Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : Computer Learning -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Zardoz who wrote (23280)	11/8/2001 9:01:49 AM
From: thecow	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 110652

Zardoz WOW...I apparently need some advice on how to run SETI. I'm running the newest version 3.03 on a P4 1.8g dell 8200 Windows XP. It takes me about 20 hours to process a work unit. At this rate, I'll never find ET. tc :-)

To: Zardoz who wrote (23280)	11/8/2001 1:40:16 PM
From: PMS Witch	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 110652

Thank-you for sharing the link emulators.com where the Pentium 4 is discussed. Although it’s both deep and long, I found the article very much worth the time to study. I also recognise that some people may not wish to commit the time and effort to a topic that lies some distance beyond the focus of the majority of Computer Learning participants. I’d like to highlight some passages from that link… Admittedly, a little off topic for this thread, but another real-world example of truth in the common saying that “Intel gives and Microsoft takes away.” Today, the observation that new software always expands its demands on new hardware continues. “The 386 chip is famous for unseating IBM as the leading PC developer and for causing the breakup with Microsoft. IBM looked at the 386, decided it was too powerful for the average user, and decided not to use it in PCs and not to write operating systems for it. Instead it chose to keep using the 286 and to support the 286 in OS/2. Microsoft on the other hand developed Windows/386 with improved multitasking, Compaq and other clone makers did use the 386 to deliver the horsepower needed to run such a graphical operating system, and the rest is history. By the time IBM woke up, it was too late. Microsoft won. Compaq DELL and Gateway won.” Again, maybe a little off topic for this thread, but addressing a long and hotly contested dispute between the RISC vs. CISC processor camps, the link contains this gem. The theory with RISC processors, which has long since proven to be bullshit, was that by making the instructions simpler the chip could be clocked at a higher clock speed. But this in turn only made up for the fact that more instructions were now required to implement any particular algorithm, and worse, the code grew bigger and thus used up more memory. In reality a RISC processor is no more or less powerful than a CISC processor. Finally, a topic that gets considerable attention on Computer Learning. How fast does everyday software run on a typical PC? What factors determine performance and what control do we have over them. Once again, let me repeat: CLOCK SPEED IS NOT EVERYTHING! So many people stupidly go out and buy a new computer every year expecting faster clock speed to solve their problems, when the main problem is not clock speed. The problem is poorly written code, uneducated programmers, and out of date compilers (that's YOU Microsoft) that target obsolete processors. How many people still run Microsoft Office 95? … That product was written in an old version of Visual C++ which targets now obsolete 486 processors. … The newer the compiler tools, the better optimised the code is for today's processors. The author gives a detailed explanation and examples, before concluding with… Until every single Windows application out there gets re-compiled with Visual C++ 7.0, or gets hand coded in assembly language, your brand spanking new Pentium III processor will not run as fast as it can. About half way through, the author makes this pronouncement on the Pentium 4. In what can only be considered a monumental lapse in judgement, Intel went ahead and threw out the many tried and tested ideas implemented in both the PowerPC and AMD Athlon processor families and literally took a step back 5 years to the days of the 486. He supports this assertion with pages of argument and examples. I won’t include the detail here because much of it would only interest developers; however, it was sprinkled with interesting bits such as follows… My advice is don't stock up on too much more PC100 or PC133 RAM as next time you go to buy a computer they'll be obsolete. When the second processor in the 670 MHz and 1.0 GHz systems was disabled, the speed actually increased. And since Microsoft's C++ compiler is known to not produce Pentium 4 optimised code, I can't possibly imagine Windows XP being tuned for the Pentium 4! The Pentium III-M, despite the fact that Intel hobbled the larger 512K L2 cache down to 256K, still delivers a solid 20% speed increase over the 1.0 GHz chip, and does so using the slowest and most common PC133 memory … The Pentium III architecture, as old as it is, scales very nicely and keeps right up with the Athlon. I cannot imagine him expressing his opinion of the current processor offerings any clearer than he does here… If someone were to buy me a computer this Christmas and it didn't have a AMD Athlon XP processor inside of it, I think I would throw it right back at the idiot who wasted his money on it. Overall, I think the link made an interesting read. If I were considering a new machine, I would take the time to read the article as well as explore the links he provided in support of his assertions. Again, thank-you for posting it to Computer Learning. Cheers, PW. P.S. For a general overview, just read the History section.

To: Zardoz who wrote (23280)	11/8/2001 1:50:47 PM
From: bowledover	Respond to of 110652

Whoa!!! Zardoz, thanks for this post and link. I went to the emulator site (new to me) and read around some. Understood some (I think!? :^) ) -- REALLY helpful, thanks again. For those folks who recently posted seeking information about a new system I strongly encourage you to look at this site Zardoz suggested. Very interesting, helpful ideas I think. emulators.com See also the page Zardoz linked (I did find the site a little awkward to get around but worth it). emulators.com David

To: Zardoz who wrote (23280)	11/8/2001 3:50:16 PM
From: shadowman	Respond to of 110652

Very interesting and informative site Zardoz. Thanks for posting it.

To: Zardoz who wrote (23280)	1/4/2002 12:20:56 AM
From: SIer formerly known as Joe B.	Respond to of 110652

New Pentium 4 to alter competitive map Thursday January 03 06:00 PM EST By Michael Kanellos CNET News.com dailynews.yahoo.com New versions of Intel's Pentium 4 due out next week are expected to stifle criticism that the chip is more expensive and offers less-enthralling performance than its nearest competitor. On Monday, Intel will introduce two new versions of the Pentium 4--code-named Northwood--that will run at 2.2GHz and 2.0GHz. But more important than the speed bump are the design of the chips and the way they are manufactured, developments that are expected to help the company open a competitive gap between itself and cross-freeway rival Advanced Micro Devices. PCs featuring the chip, along with a chipset for hooking Intel PCs into fast double data rate memory, will arrive the same day from Gateway, Dell Computer and others, according to sources. The Northwood Pentium 4 chips differ from the current versions of the chip in that they are made on the 130-nanometer (0.13-micron) manufacturing process, rather than on the 180-nanometer process by which existing Pentium 4s are made. The 130-nanometer designation refers to the average size of the features on the chip. The new process allows Santa Clara, Calif.-based Intel to dramatically shrink the size of the chip, which in turn allows it to lower the cost or raise its profits per chip. The current Pentium 4 measures 214 square millimeters and initially cost Intel about $100 to manufacture, estimated Kevin Krewell, an analyst at the Microprocessor Report. By contrast, Northwood chips will measure approximately 145 square millimeters and cost about $55 initially to make, Krewell said. Other estimates peg Northwood to measure around 116 square millimeters. At the same time, performance will improve because Northwood chips will offer--along with the higher clock speeds--a larger secondary cache, a reservoir of memory located on the same piece of silicon as the processor for rapid data access. Northwood chips will contain 512KB of cache, while current Pentium 4s contain 256KB. "Because of the increase in cache and the boost in clock frequency, Intel will start to pull away from AMD," he said. "Even with the larger cache, (the chip) is going to be smaller." Performance has long been a sticking point for the Pentium 4. Although it is the fastest chip on the market today, as measured by gigahertz, analysts and benchmark testers have criticized its overall performance. A 2GHz Pentium 4, for instance, provides less oomph than the Athlon XP 1800+, which runs at 1.5GHz on many benchmarks, according to testers. Gigahertz refers to the number of cycles per second--2 billion in the case of the current Pentium 4. The disparity exists because the Pentium 4 performs less work per clock cycle than the Athlon. The lower manufacturing cost will also let Intel continue to wage a price war against AMD. The 2.2GHz Northwood will come out at $562, the typical entry point for Pentium 4s. Prices on other Pentium 4s will be cut during January. The price war has been great for customers, but it has drastically cut Intel's profits and sent AMD into the red. Pricing "is not going to get any better," Krewell said. Sunnyvale, Calif.-based AMD, of course, won't be standing still. It will kick off 2002 with a 2000+ Athlon XP in January. In the first quarter, it will also come out with "Thoroughbred," a version of its Athlon XP chip made on the 130-nanometer process. The chip will cover 80 square millimeters in area. "We believe we have a 10 percent to 20 percent advantage on cost" because of smaller chip sizes, Hector Ruiz, president of AMD, said in November. The Northwood chips will also be the first Pentium 4 chips to be made with copper wires, rather than aluminum ones. Copper conducts electricity better than aluminum and thus gives designers an avenue to break through looming physical barriers that could prevent further boosts in chip performance. Intel introduced its first copper processors, Pentium III-M chips for notebooks, in the middle of last year. A copper 1.2GHz Celeron, based on the Pentium III architecture, came out in October. AMD and IBM already sell desktop processors with copper. Although it may seem odd to release new chips and PCs right after the rush of the holiday buying season, it is a common strategy in the processor business. In 1996, Intel decided to postpone the release of the first Pentium MMX chips from late that year to early 1997. Press coverage of the MMX had been rather extensive, and executives and analysts later blamed the relatively slow buying of 1996 to a desire on the part of consumers to wait until January to buy PCs with the new chips. Since then, Intel has tackled the problem by putting out the last major chip releases for a given year in September or October and then refreshing in January. In the first week of 1999, Intel ushered in a raft of Celeron processors, along with a prolonged price war. The Pentium 4 itself was supposed to debut in October 2000, but got pushed back to November because of a minor glitch.