announced they'll be shipping desktops with AMD
           \_ They've done that for a while but you had to know who to talk
              to.  Kinda weird that Dell finally caught up with the market
              right after Intel finally came out with some decent chips.
           \_ That'd be funny, if Intel "told" on Dell because they went with
              AMD again.  It's not like Intel's doing anything illegal by
              reporting on their partner.
2006/8/8-11 [Computer/HW/CPU] UID:43944 Activity:nil
8/8 (Fortune via
        Review of AMD anti-trust lawsuit against Intel filed last year
2006/8/7-11 [Computer/HW/CPU] UID:43933 Activity:nil
8/7     Microcenter in Santa Clara has E6600 processors, OEM for $379.  I just
        got one.  If they still have some, you can request a "one day hold".
        \_ I'm still wondering what use everyone has for a CPU like this that
           a CPU at half the cost won't do.  I understand this is the bang for
           the buck price point.  What's all that bang for anyway?
           \_ Games, multitasking a bit too much, and replacing an old box.
           \_ Well, what looks nice is that it's the cheapest chip of the
              next generation that just came out.  So you get that "next-gen"
              boost, but are still coming in on the bottom rung (which is
              the best price/perf at that level)
              \_ No it isn't, there is the E6300 etc.
                 \_ Right, but those are 2M cache, IIRC
                    \_ And again I ask, so?  What do you need 4M cache for?
                       What is all this bang going to bang on, so to speak?
                       \_ I'm not the OP, but... why do you ever buy a new
                          computer?  And when you do, don't you ever buy a
                          middle-to-new spec'ed one so that it'll last that
                          little bit longer?
                    \_ Then you should have said "cheapest chip of the next
                       Intel generation with 4MB cache".
        \_ pls report on the CPU temp and cooler you're using.  I'm reading
           on about three E6300's running > 60 degrees C at load.
           \_ Haven't assembled yet, but my cooler is rated for <0.25C/W so
              given 65W TDP and 30C case, I'd expect the mid 40's.  With bad
              case cooling and a less efficient cooler, I could imagine 60C.
              But keep in mind the Athlon X2s are rated at what, 89W?
              \_ you haven't heard the big argument about TDP for Intel and
                 AMD having two different meanings?
                 anyway, pls do report.  i'm really curious about whether
                 anyway, pls do report.  i'm concerned about whether
                 all the reviewers got super-clean CPUs, while the rabble
                 are getting crap.  thanks.
           \_ Better than my old-process Athlon XP which runs @ 82C
           \_ Better than my old-process Athlon XP 2100+ which runs @ 82C
              \_ AMD 4400+, ~20C idle, ~32C under full load.
                 \_ I have a little trouble believing the accuracy of that
                    measurement.  At idle, it should be no cooler than the
                    interior of your case, and 20C is pretty low for a case.
                    What case fans do you have and what is the ambient temp?
                    \_ Case: ExtremEngine 3T.  Temps are as measured by the
                       motherboard and cpu sensors.  I don't care enough to
                       stick a contact thermometer in the case to get more
                       accurate readings.  Ambient is about 20C, often
                       \_ I guess with that case I can believe your case temp
                          is that low. -pp
                    \_ i'm gonna guess he's water cooling!
                       \_ My 3.6GHz P4 is only -40C!*
                          (* When cooled with liquid nitrogen)
                          \_ My penis is 2 inches flaccid and 5 inches erect.
2006/8/4-6 [Computer/HW/CPU] UID:43909 Activity:nil
        "There is about a 1% chance that we'll actually ship these on the 7th.
        (The E6600/E6700's I mean). None of the distributors have them yet.
        It's a mess. I'm working my best still to get these darn things, but my
        word, Intel and the distributors just can't get this sorted out. ...
        From Tankguy's Ben"
        However, you can still get E6300 now, if you don't mind the 25% mark-up
        ... it only ends up being $229 on ... down from a 35% mark-up
        from two days ago.
        \_ Sucks.  But Fry's is supposeadly getting them on Monday 8/7.  We
           shall see.
           \_ BTW, shows OEM E6300 as "In Stock", shipping 8/7,
              for $20 less than  All other types are not listed or
           \_ I like Fry's.  -proud American
2006/8/1-2 [Computer/HW/CPU] UID:43856 Activity:nil
8/1     Bin Laden with the Democrats, so Israel needs to punish Iran.  But
        remember that they should tip at least 20%, especially when searching
        for the new Intel processor at Fry's.  RIDE BIKE!
                                                \_ and use Linux
        \_ Conroe. Learn the name, damnit.
           \_ I guess the geek community basically just rejected "Core 2 Duo"?
              \_ Conroe is 2 unaspirated sylables, Core 2 Duo is 4 sylables and
                 sounds confusingly similar to both their previous chip and
                 the generic term "dual core".  So I want Conroe, but my
                 search term is Core 2 Duo.
        \_ Flash drive has dreamhost data which sucks, and parents'
           anniversaray on flickr is bad because picasaweb is superior,
           renewable energy renews gmail interests because it's eco-friendly,
           and the breakins on a bunch of Cal sites is because minijets
           are coming. Use E6600, drink beer, and do lots of drugs so that
           you can die early and save the environment from pollution!
2006/7/28-8/2 [Computer/HW/Laptop, Computer/HW/CPU] UID:43829 Activity:nil 80%like:43827
7/28    Where is a reputable place to pre-order a E6600 processor?
        \_ I'm still curious what everyone plans to do with these chips.
           Not that I wouldn't buy one if I was in the market for a new
           computer right now but I keep computers for a loooong time.
           \_ I'm in the market for a new (self-built) computer.
           \_ My current machine can't run the latest games, I'm building a
              a new one.
        \_ Everyone seems to point to I don't know if they
           are reputable.
        \_||, and now
           There are none in stock, though, and I believe there is a embargo
           date of Aug 7.  You could buy an OEM E6300 yesterday from
  but they're all out.  See, Intel
           board for more info.
        \_ had both OEM E6300 and E6600 yesterday and shipped
           them out.  See, Intel board for more info.  I don't
           know how hard it is to cancel a pre-order.  Rumors are that
           significantly more stock will be available come Aug 7.
        \_ had OEM E6300 yesterday and shipped them out, so
           you could try them for OEM E6600.  See, Intel board
           for more info.  I don't know how hard it is to cancel a pre-order.
           know how hard it is to cancel a pre-order.  Consensus seems to be
           that significantly more stock will be available come Aug 7.
           \_ I've never used them, but I've read some bad critiques of their
              customer service online--no clue if they're for real or not
              but you might consider researching before ordering there.  -John
              \_ I bought several items, returned several items and also got
                 my mail-in rebate money from tiger with no problems at all.
                 Every company on the net has complaints posted about them.
                 You need to examine the nature and consistency of the
                 issues and ignore the random insane ranter or you'll never
                 buy anything from anyone.
                \_ is notorious for ripping people off
                   when it comes to rebate coupons.  They've been involved
                   in much litigation about this. -proud American
2006/7/28 [Computer/HW/CPU] UID:43827 Activity:nil 80%like:43829
7/28    Where is a reputable place to pre-order a Tickle-me^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H
        E6600 processor?
        \_ I'm still curious what everyone plans to do with these chips.
           Not that I wouldn't buy one if I was in the market for a new
           computer right now but I keep computers for a loooong time.
           \_ I'm in the market for a new (self-built) computer.
           \_ My current machine can't run the latest games, I'm building a
              a new one.
        \_ Everyone seems to point to I don't know if they
           are reputable.
2006/7/26-28 [Science/GlobalWarming, Computer/HW/CPU] UID:43810 Activity:nil
7/26    Re the AMD price cuts Monday, shows the Athlon X2 4600+
        Socket AM2 Windsor as $330 and out of stock, but has it
        in stock for $240.  Also, the energy-efficient variants are only
        supposed to have a 10% mark-up, but no word on availability.
        Don't get screwed.
        \_ How much MORE efficient?
           \_ 89W vs. 65W TDP in general, 35W for a special 3800+ CPU
              also, although the AMD press release gave May availability,
              they only appeared in early July in Japan on store shelves.
              the same release said the 35W part drew 14W for someone doing
              office apps.
              \_ NICE. Very nice. I'm definitely getting the 35W version
                 when it is available. This is pretty exciting!!!
                 \_ ob for yermom! -1337 g4m3r
2006/7/25-28 [Computer/HW/CPU] UID:43795 Activity:nil
7/25    I want to buy a quiet PC. It doesn't have to be completely silent,
        just quieter than the one I have now (something I could put in a
        bedroom and still fall asleep). Can someone recommend a prebuilt
        but configurable computer (Dell etc) that isn't loud? I've seen some
        websites like but those seem very focused on
        building your own system, which I don't have time to deal with right
        now. (Low power consumption is a plus).
        \_ have you considered a mac mini?  run bootcamp if you need windows
        \_ All of the Dells I have experience with are very, very quiet.
           \_ In case you don't know, Dell (and mega corporations like
              Walmart and Olive Garden) donates a huge % of money to
              the Republican Party, the party for big businesses.
              \_ Ask me if I care.
           \_ Agreed, but I haven't bought a Pentium D system and ran it
              100% on both cores.
              \_ I have a 380N Dual Core and it's as quiet as any other Dell.
                 \_ what's the processor model number, and does it stay
                    quiet when doing 3D gaming, let's say.
        \_ Personal built is ALWAYS better. You can control any component.
           Pre-built never guarantees quiet components that meet your
           stringent specification. For example they could have shipped
           a noisy HD and you're screwed. Go for personal built systems:
           Otherwise if you really want, Dells are decent:
        \_ One thing people are forgetting to say is that Dell only builds
           Intel (right now), and Intel desktop CPUs suck (right now), except
           perhaps the 65nm NetBurst dual-core line.
           The Intel CPUs that don't suck are to be released Thursday --
           suggest you login to the Dell web site then and look for Core Duo
           suggest you login to the Dell web site then and look for Core 2 Duo
           platforms and ETA.
           Otherwise, the best question is, who produces a quiet AMD Athlon
           64 X2 system?
           \_ For most uses, Intel's CPUs are just fine. Opterons are
              better if you're running a 64 bit OS. I don't understand
              why people feel a need to run a 4.0 GHz system to play
              Minesweeper. To say that Intel CPUs sucks just reeks of
              gamer boy nastiness.
              \_ I didn't say "Intel CPUs suck". I said Intel desktop CPUs suck
                 (right now), except perhaps the 65nm NetBurst dual-core line
                 (and add any 65nm single core, and any 90nm slow-clocked
        \_How about a mini-itx...they seem to be really quiet.
           \_ watch out.  some SFF systems get loud under 100% load.
2006/7/24-28 [Computer/HW/CPU] UID:43781 Activity:nil
7/24 (
        AMD releases new price list, effective today
        FYI, Conroe is launching Thursday, but it's unclear when inventory
        can satisfy demand, especially for the E6600 "sweet spot".
        \_ I want the E6600, bitch, hands off!  It's the nerd equivalent of
        \_ No!  It's MY processor!!!  Seriously though, does anyone know from
           experience if Fry's tends to get a good allocation of new CPUs
           early at a fair price?
        \_ I needed a new computer 6 months ago so I bought an AMD 4400+.
           I game but don't program or do anything heavy calculations on it
           I game but don't program or do any heavy calculations on it
           and it runs great.  Just curious: what are the E6600 buyers planning
           to do with your snazzy new cpu?  An E6600 wouldn't run my very
           piggy games any faster.
           \_ Presuming you are CPU bound and not GPU bound, yes it would.
              The E6600 is benching slightly faster than an A64x2 5000 in most
              \_ I'm neither.  I've seen the artificial benchmarks.  I'm
                 wondering what other people plan to do with their new toy.
              \_ But most real world gaming situations will be GPU limited.
                 People with high end machines will tend to push the graphics
                 to higher resolutions and such, something the CPU benchmarks
                 don't show. I'm not too excited about Conroe because it won't
                 make much difference in my usage. I like how they triggered
                 a price war though. I heard Intel is sitting on a giant
                 stockpile of Netburst-era processors. I wonder how much they
                 will lose on that.
                 This article is kinda silly but makes a point:
           \_ The 4MB of shared L2 cache significantly improves execution time
              on things like zipping files and encoding audio/video.  I expect
              compile time improvements to be similar, although I haven't seen
              any compile-time benches yet.  Performance per watt is also
              outstanding.  All that's left is if Intel can crank out these
              E6600 parts in sufficient quantity without going bust and any
              weird stability / compatibility issues.
              \_ Well they're definitely going to take a loss on the Great
                 Netburst Fire Sale of '06, but it's not going to ruin the
                 company.  Agreed that Core2 availability is an important
                 question.  An awful lot of volume goes on in sub-$100 CPUs
                 and it will be interesting to see how much cheap Netbursts
                 can stymie low-end A64s and Semprons.
        \_ News update: Fry's pricing on E6600 is $379.  Not yet in stock.
2006/6/22-29 [Computer/HW/CPU] UID:43472 Activity:nil
        "Size of AMD's Dell hook-up set to shock ... AMD will be a big winner
        come autumn"
        Inquirer reports it has seen documents in Taipei indicating Dell has
        placed design orders with several Taiwanese companies for desktop and
        notebook systems with AMD CPUs.
        \_ err... you know that AMD is not taking any new order from OEMs
           because they couldn't meet the demand
           \_ err... you do know AMD is building fabs, and the one in new
              york is part of the reason its stock dipped a bit
2006/6/22-26 [Computer/HW/CPU] UID:43465 Activity:nil
        Intel hosts LAN party on Arizona campus.
        60% bring AMD computers, 37% bring Intel.
        \_ Semi-related factoid: The Windows Startup sound was created on an
           Apple Macintosh.
2006/6/16-19 [Computer/HW/CPU] UID:43421 Activity:nil
        "Here you can see the quintessence of Conroe's triumphal hymn. While
        the efficiency of Athlon 64 FX is higher by 58% versus Pentium eXtreme
        Edition 965, Conroe's efficiency is higher by 23% versus Athlon 64 FX!
        It seemed impossible to create something more efficient than the AMD K8
        core, but Intel engineers managed to do it." (June 15, 2006)
        \_ The damn intellitxt links on this page was the last straw to get me
           to install adblock.  Man I hate those things.
           \_ intelli-what links?  oh those, yeah I ad blocked them the very
              first time I saw them.  crazy obnoxious shit.
        \_ You're gonna need all that efficiency cuz Windows Vista, at least
           right now, is a dog.
           \_ Don't you mean Vista Server 2009?  Then again, with Gates
              semi-retiring into charity work, maybe they'll actually get it
              done sometime before we have a new President.
              \_ Previewers have noted that Vista sucks up ~ 40% more juice
                 from your notebook battery in Aero mode.
2006/6/14-17 [Computer/HW/CPU] UID:43392 Activity:nil
6/14    I have old computer hardwares that I am getting rid of before my move.
        1. ASUS A7V mobo with K6 processor around 733MHz
        2. Intel desktop mobo with P3 833MHz
        3. Tyan S2500 mobo with 2x P3 ~800-1GHz cpus
        4. Cyrix 586 133MHz system
        It's free for whoever wants it and can pick it up on campus.  They
        are mounted on the case, and you must take the whole combo (mobo, case
        cpu)  #1 has a working power supply as well.  #3 requires registered
        ECC RAM, and I have 2x512MB that'll be included as well.  #1 and #2
        should be working, but no guarantee.  #3 and #4 were working when
        last turned off.  Anything
        not picked up by Friday will go to ACCRC.  Email johndkim.
2006/6/7-9 [Computer/HW/CPU] UID:43310 Activity:nil
6/7     INTC drops to three-year low.  Time to buy?
        \_ depends whether you think they'll gain the momentum back from
           AMD.  Sometimes there's a reason a company is at a three-year
           low.  -tom
           \_ I want to kill all white male and inseminate as many hot blonde
              women as possible as a revenge on the fall of
              our glorious Eastern Empire.
              \_ Kewl: (see below.)  -John
           \_ Yes, I suppose the current price reflects market uncertainty
              about whether Conroe is the real shiznit.  The latest test dated
              yesterday is a bit more independent, with machines assembled and
              software installed "without the help of Intel":
              Then read the and previews
              released on Monday:
              Hey, prime time to buy, right?  Think critically about what
              you've read so far, then see:
              My conclusion from all the hard work some individuals have done
              is that Conroe will perform at or below comparable AMD offerings,
              will probably be less available, but will probably be cheaper -
              but take that advice as from someone unwilling to sign.
              but that's advice from someone who's unwilling to sign.
              \- FYI, there is an interesting paper worth glacing at
                 by YELICK and some other berkeley/lbl people about the
                 IBM CELL PROCESSOR ... a little bit on the interesting
                 design [espe of the memory bus] and some bmarks on various
                 standarized scientific computations. obgoogle if interested.
2006/5/24 [Computer/HW/CPU] UID:43178 Activity:nil 66%like:43179
        Hot hot hot!!!!!!!
        \_ boring
        \_ they need a battery life comparison for Turion 64 X2 vs. Core Duo
           and the weight of the systems
2006/5/7-10 [Computer/HW/CPU] UID:42966 Activity:nil
5/7     Conroe CPUs will kick ass. -- recently bought INTC
        \_ but all the performance tests have been where Intel controlled both
           the Conroe and the AMD box, right?  Previously Intel would mail an
           actual CPU to a reviewer site and they could play with it as much as
           they wanted, but as far as I know this hasn't happened.
2006/3/2-5 [Computer/HW/CPU] UID:42078 Activity:moderate
3/2     How is an Opteron different from an Athlon64?
        \_ Most Opterons require registered DIMM (940pin) and most
           have 3 HT links.  1xx series only have 1 usable one, though.
           There're some 939pin Opterons, which are basically identical
           to Athlon 64.  All Athlon 64s have 1 HT link only and use
           unbuffered DIMMs.  Internally, they're identical other than
           cache size and missing HT link logic.  DRAM controller is
           actually the same, but depending on which pads get routed to
           the pins, it turns into A64 or Opteron.  -- AMD employee.
        \_ one has more vowel than the other
           \_ Thanks!  Can you answer one more question though?  I thought
              the 939 pin opterons (165,170,175) had 3 HT links (not that
              it matters) and the only difference between those and 940 pins
              was the pin count and memory required?  Is there any difference
              between any of 165,170,175 and the same speed/cache X2? -!op
              \_ There is practically no difference between 939pin
                 Opteron and 939pin A64.  Apparently, MANIDs are
                 different, though, which some BIOS may not like.  I
                 believe Opteron 939pin is multiplier unlocked, but
                 don't quote me on that.  FX parts are all multiplier
                 unlocked.  All 939pin parts have only 1 HT link, so
                 939pin Opterons can only be used on 1 socket systems.
                 Also, in case anybody cares, the biggest win for 939pin
                 is that vendors can build cheap 4-layer motherboards for
                 them.  940pin requires more layers.  Layers on motherboard
                 are relatively expensive.  Also, unbuffered DIMMs are
                 cheaper.  All K8 is capable of supporting ECC memory, but
                 not many BIOS in the consumer boards enable it.
                 \_ I've seen references to layer counts in motherboards at
                    review sites and all they ever said was "more is better!".
                    What's it really mean?  Thanks again.
                    \_ This is pretty simple.  Think all those tightly
                       packed pins.  Now, you need to route them a
                       certain way without them colliding.  Obviously,
                       if they collide, that's an electrical short.  Any
                       short you didn't intend is bad.  There are only
                       so many ways to route them in our 3-dimensional
                       world.  In fact, it's more like 2-dimension +
                       however many layers you add.  More layer really
                       shouldn't imply better quality other than the
                       fact that you can isolate the power and ground
                       planes better.  You can also route things in
                       such ways to reduce noise (add more inductive
                       loops and keep certain signals away from each
                       other).  If you're current limited (crazy
                       overclockers and what not), more may be of some
                       use, too.  More layers can also be bad since
                       there will be more points of failures,
                       particularly the layer-to-layer connections.
        \_ (
           Opteron has more HT links (3 v. 1) and more cache than a
           \_ I think the above link is dated. The reason I think so is
              that when comparing prices I found the Athlon64 FX60 to
              cost more than the equivalent dual-core Opteron. Why is
              that? Also, along those lines, anyone have links comparing
              the performance of a Opteron 280 to an Opteron 250? They
              are the same clock speed, but the 280 is dual core. Are you
              better off with a 254 (unicore but 20% faster CPU)? This is
              for pure floating point computing, let's say monte carlos
              running threaded.
        \_ You can unscrew an Athlon64!
2006/3/1-2 [Computer/HW/CPU] UID:42039 Activity:high
2/28    So this new Intel Mac Mini... didn't the old one have better
        graphics and also cost less?
        \_ I think Apple is overcharging for it, since the new model is $100
           more from the last base priced model.  As components go down in
           price, so should the unit, or the specs should go up with a flat
           price.  However, keep in mind you do get 256MB more ram ($75),
           \_ $75 for 256MB!?  What country are you from?  You can get 1GB
              with that kind of money.
              \_ Where? The new mini uses DDR2 5300 ram. The cheapest I've
                 seen 1 GB is $120 or so. I agree that $75 is overpriced
                 for 256MB ram, you can get that for around $45.
                 \_ newegg (first hit, didn't continue searching) CORSAIR
                    ValueSelect 1GB 240-Pin DDR2 SDRAM System Memory - Retail
                    $100... c'mon do a little searching
                    \_ The x86 mini and the x86 iMac use 200 pin DDR2 ram
                       not 240 pin DDR2 ram.
           20GB more space, 2 more USB ports, and the new Intel processor
           supposedly "delivers two times the performance of the original Mac
           mini."  The last part I don't get because it's the Intel Core Solo
           is a single 1.5Ghz chips, while the original was a single PowerPC
           G4 chip (1.42Ghz).  I thought, RISC processors allowed computers
           to get more processing out of the same raw Ghz?  At least that's
           what Apple was touting at the pinacle of the Intel vs PowerPC
           wars.  So how does a single 1.5Ghz chip double performance from a
           1.42Ghz chip, especially a RISC based one?  And yes, the new mini
           uses shared video RAM, but it is an entry level machine, even if
           it's not priced like one.
           \_ If I understand correctly RISC chips tend to get their speed
              from being superscalar (multiple piplines).  And the pentium4
              is a RISC chip BTW, just has decoders on it for x86. --jwm.
           \_ There are a couple of other changes that make the single
              proc x86 mini faster than the PPC mini. The x86 mini has a
              667MHz system bus, while the PPC had a 167MHz system bus.
              The x86 mini uses a 5400 rpm SATA2 HD, while the PPC had a
              4200 rpm laptop drive.  The x86 mini also has 2 MB L2, while
              the PPC only had 512KB L2.
           \_ There are a few other changes that make the single proc x86
              mini faster than the PPC mini:
              1. 2MB l2 v. 512KB l2
              2. 667 MHz system bus v. 167 MHz system bus
              3. PC5300 DDR2 ram v. PC2700 ram
              4. 5400 rpm sata2 HD v. 4200 rpm ata-100 hd
              Personally the attractive features for me are the upgrade to
              GigE, the 4 usb2 ports and the builtin bluetooth. I don't
              know what to make of the shared video b/c it might be faster
              than the Raedon 9200 in the PPC mini, but then again you have
              to give up around 80 MB of main memory.
              If I didn't own a PPC mini, I would probably have bought the
              single proc one by now.
              single proc one.
              \_ Fundamentally, the fact that Apple switched to Intel chips,
              \_ Fundamentally, the fact is that Apple switched to Intel chips
                 ostensibly to save money and because of better heat
                 performance in small form factors, and the best they
                 can come up with is a machine that may or may not be faster
                 than an identical-looking box they released over a year ago
                 for $100 less, is pissing a lot of people off.  -tom
                 \_ I think that the focus on the $100 price increase
                    for the base model misses something crucial.
                    The base model x86 mini has the same specs as the
                    high end PPC mini and costs almost $200 less. In
                    addition, the base x86 mini comes w/ gigE, optical
                    audio out, 4 usb ports, and builtin bt. Personally,
                    I think apple has done a good job in reducing the
                    price of the mini.
                    \_ wow, increasing the price by $100 for no clear
                       advantage in performance is "reducing the price."
                       Do you work for Bush?  (Here's a hint: in the
                       computer industry, generally computers get
                       significantly faster and cheaper in a year).  -tom
                       \_ Apparently tom not only flunked out of UCB, but
                          even basic H.S. economics. The new Mac mini base
                          is functionally comparable to the old Mac mini
                          "deluxe", not to the old Mac mini base. Since
                          the new Mac mini base costs less than the old Mac
                          mini "deluxe", there is a drop in price. You get
                          more value for your dollar, but the unsophisticated
                          buyer like yourself can only focus on the base
                          \_ Who gives a shit about that? The reality of it
                             is that the entry price went up $100. Is the
                             user getting $100 more value? Basically just
                             256MB more RAM. Considering how time works
                             in the computer world and the age of the old
                             system, this deal stinks.
                             \_ I think the user is getting more than $100
                                in value in comparison to the base model
                                PPC mini:
                                in value and performance in comparison to
                                the base model PPC mini:
                                1. 300 extra MHz - 1.5GHz x86 v. 1.2 GHz
                                   PPC [in addition, the x86 has 2MB l2,
                                   instead of the 512KB l2 in the PPC,
                                   which should make the base mini seem
                                2. 20GB extra HD - 60GB sata2 (faster) hd
                                   v. 40GB ata-100 hd (the 4200 rpm hd in
                                   the PPC can be painfully slow) In the
                                   PPC mini, the upgrade to a 60GB HD was
                                   around $40-$50.
                                3. 256MB extra (faster) RAM - in the PPC
                                   mini a 512MB Dimm was around $50.
                                   mini a 512MB Dimm was around $50. The
                                   extra ram was sorely needed b/c the
                                   mini was very slow w/ 256MB RAM.
                                4. Builtin Airport and BT - in the PPC
                                   mini these were BTO options that added
                                   about $50.
                                5. 4 USB2 ports - don't need to buy a
                                   ugly usb hub, which saves $20 or so.
                                6. gigE instead of 10/100
                                7. optical audio out
                                Even if one says that Apple's BTO prices
                                were 2x the real cost for RAM and HD and
                                NO additional price should be added for
                                the faster processor, the price difference
                                ($20-$25 HD + $25 RAM + $50 BT/Airport
                                ~ $100) is easily made up by the add'l
                                features of the base model x86 mini.
                                I still think that the correct comparision
                                is between the old deluxe PPC mini (1.42,
                                1.5 GHz) and the new base model x86 mini.
                                The PPC deluxe model cost $599 and did not
                                come w/ airport, bt, 512MB of ram, gigE or
                                optical audio out. The only feature that
                                the the deluxe PPC mini had was a bigger
                                HD. Arguably, all the extras in the x86
                                mini more than make up for these 20GBs.
                                To get a 1.5GHz PPC mini that w/ a config
                                similar to the base x86 mini, one had to
                                spend nearly $800 (I know I bought one).
                                optical audio out.
                                1.5 GHz w/o superdrive) and the new base
                                model x86 mini. The PPC deluxe model cost
                                $599 and did not come w/ airport, bt, 512MB
                                of ram, gigE or optical audio out.
                                The only feature that the deluxe PPC mini
                                had was a bigger HD. Arguably, all the
                                extras in the x86 mini more than make up
                                for the smaller HD, even if there is NO
                                performance upgrade (ie you are getting
                                a x86 mini w/ many more features today
                                than you would have if you bought a 1.5
                                GHz PPC mini on monday).
                                Furthermore, to get a 1.5GHz PPC mini
                                that w/ a config similar to the base x86
                                mini, one had to spend nearly $800 (I
                                know I bought one).
                                w/ a config similar to the base x86 mini
                                one had to spend nearly $800 (I know b/c
                                I bought one), which is why I say that
                                the base model today is $200 cheaper than
                                the comparable PPC model.
                                To me the base mini easily demonstrates
                                that every year you get more computer at
                                cheaper prices.
                                that every year you get more computer
                                at cheaper prices.
                                If you just want to focus on the cost of
                                entry, you are right it is $100 more. I
                                think that such an inquiry is basically
                                useless b/c it ignores almost all of the
                                relevant facts.
                                \_ The thing that kept me from getting
                                   an mac mini before was that I was
                                   worried the G4 would be slow.  That's
                                   corrected now, and all the extra
                                   goodies look good!
                                   \_ The old 1.4GHz PPC mini was pretty
                                      good provided you got enough ram.
                                      The new 1.5GHz core solo mini should
                                      be quite nice if you get 1 GB of ram.
                                      The addition of front row and the
                                      remote make it fairly attractive (to
                                      me) as a htpc.
                          \_ why is it that tom always seem to have a
                             stick up his arse?
                       \_ He says it's $200 less. You say it's $100 more.
                          Only one of you can be correct.
                          \_ The entry-level model is $100 more than the
                             old entry-level model.  He claims that the
                             entry-level model is now faster than the high-end
                          \_ The entry-level model is $100 more than the old
                             entry-level model.  He claims that the entry-
                             level model is now faster than the high-end
                             model was before, so it's $200 cheaper.  He
                             ignores the fact that by Moore's Law, the
                             machine should be almost twice as fast for
                             the same cost by this point, not $100 more
                             for a possible incremental speed increase.
                             And it's not like the old entry-level Mac Mini
                             was a great deal to begin with.  -tom
                             machine should be almost twice as fast for the
                             same cost by this point, not $100 more for a
                             possible incremental speed increase. And it's
                             not like the old entry-level Mac Mini was a
                             great deal to begin with.  -tom
                             \_ I'm not claiming that the entry level x86
                                system is faster than the high end PPC
                                system. I'm claiming that they are comp-
                                arable. I get the $200 savings b/c a
                                similarly spec'ed 1.5 GHz PPC mini would
                                have cost about $799.
                                Re Moore's Law - Is this your argument:
                                1. 1.2GHz/1.4GHz PPC mini released in
                                   Jan 2005
                                2. ~ 12 months have passed
                                3. The proc should be 2.4GHz/2.8GHz
                                Please note, the period for Moore's law
                                is 24 mo these days, not 18 mo or 12 mo
                                as in the past. Also note that Moore's
                                law says nothing about cooling and power.
                                There is no way Apple/Intel could pack
                                in a 2.4 GHz P4 in that form factor w/o
                                a huge ps and hideously loud fans.
                                If your argument is that the low end
                                mini ought to have had a core duo proc,
                                I think this is unrealistic, considering
                                Moore's own company cannot make these
                                chips cheap enough for this price point.
                                Re the mini not a good deal -
                                I've owned numerous SFF PC's and I never
                                had one that was as silent as the mini
                                w/ equiv power (sure you can get a 800
                                MHz via c3, but it not nearly as fast
                                as a 1.4GHz PPC G4). Personally I think
                                the PPC mini was a great deal for a
                                completely silent and totally integrated
                                package. The addition of front row make
                                this far more desirable as a HT pc than
                                a xbox or a pc running mythtv/windows
                                media center b/c it is small and quiet.
                                \_ Look, I'm glad you're happy with it.
                                   Buy one and enjoy it.  But to claim it's
                                   a good deal is ridiculous.  -tom
2006/2/22-27 [Computer/HW/CPU, Computer/SW/OS/Solaris] UID:41954 Activity:nil
2/22    Can someone give me a link to a ISO of opensolaris
        that I can burn and boot on my PC?  thanks
        \_ Opensolaris distributions are still pretty much for developers only.
           If you want Solaris for your PC, download Solaris 10/x86 from Sun
           ISO(s) from Sun.
        \_ The closest thing to an official ISO for openSolaris is
           sxcr. You have to register w/ sun to d/l it:
           One of my friends on the openSolaris team suggested that
           you try nexenta instead
2006/2/10-13 [Computer/HW/CPU] UID:41795 Activity:moderate
2/10    What was your computer configuration during your UCB years?
        \_ None.
        \_ 286, 5.25" disk drives
        \_ 486-66, upgraded to 100MHz.  Worked far better than the HPUX
           machines compiling over NFS at the time (graduated in '97).
           \_ hah, me too, except I also did the DX3 (33 MHz FSB) to
              DX2 (50 MHz FSB) hack that was all the rage back then.
        \_ 386SX-16, then a 486-66. i think i had a P133 by the end, or
           shortly after UCB.
        \_ 386SX-16, 4MB RAM, 185MB HD, 5.25" and 3.5" floppies, 2400baud
           modem, HCG monitor, serial mouse, Epson LX-810.  Worked great.
           Ironically, I had a composite color monotor for my Apple II+ in my
           high school days, so I "downgraded" my monitor when switching to PC.
           --- Class of '93
        \_ typewriter the first semester (mostly for English 1A),
           then 286, then 386DX
        \_ Mac SE, PowerBook 180 ('93); Quadra 650 ('95), Pentium 150
           running RH3 ('97) --class of '97
        \_ Mac SE -> Mac Classic II -> Mac IIcx -> Pentium II  -- Class of '98
           \_ why did you finally convert to the WINTEL world?
              \_ I went to go buy a Powermac, and decided I was willing to
                 spend about $2500 bucks.  I wanted to run UN*X, and figured
                 spend about $2500.  I wanted to run UN*X, and figured
                 I'd be stuck running Yellowdog Linux or something.  Most of
                 my friends ran FreeBSD, so I figured I'd at least _look_ at
                 what I could get for $2500 in a PC.  It turned out to be like
                 4x the machine.
        \_ P133 that I played Quake on, then a Celeron 300A @450 that I played
           Half-Life on. School? yeah I think I went to some sort of classes
           sometimes, kind of hazy.
        \_ Commodore 128, later replaced by an Amiga3000UX. -ERic
        \_ I was too poor for my own computer, so I just hung out in The Web.
           \_ In my days even people who had computers had to hang out in the
              Web, because there was no such thing as a PPP dialup or free X
              server for Windoze.  Actually, even if these two existed,
              performance would be terrible over a 2400baud connection anyway.
              --- Class of '93
              \_ I worked 'near' the guy who was responsible for the EECS modem
                 bank around then and pushed hard to get everything upgraded to
                 9600 to no avail.  He only ended up destroying half the modem
                 bank and oh nevermind... it hurts to think about it.
        \_ 486-33.  Too wimpy to even play Doom when it came out.
           \_ That was perfectly sufficient for playing doom.
              \_ With a math co-processor, yes.  Without, no. -!op
                    "Does DOOM benefit from a FPU for floating point
                     No.  All calculations in DOOM 1.1 and beyond
                     use integers."
                    ... so did doom 1.0 use fp?
                    \_ Presumably.  Either that or something like a 16.16
                       integer representation of real numbers.
        \_ First 2 years, a TI portable with 12.5MHz 286 CPU, 640KB of RAM, 40MB
           hard drive and a monorchrone screen. The following 1 year 233MHz
           Pentium MMX PC with 32MB of RAM, 2GB disk (made by Micron). The
           remaining two years (after a long perdiod out of school), 933MHz
           Dell with 512MB of RAM.
        \_ ADM-3A terminal plugged into a modem for dialup access.
        \_ TVI 925 dialup terminal with 1200 baud, later upgraded to 14.4!
2006/1/25-27 [Computer/HW/CPU] UID:41521 Activity:nil
1/25    AMD kicking INTC's ass
        \_ AMD should.  Intel used to punish AMD by hurting AMD's side
           businesses, but AMD has spun off all the major side businesses
           now.  So Intel can't hurt AMD except in cpu, and AMD has better
           technology and has not screwed up execution.  The "Intel inside"
           cachet is gone, and AMD has regular consumer acceptance.
           cachet is gone, and AMD has regular consumer acceptance.  I'm not
           sure what Intel has within the next generation or two to unfuck
           itself, and there's no way Intel can grab back the lost market
           \_ It's a bit premature to signal the death of Intel.  It used to
              be that Intel made more profit in 2 weeks than AMD cumulatively
              for its entire existance, I doubt that has radically changed.
              Intel has massively screwed up and mis-executed for a long time
              but they are still doing quite well.
              \_ all he's saying was that Intel can't grab back that lost
                 market share, and that the "Intel inside" cachet is gone.
                 Maybe he's wrong, but then again you have blogs like:
        \_ "AMD ISBETTER" (old CPUID in 1994)
        \_ don't dismiss INTC yet.  they still have control over laptop
           market and they have better OEM program in place for hardware
           cookie cutters to use their chip.   One interesting sign is that
           on the Server side, INTC is pre-integrating all the I/O onto
           their south-bridge chipset...
           \_ The bigger they are, the longer it takes to fall....
2006/1/11-13 [Computer/HW/CPU] UID:41333 Activity:kinda low
1/11    Anyone knows what happens to Apple's chipset design team
        now that the Intel Macs are official?
        \_ Who says Apple still wouldn't be using their own chipsets for
           Intel chips?  And wouldn't it be likely that the x86 version of
           Mac OS X would require, say, an Apple chipset to prevent it from
           running on non-Apple hardware?
           \_ It would sound like a great waste of efficiency if Apple
              plans to use its own instead of Intel. Just as with the case
              of CPUs, Intel can achieve better economies of scale in
              motherboard chipsets than about anyone and always stay on
              top in price/performance. As for Apple specific mods, I'd be
              surprised if Intel wouldn't be willing to accommodate them.
              \_ Just looking at Asus' line of motherboards, I see motherboards
                 with chipsets by VIA, SIS, Nvidia, ATI, and ULI (oh, and
                 Intel).  I wouldn't be surprised if Apple makes enough x86
                 motherboards to find it worthwhile to use a custom chipset
                 (whether they design it themselves or pay someone else to
                 do it).
        \_ I've been told some of them are doing other things, others are not
2006/1/5-7 [Science/Electric, Computer/HW/CPU] UID:41246 Activity:nil
1/5     Intel releases pricing details for dual-core notebook Yonah CPUs,
        dual-core 1.66Ghz at $241:
        You lose in power consumption / battery life:
2006/1/3-5 [Computer/HW/Drives, Computer/HW/CPU] UID:41210 Activity:nil
1/3     I noticed firefox on certain pages left idle will start to consume
        100% cpu, and cpu usage will drop back to normal after I close
        that tab. Anyone seen similar problem? This is 1.5 but I've
        seen it since 1.04.. I seem to have it on
        and today
        \_ I've seen this happen with java applets.  Perhaps those pages have
           applets on their pages?
        \_ not sure if it is related, but with 1.5 I've noticed that
           when I return from standby both firefox and thunderbird go
           crazy w.r.t. cpu usage (until I close and restart them, which
           is a real hassle since I usually have multiple tab sessions
           \_ Have you tried waiting a while to see if they're just swap-crazy?
              \_ Disk isn't spinning - the machine just sits.  It might still
                 be swap related, but I'm thinking likely not.  Just looked,
                 there are a few things in the forums that refer to a possible
                 problem with flash, trying the flash-block extension.
           \_ I noticed the same thing, and now have the habit of
              quitting firefox before I enter standby. -op
           \_ Same thing happens in Opera sometimes.  It appears to depend on
              what's open.  My guess is that it has to do with auto-refresh
              pages--that when you resume, the browser queues up a bunch of
              refresh events that gum up the system.
        \_ Nope.  Maybe evil broken Javascript?  Actually, as of 1.5, it'll
           start noticing things like javascript loops and offer to nuke the
           page for you.
2005/12/23-28 [Computer/HW/CPU] UID:41128 Activity:moderate
12/22   Anyone know of a vendor which sells AMD boxes (dual package, dual core)
        for resale (both in the US and internationally)?
        \_ What kind of AMD boxes are you looking for?  desktop? server?
           consumer? embedded?  industrial? enterprise?
           \_ Number-crunching workstation for use in hospitals.
              \_ so, essentially high end desktops?  does hospital has any
                 special requirements?  how many of those boxes are you
                 looking at?
              \_ How about Sun? The Ultra 20 is supposed to be pretty nice.
                 \_ i can assure you generic AMD boxes is going to be a lot
                    cheaper :p
                    \_ Yeah, but he wanted a vendor that sells AMD boxes
                       for resale both domestically and internationally.
                       Other than Sun, I think that the only major vendor
                       who meets that criteria is HP.
        \_ if you are serious about this, shoot me an email.  I have contacts
           with many server OEMs in Taiwan.             kngharv
2005/12/9-11 [Computer/SW/Languages, Computer/HW/CPU] UID:40938 Activity:nil
12/9    Does anyone know if there are FOSS diff tools that are somewhat
        syntax-aware? E.g., it would understand that comments and whitespace
        don't matter (well, for languages where it doesn't), and that
        expressions can span several lines but still be the same? It doesn't
        even have to be smart enough to strip redundant sets of parentheses
        or anything. Thanks.
        \_ Compile the code and "cmp" the binaries. :-)
        \_ Canonicalize the sources and diff those, e.g. run through a
           pre-processor and auto-indenter?  Or, get your hands on MOSS,
           depending on what you're trying to do?
2005/9/23-27 [Computer/HW/Memory, Computer/HW/CPU, Consumer/TV] UID:39841 Activity:nil
9/23    Anyone ever built their own TiVo/PVR? any suggestions/advice
        before I build one? I'm reading my way through
        trying  to figure out how to build one.
        \- isnt the hardware heavily subsidized? why would you want
           to build one from scratch? or is this a geek learning exercise?
                \_ definitely the latter. granted I won't have to pay a
                   monthly service fee, I'll probably pay more up front
                   if I build one.
           \_ I built mine out of mythtv because for some reason, I've
              generally been against paying for a subscription of any kind.
              You also get more features from building your own.  Another
              reason these days with TiVo adding various restrictions is
              that you're not under direct control of some corporation's
              whim.  I admit, TiVo probably is more stable, but mythtv is
              what works for me.
              \_ How much did you spend on the hardware?
                 \_ I've used parts that are just laying about few times.
                    The latest incarnation I'm working on cost me about $400
                    for the shuttle-like case, cpu, and memory, I believe.
           \_ I like to be able to watch recorded programs remotely :)
        \_ You mean like mythtv?
        \_ Decide on size of machine and noise level you find acceptable.
           \_ how about those VIA C3 chip.  I know that you can run
              800Mhz without any fans.  The newer 1GHz chip from
              xxx nm fab reportly can run without fan neither.  tried it?
2021/10/17 [General] UID:1000 Activity:popular
Results 301 - 367 of 367   < 1 2 3 >
Berkeley CSUA MOTD:Computer:HW:CPU: