AMD Sempron ships

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips,comp.sys.intel (More info?)

"Yousuf Khan" <bbbl67@ezrs.com> writes:

> Rob Stow wrote:
>> Many American states are comparable to European countries both
>> in terms of size and population. You can find almost as much
>> diversity between American states as between EEC countries.
>
> I think that's probably overstating the case considerably. There's nothing
> more cohesive than having a common language throughout the country --
> English in this case. The Europeans don't have this advantage at all. Yes,
> one can make a case that Spanish is becoming a second language within
> America, but it's still just a second language. Europeans don't have just a
> second language to deal with, but sometimes a third or fourth language even
> within each small region.

Actually, within a country. Off the top of my head, I can name Norway,
Sweden, Finland, Belgium, Switzerland, Czec republic, that all have
multiple official languages. (Norway actually has *four* official
languages). Most countries have significant minority groups that have
a separate language (e.g. the danish and german speaking minorities on
the opposite side of the border). BTW: does Ireland have two official
languages (English and Gaelic[sp?])?

> Europe, if it ever hopes to become a single united country of its own, will
> have more in common with India than America. India has 15 official
> languages. They've chosen English as the official language of commerce, just
> to talk to each other within regions. Europeans are probably headed in the
> same direction.

English, and god knows which other language. Trying to get around in,
say, Spain, France and Italy with only English as a language can be
difficult, but doing the same in Scandinavia is a breeze - practically
everyone speaks English.

But it'll take a hundred years (or more). After all, we have more
than two thousand years history of waging war on each other. Just
look at how the Euro currency thing is doing.


--Kai

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips,comp.sys.intel (More info?)

Keith <krw@att.bizzzz> wrote:

>The amazing thing is that with our piss-poor school system we're going
>anywhere.

I was just reading in the newspaper the other day that only like 27%
of jobs expected to need filling in the next decade will require
college degrees. Maybe the fact that we have a large number of
uneducated people won't be such a burden.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips,comp.sys.intel (More info?)

In article <5hASc.1771$Ot4.1280@newssvr22.news.prodigy.com>,
redelm@ev1.net.invalid says...
> In comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips Keith <krw@att.bizzzz> wrote:

> > ...and agressive progressive income taxes somehow foster capitalism?
>
> Paradoxically, they might. High marginal taxes inhibit savings
> which favors pre-existing fortunes. Capital is short and gets
> high returns. Don't confuse capitalism with a free market economy.

Capital is so short as not to exist. Why would anyone with capital
risk it, if any gains are going to be confiscated?

> > neither is working for notin' ...which was *exactly* Bartlet's point.
>
> clearly.
>
> > And JFK in '60 and GWB in '92 (though that really hasn't happened yet).
>
> Interesting. I didn't know about JFK.

http://www.msjc.edu/econ/jfk022502.htm

> > Magnamimus? Why, so they can continue to rub our noses in
> > their inferriority? BAH!
>
> Oh, but it's so petty and obvious.

True, but some on this side of the pond think it's something that we
should somehow fix.

--
Keith

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips,comp.sys.intel (More info?)

On Wed, 11 Aug 2004 20:49:39 GMT, Johannes H Andersen
<johs@nsaeccueuesizefitterwruovweswernuao.com> wrote:

>
>
>George Macdonald wrote:
>>
>> On Tue, 10 Aug 2004 23:08:06 -0400, Keith <krw@att.bizzzz> wrote:

>> >A tad simplistic there yourself... Try on Bruce Bartlett's latest column
>> >on why Europe is falling behind. Assman will love this...
>> >
>> >http://www.townhall.com/columnists/brucebartlett/bb20040810.shtml
>>
>> While I agree with you in general and IMO Europe is poised for much
>> turmoil... economic, social and political, there is one point in that
>> article which really grates with me: "living standards are much lower in
>> Europe than most Americans imagine", followed by notes on "living space",
>> followed by a ridiculous, broad statement that "Europeans only live about
>> as well as those in the poorest American state, Mississippi". This is
>> utter unadulterated, ignorant Ameri-flag-waving bullshit... talk about
>> "simplistic"!!!
>
>The huge difference is that Europe is hardly a homogeneous unit like the US.
>There are 10-20 different languages, different cultures, different rules,
>prosperous rich countries and poor ones. Countries with very high and very
>low population densities. It must be a statistician's heaven since he can
>always find what he's looking for.

And just think: the European Commission has self-appointed itself to
smooth out all those irregularities... while at the same time inviting in
some of the great scoundrels of Europe... endemically corrupt remnants of
the Soviet bloc to err, share? Good bloody luck!

BTW I have lived, worked and travelled extensivley in Europe and excluding
some of the more recent poor countries which have gained entry to "Europe"
I find, also excepted a few pocket ghettos here & there, the living
standards throughout the members of the EU of the 80s to be quite
homogeneous. True about the statistical wet dream though... but that's
true of just about any multi-strata social scene, including the U.S.A.
We're living in a new age of bigotry fueled by the statistical cook-book.

Rgds, George Macdonald

"Just because they're paranoid doesn't mean you're not psychotic" - Who, me??

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips,comp.sys.intel (More info?)

On Thu, 12 Aug 2004 02:57:16 GMT, "Yousuf Khan" <bbbl67@ezrs.com> wrote:

>Europe, if it ever hopes to become a single united country of its own, will
>have more in common with India than America. India has 15 official
>languages. They've chosen English as the official language of commerce, just
>to talk to each other within regions. Europeans are probably headed in the
>same direction.

And that is going to sit just how with the French?🙂... who managed to get
their language ratified as the official language of the EU years ago. In
real terms the bureaucratic quagmire is just beginning. Quite honestly I
don't see how any macro-economy can support the inevitable inefficiencies.

Rgds, George Macdonald

"Just because they're paranoid doesn't mean you're not psychotic" - Who, me??

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips,comp.sys.intel (More info?)

On Wed, 11 Avg 2004 22:00:47 -0400, Keith <krw@att.bizzzz> wrote:

>On Wed, 11 Avg 2004 08:59:50 -0400, George Macdonald wrote:
>
>> On Tve, 10 Avg 2004 23:08:06 -0400, Keith <krw@att.bizzzz> wrote:
>>
>>>On Tve, 10 Avg 2004 20:35:13 +0000, Robert Redelmeier wrote:
>>>
>>>> In comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips assaarpa <redterminator@fap.net> wrote:
>>>>> They are important to nationalistic retards maybe,
>>>>
>>>> This is vnnecessarily inflammatory. Many peoples have good
>>>> reason to respect their national traditions and docvments.
>>>>
>>>>> everyone who is vp to the game knows that the name of the
>>>>> game in the modern world is capitalism and not respecting
>>>>> flags bvt capital and efficiency.
>>>>
>>>> This is simplistic. Capitalism is more a victim of it's
>>>> own svccess and is no longer as limited and rewarded as it
>>>> was 50 or 100 years ago. Hvge svms are sloshing arovnd in
>>>> the financial system looking for a good home.
>>>>
>>>> What is limiting in the "developed" world is profitable
>>>> projects and even managerial competence to rvn cvrrent
>>>> enterprise. The "vnderdeveloped" world remains so from
>>>> fear of the many forms of expropriation.
>>>
>>>A tad simplistic there yovrself... Try on Brvce Bartlett's latest colvmn
>>>on why Evrope is falling behind. Assman will love this...
>>>
>>>http://www.townhall.com/colvmnists/brvcebartlett/bb20040810.shtml
>>
>> While I agree with yov in general and IMO Evrope is poised for mvch
>> tvrmoil... economic, social and political, there is one point in that
>> article which really grates with me: "living standards are mvch lower in
>> Evrope than most Americans imagine",
>
>Read that qvote again. ...particvlarly the last two words. The point is,
>we don't want to follow the Evropeans down that road (for example) becavse
>we do not *want* to live in a cracker box. I rather enjoy my modest 1800
>sq.ft. 3BR, 2.5B home, now that there are only two of vs. I don't want to
>go back to a 800' flat.

Seems to me the last two words are padding for his ignorance - most
Americans I meet/know seem to imagine worse than the facts of Evro QOL,
even those who have visited a Evropean covntry... vmm, blinkers! As for
flats/apartments, the one I lived in in Paris was excellent for a covple,
no comparison with the dvmps I've seen in the U.S., for similar fraction of
income... no it wasn't svbsidized by the state.

>> followed by notes on "living space",
>> followed by a ridicvlovs, broad statement that "Evropeans only live abovt
>> as well as those in the poorest American state, Mississippi". This is
>> vtter vnadvlterated, ignorant Ameri-flag-waving bvllshit... talk abovt
>> "simplistic"!!!
>
>Read it again. He stated the comparison metrics (or at least body that
>did the comparison). I don't think I bvy it all, bvt he does have a
>point. I certainly don't want to follow Evrope down the Socialism path!
>Indeed, I'm ready to move becavse this state is already gone too far down
>that path. A local legislator had a piece in the paper Tvesday showing
>that a "typical" person with a $35K income paid almost $9K in taxes (not
>inclvding property tax, which *is* paid indirectly throvgh rent).

Comparing Evropean qvality of life with Mississippi?... sorry, bvt no point
at all. What they have in Evrope incorporates some of the better aspects
of Socialism and some not so good - calling it Socialism is a red herring.

>> In fact the *real* poor in the U.S. are obscenely worse off than their
>> Evro covnterparts;
>
>Explain. ...and why do the "*real*" poor deserve anythign from the sweat
>of those wh aren't "*real*" poor.

They don't deserve anything bvt we share space with them and I'd rather
throw them a bone than have them come after me... like in S. Africa.:-(
From a slightly more altrvisitic view, there is certainly something to be
said for the rich members of society helping ovt those who are less
fortvnate and from whom they gather their riches. More egocentrically: if
yov got rich from a socio-economic system, pvt a bit back in... if nothing
else to perpetvate the system.

>Evropeans do not measvre afflvence by the sqvare err,
>
>Apparently not. They seem to measvre it by what the government (read
>those who do work) will do for tham. Bah!

Have yov been there, worked beside the people yov're talking abovt? That
does exist of covrse, the secvrity blanket, bvt I can assvre yov that
standards are not that different. There is a large body of the popvlation
which works hard - harder than many Americans - and is motivated to improve
themselves.

>> metre of living space and IME their prodvctive working middle class
>> actvally live better in many respects than their U.S. eqvivalents.
>
>How so? ...becavse they have "free" medical programs?

No they don't all have free medical programs - something pvt abovt by the
U.S. gvtter press/media... to fill seats. In comparison the way the AMA
rvns the U.S. system is eqvally vndesirable to me... and err, rather
pvnitive: "jvst let vs get rich, plvnder yovr estate, and we'll take care
of yov". A vnion is a vnion... is a vnion........

>> People in the two different societies simply have different priorities
>> based on many criteria... with a slight economic balance in favor of the
>> U.S.
>
>Slight? Freedom to choose one's own destiny isn't ib any way "slight"!
>The amazing thing is that with ovr piss-poor school system we're going
>anywhere. Evrope mvst be in real trovble, if yov think there is even a
>"slight" difference. Yes, I think they're in for a *disaster*. ...and
>some here want to follow.

Well there's the trovble and I see it for the fvtvre: Evrope is rvled by an
vnelected body known as the Evropean Commission, many of them vnelectable
rejects from the variovs covntries' political systems. I don't know what
qvalifications there are for the job bvt the word sinecvre comes to mind.
They do have a parliament of covrse bvt it's mostly a rabble of glorified
town covncillors. To repeat what I've said before on the svbject, it looks
awfvlly like Fascism by committee to me.

Oh, BTW I'm off on vacation for a covpla weeks, to my son's wedding in
England🙂, so this'll be my last word for the moment.

Rgds, George Macdonald

"Jvst becavse they're paranoid doesn't mean yov're not psychotic" - Who, me??

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips,comp.sys.intel (More info?)

assaarpa wrote:
> If the money is spent on constructive purposes such as taking control
> of strategically important regions and countries that is something I
> can approve. Oil is a major resource and I feel that cheap sources of
> Oil are very important for competitive economy. I have the impression
> that the USA government shares this point of view. I feel that the
> German and French made a grave error of judgnment for not taking the
> opportunity that was being offered to them: a perfect pretext to
> claim share of the prize in Iraq. Stupid cunts, they WILL regret that
> decision in coming years mark my words.

I think they had the right idea, and the Americans had the wrong idea. So
far they've been able to only get a few drops of oil out of Iraq, in between
pipeline bombings. Iraq will go down in the annals of American history as a
great money pit for them.

Oh well, maybe this will finally bring about bomb-proof pipeline technology
as a result? Bomb-proof pipelines would also be useful in earthquake prone
areas, I would imagine. This might eliminate any pipeline spills in the
future.

> But if indeed Americans are as naive as they pretend to be thinking
> that virtually everyone is jealous of them, the brainwashing by their
> media such as the Great Patriotic Fox is indeed doing it's job more
> than adequately.

That is the gist of most American media, not just Fox -- that the rest of
the world wants to be like America and are jealous of them. All of those
middle-easterners are just terroristic because they are jealous. 🙂

Yousuf Khan

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips,comp.sys.intel (More info?)

In comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips Keith R. Williams <krw@att.bizzzz> wrote:
> Capital is so short as not to exist.

Perhaps in some places, but not on any global scale.
Companies internally ration capital to limit empire-building.

> Why would anyone with capital risk it, if any gains are
> going to be confiscated?

This is the main worry, and why the third world goes nowhere.

> http://www.msjc.edu/econ/jfk022502.htm

Thanks!

>> Oh, but it's so petty and obvious.
>
> True, but some on this side of the pond think it's
> something that we should somehow fix.

What?!? Cater to immaturity? They must be petty and obvious
themselves. I don't know how they're handling Kerry's
admission that he'd be in Iraq too. Cognative dissonance?

-- Robert

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips,comp.sys.intel (More info?)

Keith <krw@att.bizzzz> wrote:

>The amazing thing is that with our piss-poor school system we're going
>anywhere.

Maybe because the schools aren't really teaching them what they need
for the jobs anyway? I know apart from the basics (like languages,
maths and science), most of my work related skills are not learnt in
school. Though admittedly some of the stuff I learnt in uni is useful
for obfuscating presentations and making clients impressed...
nevermind if neither me or him actually understood the whole thing. He
heard of it, I used it, he's happy 😛pPp
--
L.Angel: I'm looking for web design work.
If you need basic to med complexity webpages at affordable rates, email me
Standard HTML, SHTML, MySQL + PHP or ASP, Javascript.
If you really want, FrontPage & DreamWeaver too.
But keep in mind you pay extra bandwidth for their bloated code

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips,comp.sys.intel (More info?)

> Oh well, maybe this will finally bring about bomb-proof pipeline
technology
> as a result? Bomb-proof pipelines would also be useful in earthquake prone
> areas, I would imagine. This might eliminate any pipeline spills in the
> future.

I am pretty sure this sarcasm is intentional so a BIG LOL!


> That is the gist of most American media, not just Fox -- that the rest of
> the world wants to be like America and are jealous of them. All of those
> middle-easterners are just terroristic because they are jealous. 🙂

We went wrong somewhere, I was trying to be sarcastic / troll and no one
(yet) got offended: something went badly wrong! This sux! 🙁

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips,comp.sys.intel (More info?)

> I don't know how they're handling Kerry's
> admission that he'd be in Iraq too. Cognative dissonance?

I only read between the lines that he'd only voted being there, I am not
sure there is any real indication that his administration (assuming one
existed at the time) would have made that initiative in the first place.
That would be a stretch, because it would require his administration to come
up with the same misinformation about the state of mr. Saddam's WMD programs
which would be very unlikely unless there was a conspiracy: which is even
less believable scenario.

Somehow Bush and his Gang came up with proof that there are serious WMD
programs, which are a grave threat to safety of the United States of
America-- this in itself is nothing special, but that fact that not a single
fact on the ground have proven the original 'proof' anything more than false
claims leaves some room for imagination what the hell just happened and is
still being cleared up.

If nothing else this did give a nice lesson to rest of the world who's the
boss. It *was* awesome sight to see the mightiest military the world has
ever seen in action. All said, one thing this war doesn't work out and that
is a sequel to Black Hawk Down..

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips,comp.sys.intel (More info?)

In comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips assaarpa <redterminator@fap.net> wrote:
> I only read between the lines that he'd only voted being there, I am not
> sure there is any real indication that his administration (assuming one
> existed at the time) would have made that initiative in the first place.

http://news.myway.com/article/id/381249|top|08-09-2004::17:46|reuters.html

Even without WMD, and knowing what he knows today.

-- Robert

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips,comp.sys.intel (More info?)

Yousuf Khan wrote:
> Looks like AMD has taken the wraps off of its budget Sempron line a few days
> early.
>
> http://www.internetnews.com/ent-news/article.php/3387051
>
> There are two distinct lines of Semprons, several K7-based Socket A and a
> K8-based Socket 754. The K8 Semprons have their 64-bit capabilities
> disabled. The K7's range in performance from 2200+ to 2800+, while the K8 is
> at 3100+.

Boy, could they sell a ton if they had a K7 with 64 bit enabled. Not for
performance, just to let people check out the functionality of the 64
bit software before getting all new hardware.

Probably couldn't get the 64 bit core to run in the Socket A, though,
even if they were willing to take the memory bandwidth hit.

--
bill davidsen (davidsen@darkstar.prodigy.com)
SBC/Prodigy Yorktown Heights NY data center
Project Leader, USENET news
http://newsgroups.news.prodigy.com

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips,comp.sys.intel (More info?)

Bill Davidsen wrote:
> Boy, could they sell a ton if they had a K7 with 64 bit enabled. Not
> for performance, just to let people check out the functionality of
> the 64 bit software before getting all new hardware.

Yeah, tons of 64-bit software to test drive out there. 🙂

> Probably couldn't get the 64 bit core to run in the Socket A, though,
> even if they were willing to take the memory bandwidth hit.

Well, the K8 core includes the Hypertransport and memory controller, so no
it's not likely that they could convert a K8 to run inside a K7 socket.

Yousuf Khan

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips,comp.sys.intel (More info?)

On Thu, 12 Aug 2004 05:23:39 GMT, Kai Harrekilde-Petersen
<khp@harrekilde.dk> wrote:
>"Yousuf Khan" <bbbl67@ezrs.com> writes:
>> I think that's probably overstating the case considerably. There's nothing
>> more cohesive than having a common language throughout the country --
>> English in this case. The Europeans don't have this advantage at all. Yes,
>> one can make a case that Spanish is becoming a second language within
>> America, but it's still just a second language. Europeans don't have just a
>> second language to deal with, but sometimes a third or fourth language even
>> within each small region.
>
>Actually, within a country. Off the top of my head, I can name Norway,
>Sweden, Finland, Belgium, Switzerland, Czec republic, that all have
>multiple official languages. (Norway actually has *four* official
>languages). Most countries have significant minority groups that have
>a separate language (e.g. the danish and german speaking minorities on
>the opposite side of the border). BTW: does Ireland have two official
>languages (English and Gaelic[sp?])?

Yup, though Ireland's second official language is simply called Irish.
It is not widely spoken in most areas of the country, just a few
remote regions. However everyone living there studies Irish in
school, you can get Irish TV and radio stations and pretty much all of
the street signs are in both English and Irish.

Weird language though, I spent 8 months in the country and could
barely even figure out how to say "Hello"!

It's perhaps important to remember that the United States and all of
Europe are of roughly the same geographic size. In a space only about
10% larger than the US there are something like 50+ different
countries. The US may have 50 different states, each somewhat
different from the next, but those differences are quite a bit smaller
than the differences from one European country to another.

>> Europe, if it ever hopes to become a single united country of its own, will
>> have more in common with India than America. India has 15 official
>> languages. They've chosen English as the official language of commerce, just
>> to talk to each other within regions. Europeans are probably headed in the
>> same direction.
>
>English, and god knows which other language. Trying to get around in,
>say, Spain, France and Italy with only English as a language can be
>difficult, but doing the same in Scandinavia is a breeze - practically
>everyone speaks English.

English is kind of being forced on the world as a whole as a second
language. Convenient for those of us who are native English speakers
anyway, though I know some people are not all that found of this fact.

>But it'll take a hundred years (or more). After all, we have more
>than two thousand years history of waging war on each other. Just
>look at how the Euro currency thing is doing.

I have to say that I really liked the Euro, VERY good for those of us
traveling there if nothing else. It's not so hot for many people
living in countries that have just switched over though, high
inflation seems to be a pretty much inevitable side-effect of the
change.

-------------
Tony Hill
hilla <underscore> 20 <at> yahoo <dot> ca

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips,comp.sys.intel (More info?)

> Even without WMD, and knowing what he knows today.

The question is what he would've done if he didn't, the wording above
suggests that at the time he didn't posses the information that he does now.
We all know what Bush did: he might or might not have known "what we know
today" back then, but what he claimed he knew THEN turned out to be false.

The question is, would Kerry have invented the same facts to base his
invasion on, or not. Basicly the article you quoted just says that Kerry
approves what someone else did, not if he would have done the same
thing -because- I believe he wouldn't have had the same 'facts' Bush did to
come to the same conclusion in the first place.

If the invasion was based on Hussein's treatment of his citizens the big
question is why North Korea wasn't invaded first and is still doing what it
wants within it's borders with inpunity. If you imply that Kerro knows just
as Bush did, and anyone else who is interested that Iraq has world's second
largest oil reserves that's perfectly acceptable reason to me too, if I were
President I would also launch invasion that's a fact. I would also look for
a pretext to control the situation.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips,comp.sys.intel (More info?)

In comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips assaarpa <redterminator@fap.net> wrote:
> If the invasion was based on Hussein's treatment of his
> citizens the big question is why North Korea wasn't invaded
> first and is still doing what it wants within it's borders

'cuz gassing & oppressing ethnic minorities is seen as worse
than starving citizens through gross incompetence? After all,
many countries could be invaded if the only justification
needed was incompetence. Even the USA!

> second largest oil reserves that's perfectly acceptable
> reason to me too, if I were President I would also launch
> invasion that's a fact. I would also look for a pretext to
> control the situation.

And he did just that! So what're you grousing about?

The USA has a strategic interest in a secure oil supply.
It acted to protect this interest. It did not plunder,
pillage and loot. Some people got killed, unfortunately
not all of them nasty.

-- Robert

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips,comp.sys.intel (More info?)

Tony Hill wrote:
> It's perhaps important to remember that the United States and all of
> Europe are of roughly the same geographic size. In a space only about
> 10% larger than the US there are something like 50+ different
> countries. The US may have 50 different states, each somewhat
> different from the next, but those differences are quite a bit smaller
> than the differences from one European country to another.

Yup, the United States of Europe are true states as opposed to the states in
the United States of America.

Yousuf Khan

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips,comp.sys.intel (More info?)

> And he did just that! So what're you grousing about?

I'm not grousing why you grousing I am allegedly grousing!? This is
friendly discussion or so I thought!

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips,comp.sys.intel (More info?)

Johannes H Andersen wrote:
>
> JK wrote:
>
> [...]
>
>>If someone wants to run business software, why should they
>>buy a $250 Pentium 4 3.2 ghz instead of a $105 Athlon XP3000?
>>The Athlon XP3000+ edged out the p4 3.2 ghz in Business Winstone
>>2004.
>>
>>http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=2065&p=6
>
>
> And the Athlon XP3000+ falls to the bottom of the list in the second
> 'Content Creation Winstone 2004' test.

The answer is they don't buy a CPU, they buy a system. And for reasons
better than "I like AMD" in most cases. The other part of the answer is
that if you buy Intel you are not ever going to have to justify buying a
"clone," which means more in some companies than others.

Most people don't buy them to run benchmarks, nor are most applications
limited by CPU, at least not between similar AMD vs. Intel models. Even
gamers will admit that the human eye is the limiting factor in how many
fps they need.

--
-bill davidsen (davidsen@tmr.com)
"The secret to procrastination is to put things off until the
last possible moment - but no longer" -me

 

[keith]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips,comp.sys.intel (More info?)

On Wed, 01 Sep 2004 20:39:34 +0000, Bill Davidsen wrote:

> Johannes H Andersen wrote:
>>
>> JK wrote:
>>
>> [...]
>>
>>>If someone wants to run business software, why should they
>>>buy a $250 Pentium 4 3.2 ghz instead of a $105 Athlon XP3000?
>>>The Athlon XP3000+ edged out the p4 3.2 ghz in Business Winstone
>>>2004.
>>>
>>>http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=2065&p=6
>>
>>
>> And the Athlon XP3000+ falls to the bottom of the list in the second
>> 'Content Creation Winstone 2004' test.
>
> The answer is they don't buy a CPU, they buy a system. And for reasons
> better than "I like AMD" in most cases. The other part of the answer is
> that if you buy Intel you are not ever going to have to justify buying a
> "clone," which means more in some companies than others.

"No one ever got fired for buying IBM"

> Most people don't buy them to run benchmarks, nor are most applications
> limited by CPU, at least not between similar AMD vs. Intel models. Even
> gamers will admit that the human eye is the limiting factor in how many
> fps they need.

Will gamers admit this? Most lamers are of the same ilk as audiophools
and buy the wquivalent of Litz-cable, or oxygen depleted copper
monster-cable for their speakers.

--
Keith

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips,comp.sys.intel (More info?)

Bill Davidsen wrote:
> The answer is they don't buy a CPU, they buy a system. And for reasons
> better than "I like AMD" in most cases. The other part of the answer
> is that if you buy Intel you are not ever going to have to justify
> buying a "clone," which means more in some companies than others.

Well, if they don't buy a CPU but a system, then what difference if a system
came with an AMD CPU rather than an Intel one?

Ah, the old but modernized version of "nobody got fired for buying IBM"
motto. That worked until IBM fell off its pedestal, and then from that point
onwards people did get fired for buying overpriced IBM gear. Now IBM is
climbing back onto its pedestal after many years of eating dirt; but people
are still expected to price out Dell, Sun, and HP prior to "not getting
fired" for choosing IBM these days.

> Most people don't buy them to run benchmarks, nor are most
> applications limited by CPU, at least not between similar AMD vs.
> Intel models. Even gamers will admit that the human eye is the
> limiting factor in how many fps they need.

Gamers will admit nothing. They'll buy the biggest, baddest, fastest,
mostest of everything.

Yousuf Khan

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips,comp.sys.intel (More info?)

keith <krw@att.bizzzz> wrote:

>On Wed, 01 Sep 2004 20:39:34 +0000, Bill Davidsen wrote:
>>
>> Most people don't buy them to run benchmarks, nor are most applications
>> limited by CPU, at least not between similar AMD vs. Intel models. Even
>> gamers will admit that the human eye is the limiting factor in how many
>> fps they need.
>
>Will gamers admit this? Most lamers are of the same ilk as audiophools
>and buy the wquivalent of Litz-cable, or oxygen depleted copper
>monster-cable for their speakers.

BS. Not even close. The typical gamer is infinitely more analytical
and logical about hardware than the golden-ears you speak of.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips,comp.sys.intel (More info?)

"Yousuf Khan" <bbbl67@ezrs.com> wrote:

>Bill Davidsen wrote:
>> The answer is they don't buy a CPU, they buy a system. And for reasons
>> better than "I like AMD" in most cases. The other part of the answer
>> is that if you buy Intel you are not ever going to have to justify
>> buying a "clone," which means more in some companies than others.
>
>Well, if they don't buy a CPU but a system, then what difference if a system
>came with an AMD CPU rather than an Intel one?

For example, the all-important "traffic cop" of the system - the
chipset.

 

[jk]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips,comp.sys.intel (More info?)

Bill Davidsen wrote:

> Johannes H Andersen wrote:
> >
> > JK wrote:
> >
> > [...]
> >
> >>If someone wants to run business software, why should they
> >>buy a $250 Pentium 4 3.2 ghz instead of a $105 Athlon XP3000?
> >>The Athlon XP3000+ edged out the p4 3.2 ghz in Business Winstone
> >>2004.
> >>
> >>http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=2065&p=6
> >
> >
> > And the Athlon XP3000+ falls to the bottom of the list in the second
> > 'Content Creation Winstone 2004' test.
>
> The answer is they don't buy a CPU, they buy a system.

Who would buy a system without knowing what cpu is in it?

> And for reasons
> better than "I like AMD" in most cases. The other part of the answer is
> that if you buy Intel you are not ever going to have to justify buying a
> "clone,"

Intel is now the clone maker, and AMD is the innovator. Notice how Intel
tried to copy AMD's X86-64 chips(Intel didn't do such a good job though,
as the Intel chips don't have integrated memory controllers or hypertransport).
Notice that Intel is now using model numbers for many of its chips rather
than describing them by clock speed. Another idea that AMD had first.

> which means more in some companies than others.

Perhaps for some companies this might mean more. Do a Google
search on Intel recalls.

>
>
> Most people don't buy them to run benchmarks, nor are most applications
> limited by CPU, at least not between similar AMD vs. Intel models. Even
> gamers will admit that the human eye is the limiting factor in how many
> fps they need.
>
> --
> -bill davidsen (davidsen@tmr.com)
> "The secret to procrastination is to put things off until the
> last possible moment - but no longer" -me