|
PureBytes Links
Trading Reference Links
|
Sean,
from my original 3 line message and additional news quote, this is the sixth
message you have sent me. Although this is a technical analysis and not a
computer hardware listserv, I don't mind answering your emails. Hopefully
we'll be able to end this discussion once and for all and get back to TA...
1. Yes, the 286 you mentioned was designed for DOS and works fine for DOS.
However for any Windows, because of the lack of memory, the computer will
continually write to the swap file. This slows the system to a crawl. If
you don't understand the concept of the swap file or virtual memory, please
look elsewhere for an explanation. The 80286 design is 12 years old.
Inadvertently, you have stumbled upon the truth and proved my argument.
2. AGP and all faster computer components, such as Ultra-IDE, SDRAM'S, and
24x/90ms CD-ROM's, will produce better overall system performance. Try
running a computer without any type of graphics accelerator or better yet an
ISA graphics card and see what I mean.
3. The FPU's and MMX instructions on all competing processors are slower
than Intel's. The competing companies, Cyrix/IBM, AMD, and IDT, all will be
improving these parts of their processors next year. If you don't understand
the concept of the FPU or MMX, please look elsewhere for an explanation. To
produce results comparable to the Pentium II, next year AMD will making a K6
chip compatible with a 100 MHz bus speed motherboard.
4. Internally the CPU runs faster (this is the number you've always read
about: 200, 233, 266, 300) than the bus (overall system) speed. Increasing
the bus speed, and changing PCI 33 MHz to AGP 66 MHz (and even 132), results
in better performance. If you don't understand the concept of bus speed,
please look elsewhere for an explanation. ASIC's or application specific
integrated circuits are not general purpose CPUs and do not apply here.
5. Socket 8 is for the Pentium Pro. Relatively few end users use the
Pentium Pro. The Pentium Pro is optimized for 32 bit applications. The
Pentium Pro gives poor performance for DOS, Windows 3.1, and, because large
parts are still written in 16 bit, Windows 95. From your statement I can see
you are unaware the Pentium Pro will be discontinued in the second half of
next year. All of the other CPU's for the Sockets you mentioned are no
longer in production. BTW, you forgot Socket 4 and Socket 6.
6. Most CPU's use 66 MHz to communicate with the bus. Some, such as slower
AMD K5's and Cyrix 6x86's, use a 50 or 60 MHz bus speed. The Cyrix 6x86-P200
uses a bus speed of 75 MHz. However, most use a 66 MHz clock speed. When
you force a CPU to run at the same clock multiplier but at a higher bus
speed, this is called overclocking. Some of the more advanced hardware end
users use overclocking on their CPU's. I don't recommend it, since you can
burn out the CPU. If you don't understand the concept of overclocking,
please look elsewhere for an explanation.
In a message dated 97-11-24 10:49:01 EST, sesmith@xxxxxxxxx writes:
<< On Friday, November 21, 1997 8:30 PM, DanMartinz@xxxxxxx
[SMTP:DanMartinz@xxxxxxx] wrote:
> Sean,
> I agree the more advanced users will need a more advanced operating system
> (probably NT) and a faster processor. However, for the average user who
uses
> a wordprocessor, a spreadsheet, or other applications (such as MetaStock),
> the technology already exists and doesn't need upgrading.
1. They don't need a PII 300. My Mom does all the above very effectively on
a 286 10 Mhz with 40 M Drive and 2 megs of ram.
> 5 years from now, no matter how much wordprocessors, spreadsheets, or the
> other apps have progressed, a 300 MHz CPU will still be able to handle the
> load. AGP is the new graphics format and will someday replace all PCI
video
> boards. Despite Intel's refusal to support AGP with Socket 7, a company
> called VIA (http://www.via.com.tw/) has designed a chipset which will
allow
> Socket 7 users to access to the AGP slot.
2. AGP has nothing to do with your unsupported argument.
> Next year all competing CPU manufacturers, AMD, Cyrix, and now IDT, while
be
> coming out with faster processors. These processors will also feature
better
> FPU and MMX processing.
3. again what does this have to do with anything
> The only other feature which should be addressed is the bus speed. Even at
> 66 MHz, the contemporary bus design is showing strain. Anyone seriously
> considering a onetime upgrade should wait until the new 100 MHz bus speed
> motherboards become available.
4. Clueless, Do you happen to design ASIC's for a living???
> By the way, for those who don't know: the PCI bus operates at 33 MHz and
the
> AGP slot operates at 66 MHz (runs faster). Socket 7 is the connection all
PC
> CPU's, except the Pentium II, use to connect to the motherboard. The
Pentium
5. Absolutely wrong. Ever heard of Socket 8, Socket5, Socket3 Socket2
Socket1. You are showing your ignorance with these wildly false claims.
> II uses a slot called Slot I. I believe all CPU's communicate with the
rest
> of the system at 60-85 MHz, typically at 66.
6. Your are really lost now. Not trying to be rude. but you are spouting
specs and numbers that you know nothing about. >>
On Friday, November 21, 1997 8:30 PM, DanMartinz@xxxxxxx
[SMTP:DanMartinz@xxxxxxx] wrote:
> I agree the more advanced users will need a more advanced operating system
> (probably NT) and a faster processor. However, for the average user who
uses
> a wordprocessor, a spreadsheet, or other applications (such as MetaStock),
> the technology already exists and doesn't need upgrading.
In a message dated 97-11-24 10:53:22 EST, sesmith@xxxxxxxxx writes:
<< you are missing the point. I want to know what scientific evidence you
have
that makes 3000 Mhx and AGP the magic combo. I design chips for a living
and
am totally missing your logic. Some idiot has been spouting your argument
for
the last 20 years and has continually been wrong. >>
The PII 300 MHz will not come in a 100 MHz bus version. However, the 350 MHz
PII with a 100 MHz bus speed will be coming out in the second half of next
year. Not getting into a petty name calling session here I can say, from my
own personal computer experience, this speed will be sufficient for the next
5 to 7 years. Since I already have a Cyrix P150 and it gives me acceptable
performance, I can wait until the 350/100 comes out and the price comes down.
Reading through your criticisms, I see no constructive statements concerning
future usage of CPU's. Perhaps a few less animadversions and more
recommendations would be helpful.
|