IBM's new G5 CPU

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the Tom's Hardware community: where nearly two million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
It's even worse when I tried a day at my college in 3d Rendering. It took an eternity to render.

And when asked if they ever will upgrade their comps, they told me (the faculty) they were out of budget.
HINT HINT
Seriously, these things cost 5000$ CDN. If they chose a PC, they could build 2 computers using DUAL PROCESSORS from Intel's best, and we could achieve twice the speed the current Macs are rendering at. I find this sad.
If you need to pay 5000$ CDN just to know how to open Internet Explorer with no searching on your desktop, you are a serious idiot.

--
If I could see the Matrix, I'd tell you I am only seeing 0s inside your head! :tongue:
 
MAC OSX is nice. I won't deny it. It's a very advanced OS interface and I lieked it a lot.
But when it came to searching inside, I felt like you cannot access your computer's private data. I cannot stand such environment. In Windows I can find anything, from system data to registry info and be able to have it work MY WAY.

The HARD NEWS on THG <A HREF="http://www.tomshardware.com/technews/index.html#084532" target="_new">http://www.tomshardware.com/technews/index.html#084532</A>
shows just how much Apple is now turning into the nVidia and ATi battle, immature claims, utter lies.
The PC industry has really sunk. Omid, RANT!

--
If I could see the Matrix, I'd tell you I am only seeing 0s inside your head! :tongue:
 
Geeze dhlucke, you really have one hell of a chip on your shoulder. Perhaps you should learn to not generalize so much. The word 'all' encompasses everyone you know...

You guys are all fanboys. I'm really interested to see how this thing does. It would be nice if Apple was competative again.
Click to expand...
<i>All?</i> Uh huh. That's why I've been saying things like "<i>However with the G5 this will do a LOT to put Macs back on line with PCs.</i>", because I'm a fanboy.

Come on everyone, raise your hand if you were using AOL back in 1995. Yeah, that's what I thought: All of you.
Click to expand...
Again, <i>all</i> of us? Besides the fact that anyone under eight years old can't even fit into 'all' without having done some time travel, there is also the fact that in 1995 <i>I</i> wasn't even on the internet. For the first half of the year I was still using local BBSs, most of which were run by friends. For the second half of the year I was in the military and never even saw another modem again until the summer of '96 when I bought my Pentium 133 box.

I have never seen a single person on Earth who could go a year or more on Win98 without crashing. I don't even think Crashman would claim that.
Click to expand...
I've had my Celeron 500 box running Win98SE for almost two years straight now without so much as a crash, BSOD, or shutdown problem. It has good drivers. (Despite being mostly comprised of crap hardware.) It has a more than adequate power supply. It has great cooling for it's heat output. (Even if I did have to drill holes in the case and cut away a little plastic for the front intake fan because the case was crap and had no place for a front fan.) It has been one of the most stable PCs that I've ever owned.

And before that my Pentium 133 box was incredibly stable for years and years too. Except for when playing Earthsiege (which had a bug in it that would occasionally reboot a PC no matter what OS it ran under) it never had any BSODs or crashes when it ran DOS6 or Win95b. The only problems that I ever had with it was it stopping in the middle of a shutdown, which didn't really matter since it was before shutting down turned the PC off on it's own, so I always had to manually power it down anyway. It's a shame that the hardware finally deteriorated into multiple components breaking down and it becoming a waste of money to keep running.

But basically nine out of ten of the problems that I've ever helped people with regarding 'Windows' instability is actually either bad drivers, an insufficient or flaky power supply, insufficient cooling, or dust buildup. And none of those have anything to do with M$'s OS. They're hardware and firmware problems. Windows itself has been a pretty stable product.

Don't put words in my mouth.
Click to expand...
Why not? You put words into our mouths. Turnabout is fair play.

"<i>Yeah, if you treat them like equals, it'll only encourage them to think they <b>ARE</b> your equals.</i>" - Thief from <A HREF="http://www.nuklearpower.com/daily.php?date=030603" target="_new">8-Bit Theater</A>
 
No right click means u either have to go to the menus and select from there or hold down some mac key till it activates right click. No thanks- that costs me an extra 15 seconds every time I need to do something.

All the things I really like to do are either illegal, immoral, or fattening.
 
Windows itself has been a pretty stable product.
Click to expand...

I find it amazing how in a Macintosh thread everyone suddenly has flawless installations of Win98.

Their OS's were not good until Win2000 and WinXP. Even then it took some time for Win2000 to become mature enough to use since there were no drivers in the begining.

<A HREF="http://forums.btvillarin.com/index.php?act=ST&f=41&t=389&s=1fee5dab901bebe29da7aa1c2658fc6f" target="_new"><font color=red>dhlucke's system</font color=red></A>

<font color=blue>GOD</font color=blue> <font color=red>BLESS</font color=red> <font color=blue>AMERICA</font color=blue>
 
i'll take win98 over a mac anyday, Macs are soooo expensive. And slow....and ppl use Internet explorer and office on mac anyway so what's the point ?
 
win98 is a stable os.. just becuse you may have had problems with drivers or hardware that you couldnt trace doesnt mean it was the os. i tried winxp for6 months and a few months ago i switched back to 98se. why? because winxp wasnt as stable 98se IN MY OPINION.
 
yeah - my experience of XP is the same. Although I have mostly used it on Compaq Pcs, so it's probably more the pc than the os..

---
$hit Happens. I just wish it would happen to someone else for a change.
 
<A HREF="http://www.microsoft.com/whdc/winhec/eyeonwinhec/64bitarch.mspx" target="_new">END OF 2003</A> So what does this mean for Athlon 64? Opteron is not a desktop processor, no one is running out to buy them. That <A HREF="http://www.amdzone.com/articleview.cfm?articleid=1296" target="_new">linked article</A> is a joke right?

The article wreaks of BS, Windows 64bit 2003 is <A HREF="http://www.microsoft.com/catalog/display.asp?subid=22&site=11261" target="_new">available now</A>, it does not support Opteron. Read above link and it tells you that SP1 will have the 64 bit enhancements for Athlon 64 and Opteron. <A HREF="http://www.amdzone.com/articleview.cfm?articleid=1296" target="_new">Here it is spelled out.</A>

AMD Zone known for such well written crap?

<b>"Granted I dont own a P4. But I read enough stuff and waste enough time on forums newsgroups IRC and computer news sites that I proberly know more then if I DID own a P4." -vk2amv</b>
 
how you doin, haven't seen ya in some time. Man, this amd sh!t with the bs pr system is turning me off from them. I'm beginning to reconsider the dual to quad hammer system setup as well to be honest. Need a great fpu tho...

All the things I really like to do are either illegal, immoral, or fattening.
 
Win98 is not stable. Win98se is a lot better, but it is still not stable. I hear that the lite version is a bit better but I haven't tried it. WinME is a joke. WinXP Pro is stable. It's not perfect, but it is stable. Same goes for Win2000.

Hey, we're all here to give our opinions. I'm sorry that you couldn't get WinXP to work on your system. I've gotten it to work on every system I've installed it. I only had to go back to Win98se on one system since the damn printer didn't have any drivers that would work in XP. Canon decided that they wouldn't support the printer and the 2000 or hacked drivers on the net didn't work for me. Oh well. I wasn't about to buy a new printer just because of the OS.


<A HREF="http://forums.btvillarin.com/index.php?act=ST&f=41&t=389&s=1fee5dab901bebe29da7aa1c2658fc6f" target="_new"><font color=red>dhlucke's system</font color=red></A>

<font color=blue>GOD</font color=blue> <font color=red>BLESS</font color=red> <font color=blue>AMERICA</font color=blue>
 
Get an Itanium 2!
You got money no?
I heard the next compiler has excellent x86-32 (IA32) support so you can try to run the 32-bit apps in there and use the world's most powerful FPU at your hands.

--
If I could see the Matrix, I'd tell you I am only seeing 0s inside your head! :tongue:
 
Apple crippled the P4 systems to come out on top. Just skip past all the AMD biased crap.
The article wreaks of BS, Windows 64bit 2003 is available now, it does not support Opteron. Read above link and it tells you that SP1 will have the 64 bit enhancements for Athlon 64 and Opteron. Here it is spelled out.
Click to expand...
I <i>think</i> they meant that 64-bit support for Opteron is in a beta version of 64-Bit Windows Server 2003; not that 64-Bit Windows Server 2003 is in beta. Perhaps I'm giving them too much credit though.
 
it not a compiler but a emulator.Most of Risc base corp were working on emulator for the machine alpha and HP was trying to reach a level of 80% of native code.Now bolt are working on for IA-64.The point is for smaller workstation will be able there primary software on native mode and run the rest of there software at a good speed but a IA-64 OS will be need and driver for IA-64 will be need.

They dont have reach yet the ability to go down much in the market.

If the itanium team cannot reach manufacturing process equal of XEON there doom to stay at server market all thee life.ON 0.65 they should make transition about at the same time that were intel got it chance they cannot keep 8 team running.

The intersing part is Itanium 2 core is 70% (excluding IA-32 converter) of size of willimete but have 6 ALU and 4 FPU 2 load 2 store and larger L1.Maybe 15% must be add for SMT purpose

[-peep-] french
 
i did get winxp to work on my system.. it just didnt feel as solid as 98se. the odd program would hang internet explorer would crash watever.. altho i never got a fatal crash that needed a reboot these irritating little probs turned me off xp. im sorry you cant get win98se to work on your system but i have installed it on countless machines and never been called back once for anything more than routine maintenence ie defragging etc
lets just agree to differ on this one ok. u like xp i like 98se. leave it at that
 
did anyone read this...
http://www.haxial.com/spls-soapbox/apple-powermac-G5/ ?

I can't remember how to link and for some reason I can't get into the FAQ thing so sorry in advance.

"Don't question it!!!" - Err
 
Wow and I thought AMD fanboys were the worst to grace the Earth! 😱

Mac fanboys need to die, IMO, they have no reason to live based on such comments.

--
If I could see the Matrix, I'd tell you I am only seeing 0s inside your head! :tongue:
 
I think the AMD fanboy desperation level is at about a 3 while the MAC fanboy desperation level is at about a 10 so the behavior follows accordingly....

"Don't question it!!!" - Err
 
What have you learned? (aside from AMD fanboys sounding like a feather compared to the Apple fanboys)

--
If I could see the Matrix, I'd tell you I am only seeing 0s inside your head! :tongue:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom