|
Post by Kokusho the Evening Star on Aug 26, 2011 6:01:44 GMT -5
Well, I haven't been keeping in touch with this thread recently, so I don't have big hopes for ATI, but I do now when it comes to Nvidia and their Kel-El quad-core.
|
|
|
Post by The Italian Dragon on Aug 26, 2011 13:12:20 GMT -5
I have more trust into AMD than nVidia for CPU's honestly >.>
|
|
|
Post by Kokusho the Evening Star on Aug 26, 2011 13:55:02 GMT -5
When it comes to PCs, I do have my faith in AMD, but when developments are not hearing so much compare to Nvidia, I'm stuck. But today it's now for the smartphones and tablets which I get the faiths from both worlds, I'm having my big investment in Nvidia for the upcoming Kal-El, in this way, Qualcomm will be in big trouble no matter how they try on their Snapdragons.
|
|
|
Post by The Italian Dragon on Aug 26, 2011 16:26:29 GMT -5
Okay I see
|
|
Clone
Maturing Dragon
That one dragon with no name
Posts: 2,243
|
Post by Clone on Aug 29, 2011 4:15:45 GMT -5
Nvidias got a great lead in the low power mobile section right now. not to mention the company actually spending a lot of R&D their due to it trying to get a market share in a section that isn't controlled by Intel. (Nvidia and Intel aren't best buds like all the AMD people would like to think)
as of right now i'm not going to take any sides in computing. all of them have their advantages and draw backs.
still, BULLDOZER is getting so close! (some competition in the processor field would be wonderful for driving down prices)
Edit>>>> corrected horrendous spelling problems. why was i on the internet at 5AM?
|
|
|
Post by Kokusho the Evening Star on Aug 29, 2011 15:22:27 GMT -5
Bulldozer may sound like a new thing, but what about the other thing called the Intel Sandy Bridges?
|
|
Clone
Maturing Dragon
That one dragon with no name
Posts: 2,243
|
Post by Clone on Aug 29, 2011 15:50:38 GMT -5
Bulldozers said to be able to go head to head with sandy bridge and out run them, however nothings set in stone till that launch date roles around and people start benching them.
|
|
|
Post by Kokusho the Evening Star on Aug 29, 2011 22:12:33 GMT -5
Will do and let's see how it goes. Damn, it's so fast technology goes, it even makes my i7 laptop look outdated soon. Well, I felt a little regret of it and I could have bought an i5 instead.
|
|
Clone
Maturing Dragon
That one dragon with no name
Posts: 2,243
|
Post by Clone on Aug 30, 2011 1:57:13 GMT -5
well be glad that your only about 15% slower than the Sandy bridge generation. (sadly Sandy bridge's GMA is as fast as your Radion... however yours has better compatibility and less bandwidth problems)
I on the other hand would see a 50% frame rate boost by jumping up to a i5 2600k under a 3 year old graphics card. now that's what i call begin slown by your processor! (not to mention seeing as i have a GTX 470 it could be a far larger frame rate jump)
|
|
|
Post by Kokusho the Evening Star on Aug 30, 2011 7:48:05 GMT -5
I knew you're going to mention an Nvidia card, one of the latest models, I'm jealous, I wish I could have played Starcraft 2 with that kind of graphic card without the worry of reduced frame rate.
|
|
Clone
Maturing Dragon
That one dragon with no name
Posts: 2,243
|
Post by Clone on Aug 31, 2011 14:26:22 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Kokusho the Evening Star on Aug 31, 2011 15:33:29 GMT -5
Under low, yes, but on medium, it begins to lose frame rate. Well, I was greedy when it comes to that game so I prefer to have some additional spices in them but sadly, the price must be paid.
|
|
Clone
Maturing Dragon
That one dragon with no name
Posts: 2,243
|
Post by Clone on Sept 3, 2011 0:29:34 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Kokusho the Evening Star on Sept 3, 2011 7:20:17 GMT -5
I seem to forgot how they work, is it like when you have an i5/i7, when Turbo Boost, it focuses on a specific thread to speed up while the others are slowed down or stopped, and Bulldozer or Sandy Bridge makes ALL of the threads or cores to accelerate all at once?
|
|
Clone
Maturing Dragon
That one dragon with no name
Posts: 2,243
|
Post by Clone on Sept 5, 2011 16:42:26 GMT -5
hum, should i give the 'long' answer or the one people are willing to read? dilemmas these are...
to try to keep it short i'm going to SUUUUPER simplify it. (now remember this is 'simple' for some one whose read a lot on this)
(general info that should be known) Intel introduced Hyper threading back in the days of the Pentium 4 which had an extremely long pipe line. (last gen P4's had a 42stage pipeline) long ass pipelines are fine and actually Faster than short ones when doing a single task, however the problem with them is that if the code guesses wrong on whats to be done when and how then the whole processor stalls and dose nothing. to counter this it added insertion points in the code to counteract this by allowing the OS to insert processes in the inactive portions of the pipeline. this is Hyper Threading; processing more code in less space. however hyper threading fails if the code path is efficient and renders properly. (not to mention less needed in modern processors that sport pipe lines of less than 15 as the penalty of a stall is far less)
what you ultimelty need to take form that is, Hyper threading only helps if the code is poorly written or the processor incorrect guesses the work.
AMD's solution to this is to add more physical processing units instead of the faked ones that hyper threading creates. however AMD's 8 processing unit processors are not actual full on octacore processors as for every 2 processing units theirs only 1 fetch, decode, and cache system. only difference between this and hyper threading is the inclusion of a second FPU and logical unit. one benefit of this design is that the processor in theory, it can disable/combine the logical processors of a single modual (core) to hit higher TCP and FPU precision. (duel 128bit FPU's can and will function as a 256bit FPU unit in the final product when single threading on a modual) thus allowing a duel modual unit to function as though its a Quad core processor whit out the added overhead and power requirements. (by theory a more efficient processor)
now that's probably a bunch of mumbo jumbo to you and isn't 100% what you were asking. so hears the part on the over clocking system.
(READ THIS IF YOU SKIPPED THE FIRST PART!!!)
intel's turbo boost up clocks a single processing core for higher single threading capability's. this was introduced to help mitigate performance bottle necks caused by single threading applications on multiple cored processors. however this is done at the expense of it can not activate if any more than 1 processing core is loaded. however due to Intel's Hyper Threading system, the CPU's turbo mode actually boost 1 logical and 1 virtual threads performance)
AMD's turbo mode on the other hand over clocks the whole processor or more correctly the parts that are loaded. allowing it to boost as many as 4 logical threads at once. (this may have changed from when i last was researching, which was 4 months ago)
now weather or not all that tech speak i just spat out actually means anything is still up in the air till Bulldozer releases to the general public and we start gettign some benchmarks.
|
|