| Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Ryan Darkwolf
Amarr
Viziam
   |
Posted - 2007.07.31 23:14:00 -
[1]
Ok...it's about that time to get a new laptop...and searching online doesn't do jack because you don't get reviews from REAL people.
So here it is....
I can get:
Intel Core 2 Extreme Processor at 2.93GHz, 1066 MHz FSB, 4M Cache
or
AMD Turion 64x2 Mobile TL-60 Processor at 2.0 GHz, 1600MHz FSB, 512KBx2 Cache
-------------------
New account on EvE-Online...$19.95
100 Day GTC...$49.95
2 Month supply of German beer...$200.00
Having your computer die because your sister installed Hello Kitty online...P |
Buraken v2
Spontaneous Defenestration
|
Posted - 2007.08.01 00:26:00 -
[2]
intel
 Quote:
Mail from: Houvire Takaerne
2006.06.06 19:25
Our research has been fruity. If you're interested, I believe I have found what might be a banana in the corner of my office draw.
|
Ryan Darkwolf
Amarr
Viziam
|
Posted - 2007.08.01 00:40:00 -
[3]
Hmmm...ok but why?
I guess I should have explained this: Which one and why?
-------------------
New account on EvE-Online...$19.95
100 Day GTC...$49.95
2 Month supply of German beer...$200.00
Having your computer die because of Hello Kitty online...Priceless |
Dark Shikari
Caldari
Imperium Technologies
Firmus Ixion
|
Posted - 2007.08.01 00:48:00 -
[4]
Why not get a slower Core 2?
That Core 2 looks so high powered that if you need mobility at all it'll drain your battery very fast. It'll be very expensive too.
23 Member
EVE Video makers: save EVE-files bandwidth! Use the H.264 AutoEncoder! |
jbob2000
Gallente
KIA Corp
KIA Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.08.01 02:54:00 -
[5]
Intel core 2 is top, but you defiantly don't need the extreme, I can't even imagine the price.
________________________________
|
Rei Sara
Duty.
|
Posted - 2007.08.01 03:05:00 -
[6]
As a side note, I don't know exactly how the AMD does on energy use, but I know that the entire Core 2 line was a big step up in energy efficiency, so even if it clocks faster than the AMD it may not burn your battery any faster.
|
Dark Shikari
Caldari
Imperium Technologies
Firmus Ixion
|
Posted - 2007.08.01 03:07:00 -
[7]
Originally by: Rei Sara
As a side note, I don't know exactly how the AMD does on energy use, but I know that the entire Core 2 line was a big step up in energy efficiency, so even if it clocks faster than the AMD it may not burn your battery any faster.
I use a Core 2 2Ghz, its bad enough... remember that energy usage scales linearly in clock speed (so 2.93Ghz is almost 50% more energy used) and quadratically for voltage, so if the 2.93Ghz uses 20% more voltage it uses 44% more energy additionally. And it stacks multiplicatively!
23 Member
EVE Video makers: save EVE-files bandwidth! Use the H.264 AutoEncoder! |
Derovius Vaden
|
Posted - 2007.08.01 03:19:00 -
[8]
Originally by: Ryan Darkwolf
Ok...it's about that time to get a new laptop...and searching online doesn't do jack because you don't get reviews from REAL people.
So here it is....
I can get:
Intel Core 2 Extreme Processor at 2.93GHz, 1066 MHz FSB, 4M Cache
or
AMD Turion 64x2 Mobile TL-60 Processor at 2.0 GHz, 1600MHz FSB, 512KBx2 Cache
I strongly suggest Intel, though I will explain myself better than the others I hope; most programs that are written in C, C++ or equivalent are written in a neutral or Intel based version of the language. It has been shown through tests that Intel code will literally take longer paths through memory to purposely make it less efficient on AMD processors.
That and its 46.5% faster to go Intel (yay Math!), and you can't beat that kinda boost.
|
Ryan Darkwolf
Amarr
Viziam
|
Posted - 2007.08.01 07:11:00 -
[9]
Ok...thanks I like the responces. I will go with Intel for 2 reasons. As everyone has posted especially the last guy (thanks for the in-depth explanation) the Intel will run faster...I am building a laptop that can replace my destop but that I can still take to a hotel or whatever.
Plus if I get the one with the Intel core 2 (i can get the less expensive 2.XX GHz one)
I can add 3 200gig 7200rpm hardrives instead of 2...
 Expensive gaming-desktop replacing-laptop ftw.
-------------------
New account on EvE-Online...$19.95
100 Day GTC...$49.95
2 Month supply of German beer...$200.00
Having your computer die because of Hello Kitty online...Priceless |
MotherMoon
Huang Yinglong
Namtz'aar k'in
|
Posted - 2007.08.01 07:24:00 -
[10]
my laptop burns laps and gets 40 mins of battery power. got to keep that sucker plugged in!
-----------------------------------
I'm working my way through college
target CCP
Quote:
CCP posted a new dev blog, they are going to bring Nos in line with.....well....logic
|
|
|
Ryan Darkwolf
Amarr
Viziam
|
Posted - 2007.08.01 07:29:00 -
[11]
Ok this here is the one with Intel
#PROCESSOR Intel Core 2 Duo Processor E6700 at 2.67GHz, 1066MHz FSB, 4M Cache
#MB CORE LOGIC Intel P965 + ICH8R Chipset w/1066MHz FSB
#SCREEN SIZE 17" WUXGA 1920x1200 ClearView Glossy-Glass Wide Screen TFT LCD Display
#MEMORY 4GB Corsair SODIMM PC2-5300 DDR2 667MHz Memory (2 X 2048MB)
#HARD DRIVE 1 200GB Ultra Performance S-ATA150 7200 RPM Hard Drive
#HARD DRIVE 2 200GB Ultra Performance S-ATA150 7200 RPM Hard Drive
#HARD DRIVE 3 200GB Ultra Performance S-ATA150 7200 RPM Hard Drive
#VIDEO CARD SLI SLOT 1 nVidia GeForce Go 7950 GTX 512MB DDR3 16X PCI Express
#VIDEO CARD SLI SLOT 2 nVidia GeForce Go 7950 GTX 512MB DDR3 16X PCI Express
#OPTICAL DRIVE Internal 8X Super Multi DVD+/-R/RW (4X+DL) + 24X CDRW Drive
#I/O PORTS 4 USB, 2 Firewire, PS/2, S-Video In/Out, DVI, Infrared, Serial, Parellel, #PCMCIA II and 7-in-1 Card reader
#CAMERA Intergrated 1.3M High-Resolution Digital Video Camera
#OPERATING SYSTEM Microsoft Windows XP Home Edition SP2 w/Original Disc
#DIMENSIONS 15.50" Width X 11.75" Depth X 2.35" Height. 11.55lbs.
#SERVICE Standard 1 Year Limited Parts and Labor Warranty
#EXTRA BATTERY 12 Cell Li-Ion Smart Battery
Price $4800
-------------------
New account on EvE-Online...$19.95
100 Day GTC...$49.95
2 Month supply of German beer...$200.00
Having your computer die because of Hello Kitty online...Priceless |
Ryan Darkwolf
Amarr
Viziam
|
Posted - 2007.08.01 07:32:00 -
[12]
And this one has teh AMD
#PROCESSOR AMD Turion 64 X 2 Mobile TL-60 Processor at 2.0GHz, 1600MHz FSB, 512KB X 2 Cache
#MB CORE LOGIC nVidia nForce 4 SLI CK804 Chipset w/1600MHz FSB
#SCREEN SIZE 20.1" WSXGA+ 1680x1050 ClearView Glossy-Glass Wide Screen TFT LCD Display
#MEMORY 2GB Corsair SODIMM PC2-5300 DDR2 667MHz Memory (2 X 1024MB)
#HARD DRIVE 1 200GB Ultra Performance S-ATA150 7200 RPM Hard Drive
#HARD DRIVE 2 200GB Ultra Performance S-ATA150 7200 RPM Hard Drive
#VIDEO CARD SLI SLOT 1 nVidia GeForce Go 7950 GTX 512MB DDR3 16X PCI Express
#VIDEO CARD SLI SLOT 2 nVidia GeForce Go 7950 GTX 512MB DDR3 16X PCI Express
#WIRELESS NETWORK WiFi Wireless Intel 3945 802.11a/b/g Wireless Card with Bluetooth #I/O PORTS 5 USB, Firewire, S-Video TV-Out, DVI, Infrared, Serial, PCMCIA II and 4-in-1 Card reader
#OPERATING SYSTEM Microsoft Windows XP Home Edition SP2 w/Original Disc
#DIMENSIONS 18.70" Width X 13.50" Depth X 1.20"~1.90" Height. 14.5lbs.
#EXTRA BATTERY 12 Cell Li-Ion Smart Battery
Price $4662
After looking at this...what say the experts on the one I should get
-------------------
New account on EvE-Online...$19.95
100 Day GTC...$49.95
2 Month supply of German beer...$200.00
Having your computer die because of Hello Kitty online...Priceless |
Ryan Darkwolf
Amarr
Viziam
|
Posted - 2007.08.01 07:33:00 -
[13]
And this one has teh AMD
#PROCESSOR AMD Turion 64 X 2 Mobile TL-60 Processor at 2.0GHz, 1600MHz FSB, 512KB X 2 Cache
#MB CORE LOGIC nVidia nForce 4 SLI CK804 Chipset w/1600MHz FSB
#SCREEN SIZE 20.1" WSXGA+ 1680x1050 ClearView Glossy-Glass Wide Screen TFT LCD Display
#MEMORY 2GB Corsair SODIMM PC2-5300 DDR2 667MHz Memory (2 X 1024MB)
#HARD DRIVE 1 200GB Ultra Performance S-ATA150 7200 RPM Hard Drive
#HARD DRIVE 2 200GB Ultra Performance S-ATA150 7200 RPM Hard Drive
#VIDEO CARD SLI SLOT 1 nVidia GeForce Go 7950 GTX 512MB DDR3 16X PCI Express
#VIDEO CARD SLI SLOT 2 nVidia GeForce Go 7950 GTX 512MB DDR3 16X PCI Express
#WIRELESS NETWORK WiFi Wireless Intel 3945 802.11a/b/g Wireless Card with Bluetooth #I/O PORTS 5 USB, Firewire, S-Video TV-Out, DVI, Infrared, Serial, PCMCIA II and 4-in-1 Card reader
#OPERATING SYSTEM Microsoft Windows XP Home Edition SP2 w/Original Disc
#DIMENSIONS 18.70" Width X 13.50" Depth X 1.20"~1.90" Height. 14.5lbs.
#EXTRA BATTERY 12 Cell Li-Ion Smart Battery
Price $4662
After looking at this...what say the experts on the one I should get...and don't go on price....my budget is $5000 and I want to spend it on the best one harware wise (price doesnt always equal quality)
-------------------
New account on EvE-Online...$19.95
100 Day GTC...$49.95
2 Month supply of German beer...$200.00
Having your computer die because of Hello Kitty online...Priceless |
Imperator Jora'h
|
Posted - 2007.08.01 07:40:00 -
[14]
Originally by: Derovius Vaden
I strongly suggest Intel, though I will explain myself better than the others I hope; most programs that are written in C, C++ or equivalent are written in a neutral or Intel based version of the language. It has been shown through tests that Intel code will literally take longer paths through memory to purposely make it less efficient on AMD processors.
That and its 46.5% faster to go Intel (yay Math!), and you can't beat that kinda boost.
Not sure what you are talking about here. Do you have any cites (I'm genuinely curious).
And just doing the math on the clock speed between AMD and Intel is misleading. While today Intel has the leading processor not too long ago AMD was busting up Intel pretty well. While AMD had lower clocked processors they had a more efficient architecture. It was for this reason AMD went to a new naming policy because people would just buy on clock speed so AMD put numbers on their chips that presumably equated to their effective clock if it were an Intel chip.
|
Imperator Jora'h
|
Posted - 2007.08.01 07:43:00 -
[15]
Originally by: Ryan Darkwolf
Ok...it's about that time to get a new laptop...
Do you have to have a laptop? Unless you need the mobility of a laptop you are far better off with a desktop computer. You will get more bang for your money in a desktop than a laptop.
|
Ryan Darkwolf
Amarr
Viziam
|
Posted - 2007.08.01 07:47:00 -
[16]
Originally by: Imperator Jora'h
Originally by: Ryan Darkwolf
Ok...it's about that time to get a new laptop...
Do you have to have a laptop? Unless you need the mobility of a laptop you are far better off with a desktop computer. You will get more bang for your money in a desktop than a laptop.
Being in the military I am always on the go.. I have a great gaming desktop...that is now collecting dust or most likely being used to play hello kitty land since my sister has most likely hacked the password already....
So a laptop that will replace my desktop is necessary since i can carry it anywhere.
-------------------
New account on EvE-Online...$19.95
100 Day GTC...$49.95
2 Month supply of German beer...$200.00
Having your computer die because of Hello Kitty online...Priceless |
Dark Shikari
Caldari
Imperium Technologies
Firmus Ixion
|
Posted - 2007.08.01 11:41:00 -
[17]
Originally by: Imperator Jora'h
Originally by: Derovius Vaden
I strongly suggest Intel, though I will explain myself better than the others I hope; most programs that are written in C, C++ or equivalent are written in a neutral or Intel based version of the language. It has been shown through tests that Intel code will literally take longer paths through memory to purposely make it less efficient on AMD processors.
That and its 46.5% faster to go Intel (yay Math!), and you can't beat that kinda boost.
Not sure what you are talking about here. Do you have any cites (I'm genuinely curious).
And just doing the math on the clock speed between AMD and Intel is misleading. While today Intel has the leading processor not too long ago AMD was busting up Intel pretty well. While AMD had lower clocked processors they had a more efficient architecture. It was for this reason AMD went to a new naming policy because people would just buy on clock speed so AMD put numbers on their chips that presumably equated to their effective clock if it were an Intel chip.
He's referring to the Intel C Compiler. This isn't very useful as most companies use Microsoft's Visual C++ and most open-source programs for Windows are compiled with GCC for MinGW.
Intel's compiler is used though and it gives a slight advantage to Intel CPUs, though not that much.
23 Member
EVE Video makers: save EVE-files bandwidth! Use the H.264 AutoEncoder! |
Zeonos
Amarr
Fairtrade Syndicate
|
Posted - 2007.08.01 14:04:00 -
[18]
dosnt XP only supports 3GB of ram? at least if its 32bit"most likely"
Look I Hijacked a sig!! -Kaemonn
<3 Kaemonn -Zeonos
A sunset with Kaemonn... how nice... -Wachtmeister
In Eve-Online Forum Hijack Signature! -Ivan K
This space is reserved for moderator hijacking, Need more colors!
Red & Yellow & Pink & Green, Orange & Purple & ME! - Deckard
|
Miss Anthropy
School of Applied Knowledge
|
Posted - 2007.08.01 14:12:00 -
[19]
Originally by: Dark Shikari
Originally by: Imperator Jora'h
Originally by: Derovius Vaden
I strongly suggest Intel, though I will explain myself better than the others I hope; most programs that are written in C, C++ or equivalent are written in a neutral or Intel based version of the language. It has been shown through tests that Intel code will literally take longer paths through memory to purposely make it less efficient on AMD processors.
That and its 46.5% faster to go Intel (yay Math!), and you can't beat that kinda boost.
Not sure what you are talking about here. Do you have any cites (I'm genuinely curious).
And just doing the math on the clock speed between AMD and Intel is misleading. While today Intel has the leading processor not too long ago AMD was busting up Intel pretty well. While AMD had lower clocked processors they had a more efficient architecture. It was for this reason AMD went to a new naming policy because people would just buy on clock speed so AMD put numbers on their chips that presumably equated to their effective clock if it were an Intel chip.
He's referring to the Intel C Compiler. This isn't very useful as most companies use Microsoft's Visual C++ and most open-source programs for Windows are compiled with GCC for MinGW.
Intel's compiler is used though and it gives a slight advantage to Intel CPUs, though not that much.
C/C++ code is fast no matter what processor you use. If you're really going to be processor specific in designing software then you'd have to write in Assembly Language, which is less fun than being attacked by a starving dog that's got a bag of wasps tied to its *******.
|
Dark Shikari
Caldari
Imperium Technologies
Firmus Ixion
|
Posted - 2007.08.01 16:30:00 -
[20]
Originally by: Ryan Darkwolf
Edited by: Ryan Darkwolf on 01/08/2007 07:43:23
Ok this here is the one with Intel
#PROCESSOR Intel Core 2 Duo Processor E6700 at 2.67GHz, 1066MHz FSB, 4M Cache
#MB CORE LOGIC Intel P965 + ICH8R Chipset w/1066MHz FSB
#SCREEN SIZE 17" WUXGA 1920x1200 ClearView Glossy-Glass Wide Screen TFT LCD Display
#MEMORY 4GB Corsair SODIMM PC2-5300 DDR2 667MHz Memory (2 X 2048MB)
#HARD DRIVE 1 200GB Ultra Performance S-ATA150 7200 RPM Hard Drive
#HARD DRIVE 2 200GB Ultra Performance S-ATA150 7200 RPM Hard Drive
#HARD DRIVE 3 200GB Ultra Performance S-ATA150 7200 RPM Hard Drive
#VIDEO CARD SLI SLOT 1 nVidia GeForce Go 7950 GTX 512MB DDR3 16X PCI Express
#VIDEO CARD SLI SLOT 2 nVidia GeForce Go 7950 GTX 512MB DDR3 16X PCI Express
#OPERATING SYSTEM Microsoft Windows XP Home Edition SP2 w/Original Disc
#DIMENSIONS 15.50" Width X 11.75" Depth X 2.35" Height. 11.55lbs.
#EXTRA BATTERY 12 Cell Li-Ion Smart Battery
Price $4800
And you call that PORTABLE? 12 POUNDS? 
It'll probably have the heat output of a lap-sized fireplace, too.
23 Member
EVE Video makers: save EVE-files bandwidth! Use the H.264 AutoEncoder! |
|
|
Derovius Vaden
|
Posted - 2007.08.01 16:57:00 -
[21]
Originally by: Miss Anthropy
Originally by: Dark Shikari
Originally by: Imperator Jora'h
Originally by: Derovius Vaden
I strongly suggest Intel, though I will explain myself better than the others I hope; most programs that are written in C, C++ or equivalent are written in a neutral or Intel based version of the language. It has been shown through tests that Intel code will literally take longer paths through memory to purposely make it less efficient on AMD processors.
That and its 46.5% faster to go Intel (yay Math!), and you can't beat that kinda boost.
Not sure what you are talking about here. Do you have any cites (I'm genuinely curious).
And just doing the math on the clock speed between AMD and Intel is misleading. While today Intel has the leading processor not too long ago AMD was busting up Intel pretty well. While AMD had lower clocked processors they had a more efficient architecture. It was for this reason AMD went to a new naming policy because people would just buy on clock speed so AMD put numbers on their chips that presumably equated to their effective clock if it were an Intel chip.
He's referring to the Intel C Compiler. This isn't very useful as most companies use Microsoft's Visual C++ and most open-source programs for Windows are compiled with GCC for MinGW.
Intel's compiler is used though and it gives a slight advantage to Intel CPUs, though not that much.
C/C++ code is fast no matter what processor you use. If you're really going to be processor specific in designing software then you'd have to write in Assembly Language, which is less fun than being attacked by a starving dog that's got a bag of wasps tied to its *******.
Not really true, a compiler for C that is written by a hardware manufacturer will be much more inline with that the hardware can do, and therefore more efficient, than if someone is just hardcoding through Assembly.
Quite frankly, I think there is a serious need for a more universal language (I think Java is a joke, the whole compile once run anywhere is all good and well, so long as its doing something simple.).
|
Dark Shikari
Caldari
Imperium Technologies
Firmus Ixion
|
Posted - 2007.08.01 17:10:00 -
[22]
Edited by: Dark Shikari on 01/08/2007 17:10:29
Originally by: Derovius Vaden
Not really true, a compiler for C that is written by a hardware manufacturer will be much more inline with that the hardware can do, and therefore more efficient, than if someone is just hardcoding through Assembly.
No, any skilled assembly programmer can easily beat any compiler because of parallel instructions such as SSE/MMX which compilers, not even the best, are that intelligent at using. Especially since the programmer can test dozens of possibilities and pick the one that is fastest for a specific CPU.
Of course the use of assembly is limited; its great for short, often-used functions that can be parallelized, like dot products and such, but not useful for much more than that.
Its definitely helpful: the video encoder x264 goes about 5-6 times slower with assembly turned off, for example.
23 Member
EVE Video makers: save EVE-files bandwidth! Use the H.264 AutoEncoder! |
Halo Jones
Caldari
Oberon Incorporated
|
Posted - 2007.08.01 17:17:00 -
[23]
Originally by: Dark Shikari
Originally by: Ryan Darkwolf
Edited by: Ryan Darkwolf on 01/08/2007 07:43:23
Ok this here is the one with Intel
#PROCESSOR Intel Core 2 Duo Processor E6700 at 2.67GHz, 1066MHz FSB, 4M Cache
#MB CORE LOGIC Intel P965 + ICH8R Chipset w/1066MHz FSB
#SCREEN SIZE 17" WUXGA 1920x1200 ClearView Glossy-Glass Wide Screen TFT LCD Display
#MEMORY 4GB Corsair SODIMM PC2-5300 DDR2 667MHz Memory (2 X 2048MB)
#HARD DRIVE 1 200GB Ultra Performance S-ATA150 7200 RPM Hard Drive
#HARD DRIVE 2 200GB Ultra Performance S-ATA150 7200 RPM Hard Drive
#HARD DRIVE 3 200GB Ultra Performance S-ATA150 7200 RPM Hard Drive
#VIDEO CARD SLI SLOT 1 nVidia GeForce Go 7950 GTX 512MB DDR3 16X PCI Express
#VIDEO CARD SLI SLOT 2 nVidia GeForce Go 7950 GTX 512MB DDR3 16X PCI Express
#OPERATING SYSTEM Microsoft Windows XP Home Edition SP2 w/Original Disc
#DIMENSIONS 15.50" Width X 11.75" Depth X 2.35" Height. 11.55lbs.
#EXTRA BATTERY 12 Cell Li-Ion Smart Battery
Price $4800
And you call that PORTABLE? 12 POUNDS?
It'll probably have the heat output of a lap-sized fireplace, too.
Thats a very strange laptop, top end desktop processor, 3 separate harddrive and dual gfx crads setup in SLI format. With 4bg of ram running on a 3gb max OS, coupled with it being speed rated for half the alleged motherboard chipset.
Where is this beng advertised, link to the website, its a monster of a system, about the same dimension of a dell xps2, which is a big heavy laptop, but a v good one at that. So many strange things however, 3 harddrives in a laptop? You sure?
|
AlexCA
Amarr
De Valken BV
Sylph Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.08.01 18:14:00 -
[24]
http://www.clevo.com.tw/products/D900C.asp
Your signature exceeds the maximum allowed filesize of 24000 bytes -Forum Moderator ([email protected]) |
Ryan Darkwolf
Amarr
Viziam
|
Posted - 2007.08.01 19:32:00 -
[25]
Edited by: Ryan Darkwolf on 01/08/2007 19:34:01
Linkage to Laptop
Ok this is where it is advertised...build it the way I have it if you want...or if you can come up with a better build from this site please do so. I have given up on AMD one (the Atlantis Pro) since I asked other guys here at work and they say the Intel Core 2 is the better prosessor for gaming and such...
Its portable as in I can take it in my backback and go to a hotel or a friends house with it...and like I said...its made to replace my desktop
-------------------
New account on EvE-Online...$19.95
100 Day GTC...$49.95
2 Month supply of German beer...$200.00
Having your computer die because of Hello Kitty online...Priceless |
Ryan Darkwolf
Amarr
Viziam
|
Posted - 2007.08.01 19:55:00 -
[26]
Btw i'm thinking about changing the memory to a
2Gb Kingston SODIMM PC2-6400 DDR2 800Mhz (2x 1024mb)
what do you experts say?
-------------------
New account on EvE-Online...$19.95
100 Day GTC...$49.95
2 Month supply of German beer...$200.00
Having your computer die because of Hello Kitty online...Priceless |
Trek
Minmatar
N.A.G.A Corporation
|
Posted - 2007.08.01 22:35:00 -
[27]
Wow, that is gonna be one big, hot, and probably LOUD, laptop! Not something I would go for, but it should work just fine for your needs as a desktop replacement. It least I can't see it lacking any punch! Oh and I agree on the Intel recommendations also.
---
My other ship is a Reaper
|
Miss Anthropy
School of Applied Knowledge
|
Posted - 2007.08.01 23:47:00 -
[28]
Originally by: Derovius Vaden
Not really true, a compiler for C that is written by a hardware manufacturer will be much more inline with that the hardware can do, and therefore more efficient, than if someone is just hardcoding through Assembly.
Quite frankly, I think there is a serious need for a more universal language (I think Java is a joke, the whole compile once run anywhere is all good and well, so long as its doing something simple.).
Like DS said, most software that us peons will use is written using Microsoft Visual Studio or GCC (MinGW for Windows based PCs). This is mainly because of the API's that come with these compilers. It's a lot easier to write Windows applications when there are premade Libraries for designing Windows software. So technically it's not about writing software for the processor, it's about writing software for the Operating System. Visual C++ and MinGW have an excellent set of libraries for doing this.
Even Java has a great set of premade classes called Swing that will design Windows looking apps. And, on the plus side, Java's compiler has gotten a lot faster over the years. Java is mostly consigned to embedded software these days like Mobile Phone software and little Java games on those phones. As for Java Database Connectivity; most web designers would rather use the MySQL/PHP approach rather than Java. So sadly, yeah, Java can do a lot but is mostly ignored; especially now that C# programming is becoming more popular.
Hell is other people's ringtones. |
Zeonos
Amarr
Fairtrade Syndicate
|
Posted - 2007.08.02 03:58:00 -
[29]
wonder how it will cool it all, and how long it gonna run on battery, with SLI gfx card..
how the hell do they even fit all that stuff inside it?... and how the heck are they cooling it all down?...
Look I Hijacked a sig!! -Kaemonn
<3 Kaemonn -Zeonos
A sunset with Kaemonn... how nice... -Wachtmeister
In Eve-Online Forum Hijack Signature! -Ivan K
This space is reserved for moderator hijacking, Need more colors!
Red & Yellow & Pink & Green, Orange & Purple & ME! - Deckard
|
Imperator Jora'h
|
Posted - 2007.08.02 05:10:00 -
[30]
Edited by: Imperator Jora''h on 02/08/2007 05:10:37
Originally by: Ryan Darkwolf
Btw i'm thinking about changing the memory to a
2Gb Kingston SODIMM PC2-6400 DDR2 800Mhz (2x 1024mb)
what do you experts say?
Couple of things...
First off I am a big fan of Corsair memory. Kingston is ok but Corsair seems to cater better to the performance freaks.
That said you need to look in to the memory you can get closely. In my system I have Corsair Dominator memory. This is for desktops but gives you an idea on what Corsair is about.
More than that though you need to look beyond the commonly cited memory specs. What really gets it doen memory wise are the timings. When overclocking my system I could loosen my tight memory timings and opt for a better clock rate. Reading up on some articles though had some people who had done their homework and the system performs better at lower clock rates and tight timings. Just saying, "DDR2, 800 Mhz" does not come close to telling the whole story in performance.
As for your hard drives I have to wonder why you want three of them? If you want RAID-5 for fault tolerance purposes fine. You will lose 33% of your capacity but if fault tolerance is important than that may be worthwhile. If you want fault tolerance at a cheaper price you could go RAID-1 but lose 50% of your capacity. If you want performance and no fault tolerance two drives and RAID-0 will do best for you.
Thing is more hard drives means more power consupmtion and heat generation. I really think opting for higher capacity drives but fewer of them would suit a laptop better. Besides, laptop hard drives are slow in comparison to their desktop counterparts. It's a laptop...just will not perform as well as a well built desktop...hard drive performance in particular.
I have 2 Western Digital Raptors in my system (RAID-0). They are SATA-1 and outperform all but the very best SATA-2 drives on the market (and in fact they outperform the *best* SATA-2 drives in many benchmarks...just not all of them but on balance they are still faster than the SATA-2). Again obvious numbers in marketing materials can be misleading. It's a laptop and while you can buff it to an extent its I/O performance is going to be so-so.
Not telling you what to do....just food for thought. Bottom line is look closely. It's a $4000-5000 investment. Worth you doing some homework if you want the best of the best (and at that price you should get it).
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |