On Tue, 31 Dec 2002, Eric Jeschke wrote:
>I just don't think it makes sense if you want to run Linux (desktop or
>server) and get the best performance, price and flexibility. The P4 and
>AMD chips are better in this regard on all counts.
Can you expand on why 'flexibility'? Also, on price/perfor
On Mon, 30 Dec 2002 Jimen Ching <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
| Date: Sun, 29 Dec 2002 18:32:20 -1000 (HST)
| From: Jimen Ching <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
| Subject: Re: [luau] Re: PPC vs. X86
| ...
| You must mean the benchmarks found here:
|
| http://www.azillionmonkeys.com/qe
NOT
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Jimen Ching
Sent: Sunday, December 29, 2002 6:32 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [luau] Re: PPC vs. X86
On Sat, 28 Dec 2002, Eric Jeschke wrote:
>would probably outperform a 1.3GHz P4 and ma
On Sat, 28 Dec 2002, Eric Jeschke wrote:
>would probably outperform a 1.3GHz P4 and maybe even a 1.5GHz P4.
>This is same reason that a 1.6 GHz Athlon was outperforming a 2.0GHz
>P4. BUT P4's are currently topping out above 3GHz!!
Deminishing returns...After reading some of the benchmarks that peo
Jimen Ching wrote:
I guess you mean this Power3 processor, which is a 64bit processor.
I curious as to what kind of applications you have that need a 64bit
processor.
--jc
Well, personally I have nothing that requires 64bit, just having Athlon
64 would allow me to run existing 32bit programs
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
slughead writes "Forbes Magazine is reporting that AMD will no longer
compete with Intel to make faster, smaller, and more efficient
processors. Just as Mac users would be worse off if Windows didn't
exist, Intel users will be much worse now that AMD will no longer
com
On Sat, 28 Dec 2002, Warren Togami wrote:
>Didn't IBM have something that is the "next generation" of PowerPC, but
>it is currently too expensive for Apple to use mainstream?
I guess you mean this Power3 processor, which is a 64bit processor.
I curious as to what kind of applications you have tha
-snip from /.
Posted by timothy on Sunday November 24, @01:53AM
slughead writes "Forbes Magazine is reporting that AMD will no longer
compete with Intel to make faster, smaller, and more efficient
processors. Just as Mac users would be worse off if Windows didn't
exist, Intel users will b
Eric Jeschke wrote:
I don't agree with this. They are tracking the top of the PPC
manufacturing pretty closely. Witness: the dual 1GHz G4 is their
current top of the line (they have been beating Motorola's door down
trying to get them to build a faster chip, but Motorola does not have
the mark
On Sat, 28 Dec 2002 Jimen Ching wrote:
| Date: Fri, 27 Dec 2002 22:59:48 -1000 (HST)
| From: Jimen Ching <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
| To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
|
| [snip]...
| I heard the opposite. I heard the higher clock rates of the Pentium
| 4's give you no advantages. I heard clock rates of 800Mhz is
10 matches
Mail list logo
