|
PureBytes Links
Trading Reference Links
|
Ivo,
I will answer you because you are a courteous individual, not like Coaster
who must work as a hypster on
Yahoo Amd, lol. I only wanted to add balance to the conversation given my
Mfg Eng experience and insight
into electronic equipment and components. Trading with TS is more demanding
than anything I know of
barring 3-D CIMS and discrete event simulation, and I didn't want to get
traders hopes up on $400 will cover it
all. Just the nightmare of software, drivers, and workstation components
every year would drive me
away from updates every year. Its a nightmare getting everything working
like it should. And its a
big minus 'hoping' Msft will address Amd support which they have not done so
to date. If you have an Amd
working fine, you aren't going to improve on speed significantly from an
update, they are fast enough;
just going to have unneeded cost and aggravation for an 64 bit product that
doesn't YET have an operating
system tailored to the chipset (on Msft Site I could not find anything
related to Amd, and just assume
Intel will be supported as history indicates). The main bottleneck is the
bus, and putting a bigger bus on it will not get
it done: you need the whole hardware configuration designed specifically for
it (no Coaster, they are not all the same).
DDR is an inbreed cousin of RDRAM and SDRAM: more problems than SDRAM and a
minority of benefits of RDRAM.
Yes Intel is screwing the pooch, with DDR and 64 bit: its cheaper, more
profit, and upgrades every year.
They are just following Amd, Micron, etc.. lead of getting rid of obsolete
inventory.
Here's your items as requested I assume (last response from me):
1. As mentioned above, Msft 64bit don't mention Amd and if so, direct me to
that specific link.
64 bit chipsets is what they design the software to. Intel has the best cpu
engineers in the world and
Msft has 100% designed for them to date: which one do you think they will
design it for?
There is nothing I have seen to indicate otherwise.
2. SP 2 is a bugger for sure. One thing for sure is you will have to upgrade
video drivers, the heart of OS.
I don't know about Pentium M or DDR in fact. There are two many variables in
PC's today to make a judgement.
It sounds like a critical driver needs updating.
3. RDRAM I know were run at half processor speed. Maybe it was marketing to
better dispose of obsolete inventory.
But reliability and heat dissipation have always been a critical factor
Intel has addressed through intricate design.
Historically, that's why businesses and people who own their own
traditionally buy Intel. It works.
It doesn't overheat. If enough Ram is supplied, it doesn't repeatedly crash.
Its a consistant reliable serviceable
machine you can depend on. And that is a little more important than a 1990
Quake test speed: especially for a trader.
4. Think again. a pair (2 EA) of Dual 2.8GHz (5.6 GHz), 4GB 40ns RDRAM, Dual
15K Cheetah Scsi Raid O w/320 bps Adaptec controller,
Various Matrox 32bit digital cards from 8 independent 32mb sources(450MMS,
450G, 550G). Until the Rambus suits are settled, nothing made
has the 'architecture' to best it presently. Maybe 5 years give or take a
couple, and it will come from Rambus/Intel most likely
if their patents don't get raped.
5. See above. No, but my first 2 lasted 9 yrs (Mac SE) and 4 yrs (Compaq WS
6000 Professional PII) years. There's no reason this couldn't
last for 10 even if its not the best (but it is now, lol).
Finally, I think Amd's are wonderfully efficient. And if a trader can get it
set up correctly, fantastic. They are fast.
But there are more factors to consider in a qualtitative assessment for a
critical purchase your livelihood depends on.
There's enough variables with dsl, phone lines, software, hardware
compatibility/components, drivers, data feed, etc...
without worrying about if an operating system will ever be designed for your
machine. That's the main thing!
Win XP Pro will fly, but everything has to be right. And 64 bit performance
will only significantly improve
products like multiple (>2) processor servers. There are many bottlenecks in
a pc which would eclipse this factor,
like the bus architecture is the main one.
Ivo, I hope no offense is taken with you or anyone who owns Amd (like
Jimmy). There are positive and negative benefits
to every decision. There are no easy decisions today, especially for a
pc/workstation buyer.
But you may be right, wait for your first million dollars before you
consider anything else!
Sincerely,
Phil
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Ivo Karindi [mailto:ivo@xxxxxxxxx]
> Sent: Friday, October 29, 2004 12:04 PM
> To: omega-list@xxxxxxxxxx; Phil Bailey
> Subject: Re[2]: OT- Dell Dimension, Celeron vs Pentium 4
>
>
> Hello Phil,
>
> Thursday, October 28, 2004, 4:49:27 PM, you wrote:
>
> PB> "Plus they are ready for windows 64 bit os which is in
> PB> beta now."
>
> PB> Got an applicable link for that, other than an unspecified source
> PB> from an Amd sponsered tech link?
>
> Here, all ready for download:
> http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/64bit/default.mspx
>
> PB> The only way that would happen is if INTC comes out with 64 bit,
> PB> but it is not needed, and it would not be an architecture like
> PB> Amd.
>
> After initially putting down AMD for their 64-bit processors and
> telling the world that 64-bit is not needed, Intel suddenly, about a
> year ago, came out with their own design (?) claiming that they were
> the first bringing out this technology!!! (notice the similarity to
> VP-talk?) However, try to go and buy a single 64-bit desktop processor
> from Intel - they are far from being actually ready with this, and are
> nowhere to be found!
>
> PB> In fact most all Amd's have some incompatibilities with WinXP
> PB> SP2.
>
> I have experianced precisely none with any of our AMD cpu-s, but my
> Pentium M laptop started experiencing occasional blue screens after
> SP2 install.
>
> PB> Basically you're buying old Athlon 32 bit technology from years
> PB> back. It is fast for its size, but the processor is gated 0%,
> PB> where as Intc gate their processors 50% for reliabilty and heat
> PB> reduction.
>
> Now can you back *this* up with a link or something? Never heard of
> anything like that. Again, sounds like elections...
>
> PB> So if you're low on funds and need power, its hard to beat. Many
> PB> traders like Amd. I don't like the ddr crap either, but my dual
> PB> Xeon RDRAM loaded workstations should do well for years to come in
> PB> performance and reliability. But personally, I'd get the best Intc
> PB> you could get.
>
> If you think that your trading and software setup is set and is not
> going to evolve over the years to come, that's just pefect. However,
> traders who want to evolve with their trading know that more and more
> resources are needed to evolve. Even with TS, it's possible to do more
> with a more powerful cpu. If someone thinks that investing $8000 in
> hardware for the next 5 years will keep them on the cutting edge,
> he/she is totally wrong in today's environment of ever-increasing
> speed of technological progress. Small $500-$1000/year investments on
> upgrades are the only answer to keep you close to the cutting edge,
> unless you absolutely don't care being there. The dual Xenons are
> worth next to nothing in 3 years although at present this may sound
> impressive to superficially inclined.
>
> PB> But look very hard so you don't have to keep buying and upgrading
> PB> frequently.
>
> My thinking in this regard is precisely the opposite - it's not
> possible to make a one-time investment in computer technology for the
> rest of your life; the situation is *very* different from buying a
> house. Rather than spending $5000 for a cutting-edge new system now, I
> would spend it in $200-$500 increments over the next years, and by
> doing so keep myself much closer to the edge in technology. But that's
> just me and opinions obviously differ.
>
> Best regards,
>
> Ivo Karindi
>
>
>
|