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.

Technology Stocks : Creative Labs (CREAF) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Doug Fowler who wrote (11385)	5/21/1998 7:47:00 PM
From: mr.mark	Respond to of 13925

An Open Letter To CREAF Regarding Today's +9/16 thankyou.thankyouverymuch

To: Doug Fowler who wrote (11385)	5/21/1998 7:52:00 PM
From: BZOOKA	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 13925

Today at 14.12 Morgan Stanley fund manager talking about Asia, disclosed that he has 3% of funds invested in two holdings in Hong Kong and Singapore; HSBC Holdings PLC and CREAF. Valeiras manage a 1.7 billion international equity portfolio and a 5.5 billion asset allocation fund for Miller,Anderson & sherrerrd LIP, a unit of Morgan Stanley institutional investment management. He said the trick is choosing the right company.Valeiras looks at relative revenue to determine the strength of the company.Specifically the fund manager calculates the price-to-sale ratio of a company to see if it is a good buy. For full story check Dow Jones. Dow Jones News 05-21-98 2.12 PM

To: Doug Fowler who wrote (11385)	5/21/1998 10:39:00 PM
From: Gambit	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 13925

Doug: I think the XXX Mhz # is not what your looking for, Mhz is just the speed of the chip. But this tells you nothing I.E. 100Mhz 486 is not the same speed as a 100Mhz 586. % of cpu time used would be better in this case. But I know what your asking. Sounds like the same thing (Mhz/%) but trust me its not. With that said Jon would know more about sound on a chip than I(clock cycles used/% of cpu time based on PII). But a good test to give you an idea of the power(hehe) of everything on a chip, just run a 2d/3d app. from your MMX cpu. SLOOOOOW is the word. I have a 300Mhz PII running a 3d game or demo would yield about 1-5 Frames per sec.(FPS) 5fps would almost never happen, with my Riva128 card I get 30+fps. As you would guess MMX is never going to see the light of day on my cpu for years. But to answer your question using video and based on my PII #'s(5fps) I would need a 1500+Mhz PII to get me 30fps as a very ROUGH answer but should give a good idea. 5000-2500Mhz PII if based at 1-2fps : ) You could Bake food inside your computer as you use it at that speed. Easy bake computers from intel : ) Adam -

To: Doug Fowler who wrote (11385)	5/21/1998 10:49:00 PM
From: Jon Tara	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 13925

I don't feel that having the CPU handle audio functions is the architectural ideal, though. Multiple, specialized processors is. The problem is not just CPU speed - it's bandwidth - both I/O and (more importantly) memory bandwidth. Today's CPUs are ALREADY bandwidth-limited. Not even the cache memory in current CPUs is as fast as the CPU. Now, cache is catching up, and the NEXT generation of Pentium II's (this fall) will have cache that runs at the same clock rate as the CPU. (The new Deschutes chips ahve the cache running at 1/2 the CPU speed, and THAT is a step UP!) Main memory runs much slower than the CPU - the latest, greatest is the PC100 memory that runs at 100mHz. Consider Midi synthesis. With a traditional sound card, the CPU sends a few bytes per note to a sound card. The sound card uses specialized hardware to synthesize waveforms. (Whether algorithmically, by table look-up, whatever) and then outputs about 160Kbytes/sec to the D/A. Instead of 160kbytes/sec going across the bus, only a few hundred or a couple thousand bytes/sec go across the bus. Now, consider the more difficult task of 3-D positioning. This requires several mathematical operations per byte of the waveform. This all has to fly back and forth across the bus to and from the CPU. Multiply that 160K/sec by "n". I'm not sure what "n" is, but it's sufficient that a low-end Pentium isn't capable of doing the job at all. Now, a sound processor (note I didn't say a sound card - it's irrelevant whether it's on a plug-in card or not) has to do the same thing, but it generally has the advantage of having a specialized processor (a DSP) or even task-specific hardware. And all that massaging of the sample data takes place in the memory and over the internal bus of the sound processor, leaving the CPU and it's bus and memory free for other tasks.