Why Pentium?

Discussion in 'Computer Information' started by Talal Itani, Jul 3, 2006.

  1. Talal Itani

    Eric Furness Guest

    Yeah we have one of those, Problem is, the owner died, and guess
    what? Now the son is the owner. He comes in and makes big decisions,
    such as "we need plants outside" and "lets put fancy signs on the
    building". Jeez.
     
    Eric Furness, Jul 10, 2006
    1. Advertisements

  2. Do keep in mind that we are using two different platforms after all. I
    would expect certain things to perform much better on the P4 due to
    the way it is designed just as somethings just do much better on the
    A64.
    It could just be the filter is better implemented as well on the newer
    versions.
    I had a HT system for a while and from that experience, I will say
    that HT does work for situations like this. On a single core system,
    if one process takes up enough processing power, the rest of the
    system slows to a crawl, especially if it's choking on some disk IO.
    On the HT system, the virtual processor was capable of allowing the
    rest of the processes and programs to more or less remain responsive
    even if overall speed was affected.
    Just on the basis of this? :p I'm pretty willing to bet my machine
    will outdo yours on various other benchmarks. After all, mine did do
    better on the 33mpix test with 14s vs your 22s. Would you then bring
    your system back to your vendor and complain about it? I'm sure if
    either of us did that, your vendor will either laugh his/her head off
    or bang it against the wall asking why did they get this kind of
    client :pPPp
     
    The little lost angel, Jul 10, 2006
    1. Advertisements

  3. Talal Itani

    Mxsmanic Guest

    HT is the poor man's multiprocessor system, but it's good enough to
    make the system more responsive, as you observe. If you have very
    different threads running at the same time, it can also come close to
    a true multiprocessor system.

    I note that PS 5.0.2, at least, does not use more than one processor.
    Well, it all sounds very weird.
    Well, since I built it myself, I'd have only myself to blame.
    Depends. Some PC salespeople are so stupid that they would probably
    take it back, thinking there's something wrong with the machine.
     
    Mxsmanic, Jul 10, 2006
  4. Wot... no salt-water tropical fish tank in the err, reception foyer?:)
     
    George Macdonald, Jul 10, 2006
  5. Talal Itani

    Eric Furness Guest

    Heh. Maybe I'll just drop a hint to f with him.
     
    Eric Furness, Jul 11, 2006
  6. Talal Itani

    kony Guest


    I'm quite content to have you think that Rod, and plenty of
    people were quite happy to have a quieter fan instead.
    Perhaps your subjective opinion of "quiet" means anything
    less than 30% of the noise a hair dryer produces, but to
    others if the CPU isn't particularly high heat, quiet would
    mean "can I hear it without trying to".

    I happened to pull out another P3 fan yesterday as it just
    happened to be within arm's reach and I'd needed a temporary
    airflow for testing passive cooling a C3 (simulation of a
    PSU intake flow). The fan was far louder than anything I
    have running, cooling video cards, overclocked CPUs,
    chipsets, etc. Pathetic really, didn't even move half the
    air of fans far far quieter. For the record this particular
    fan was Nidec-made and rated for 0.13A, and like all the
    others it's problems were that it was too thin, too high an
    RPM, bearings and hub too small.

    Disagree all you want but more than anything it shows just
    how little you realize how quiet a system can actually be if
    you think that era of intel fan was quiet.

    There's nothing desperate about plugging in a fan and
    noticing how loud it is. Same as observed by many many
    people for many years. All except a handful including Rod.
    Oh well, I'm done arguing about it because nothing you or I
    write will change the noise level.
     
    kony, Jul 12, 2006
  7. Talal Itani

    kony Guest

    Arguable, P4 needed software optimizations to even keep up
    most of the time. Benchmarks belie this by always testing
    newest versions of app even when most people don't run
    newest versions, it'd cost several thousand addt'l per year
    to do that.
     
    kony, Jul 12, 2006
  8. Talal Itani

    kony Guest


    For many common tasks it is not the bottleneck. That
    doesn't diminish it as a bottleneck for other tasks.

    Gaming isn't so uncommon, nor is video capture, editing,
    on-the-fly compression for burning DVDs. Remember Win MCE?
    Plenty of OEMs sell it, relatively unsophisticated users are
    now doing things they never could before because of the CPUs
    we have today. Most of the time the CPU is nowhere near
    100% utilized but for milliseconds at a time, it helps.
     
    kony, Jul 12, 2006
  9. Talal Itani

    kony Guest


    Sure, but the apps themselves can.
    Actually it can be a benefit, if for example you wanted to
    apply some filters and capture to MPEG4 while using a
    system, it'll be good to give that enough priority.
     
    kony, Jul 12, 2006
  10. Talal Itani

    kony Guest


    Then you look even more foolish.
     
    kony, Jul 12, 2006
  11. Talal Itani

    Rod Speed Guest

    Separate issue entirely to your stupid pig ignorant claim that
    ALL P3s BOXED FANS DEVELOP BEARING WHINE IN MONTHS.
    Or perhaps not when I chose to replace the power
    supply and hard drives with those that are silent.
    Thats the case with me too thanks.
    Says nothing useful what so ever about your stupid pig ignorant claim
    that ALL P3s BOXED FANS DEVELOP BEARING WHINE IN MONTHS.
    Says nothing useful what so ever about your stupid pig ignorant claim
    that ALL P3s BOXED FANS DEVELOP BEARING WHINE IN MONTHS.
    Says nothing useful what so ever about your stupid pig ignorant claim
    that ALL P3s BOXED FANS DEVELOP BEARING WHINE IN MONTHS.
    Yep, you'll never convince those of us that have P3 boxed fans which dont have
    bearing whine that ALL P3s BOXED FANS DEVELOP BEARING WHINE IN MONTHS.
     
    Rod Speed, Jul 12, 2006
  12. Talal Itani

    Rod Speed Guest

    Video capture doesnt need the latest cpu,
    my 4 channel PVR is fine with a 900MHz cpu.

    And while basic video editing, chopping dvr-ms files
    up into program segment files would be faster on a
    faster system, its quite adequate on that system too.
    Gets sillier by the minute. Thats completely invisible.
     
    Rod Speed, Jul 12, 2006
  13. Talal Itani

    Rod Speed Guest

    Never ever could bullshit its way out of a wet paper bag.
     
    Rod Speed, Jul 12, 2006
  14. Talal Itani

    kony Guest

    So you're stuck capturing in MPEG2, right?
    That's a good way for beginners to get started but hardly a
    good result for editing or long term storage.


    Well sure, it's a little slower, and on a little slower CPU,
    a little slower, and so on... and that's only BASIC,
    simplistic editing jobs. You're just arguing for the sake of
    it now, and it's sad.
     
    kony, Jul 12, 2006
  15. Talal Itani

    Rod Speed Guest

    Wrong. I can capture any of TS, full TS, dvr-ms as well.
    Depends on what you want to do editing wise. Most
    just want to chop a big block of capture into individual
    program segments and maybe auto strip the ads.
    Mindlessly silly.
    Its what most do with their PVRs, MCEs.
    You're projecting now, you pathetic excuse for a bullshit artist.
     
    Rod Speed, Jul 12, 2006
  16. Talal Itani

    kony Guest

    Any way you wanna slice it, you have either hardware MPEG or
    you have insufficient CPU power to get adequate compression
    for permanent storage. Sure you can compress it later, but
    all the worse to do that if it were MPEG'd already, and a
    horrific use of HDD spac if lesser compression.

    DVR-ms is not an actual capture format though, it's a MS
    proprietary kludge for (get ready for it....) MPEG2. Maybe
    DV, but any way you look at it the 900MHz CPU is a problem
    is not working within it's limitations like direct transfer
    of a pre-existing data stream. Some wouldn't even call that
    video capture but that it happened to occur on a vidcap
    card, but if you wanna stick to that then so be it.

    Well that's certainly up to you, back when 900MHz was the
    best affordable technology I cued up jobs and just left a
    box doing them if/when they couldn't cut it realtime.


    Not at all, do you routinely waste storage space for no
    useful purpose at all? "IF" you're dumping it all out to
    DVD immediately I can see wanting MPEG2 but otherwise, it's
    just a bad alternative that persisted from a past era when
    hardware decompression was too weak in set-top boxes to be
    done on the fly.


    You presuppose MCE?
    No wonder you are thinking only within what MS pushes at
    you.
     
    kony, Jul 13, 2006
  17. Why Pentium, indeed? I have been using AMD CPUs for years. I don't
    miss Intel at all.
     
    ToolPackinMama, Jul 13, 2006
  18. Talal Itani

    kony Guest

    Funny, I never limited "capture" to TV.

    So you're not actually arguing for that CPU for "capture"
    but rather, one very specific situation and that situation
    only.
     
    kony, Jul 13, 2006
  19. Talal Itani

    Jure Sah Guest

    kony pravi:
    Buy the cooler fans that have double bearings. :)

    Those purr smoothly even after years of use.


    --
    Primary function: Coprocessor
    Secondary function: Cluster commander

    http://www.thought-beacon.net

    Pay once per lifetime webhosting:
    http://farcomm-it.com/?ref=jsah

    We are the paragon of humanity. You may worship us. From afar.

    01010010 01100101 01110011 01101001 01100100 01100101 01101110 01110100
    01000010 01000001 01010011 01001001 01000011
     
    Jure Sah, Jul 20, 2006
  20. Talal Itani

    Jure Sah Guest

    kony pravi:
    Seriously, do you think the Pentium optimizations are better than the
    AMD ones?

    AMD's 64bit optimizations aren't used very well yet either. But all it
    takes is to download properly compiled software (Linux) and you do.

    And AMDs are practically faster than Intels. I know the numbers look
    neater on Intel processors, but AMDs very simply make a computer more
    responsive. I'm guessing it's something to do with overall design.

    --
    Primary function: Coprocessor
    Secondary function: Cluster commander

    http://www.thought-beacon.net

    Pay once per lifetime webhosting:
    http://farcomm-it.com/?ref=jsah

    We are the paragon of humanity. You may worship us. From afar.

    01010010 01100101 01110011 01101001 01100100 01100101 01101110 01110100
    01000010 01000001 01010011 01001001 01000011
     
    Jure Sah, Jul 20, 2006
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.