By: anon (anon.delete@this.anon.com), September 25, 2013 2:28 am
Room: Moderated Discussions
Wilco (Wilco.Dijkstra.delete@this.ntlworld.com) on September 25, 2013 3:14 am wrote:
> none (none.delete@this.none.com) on September 25, 2013 2:50 am wrote:
> > anon (anon.delete@this.anon.com) on September 25, 2013 1:56 am wrote:
> > > Doug S (foo.delete@this.bar.bar) on September 24, 2013 8:44 pm wrote:
> > > > Wilco (Wilco.Dijkstra.delete@this.ntlworld.com) on September 24, 2013 6:17 pm wrote:
> > > > > Rubbish. In Anand's Calxeda test a 2.3GHz E5-2560L beat a quad 1.4GHz A9 by a factor of 4.8x
> > > > > single threaded. That means a 4GHz i7 would beat an 1.8GHz Calxeda node by ~6.5x. Given that
> > > > > A15 is significantly faster than A9, the i7 would beat A15 by about 3.5x. That means a 4GHz
> > > > > i7 would only be ~2.3x faster than an A7 at 1.8GHz. So they are pretty close already.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > That's an awful lot of commutative math there, it is easy to trip up (or
> > > > deliberately obfuscate) with all that, especially without citations.
> > > >
> > > > But basically we know it is a steaming load of you know what, given the final claim that
> > > > the 2 watt SoC in a phone is only 2.3x slower than an actively cooled top bin Haswell.
> > > > Surely you can't be deluded enough to really believe that? If you do, you're basically
> > > > telling people they shouldn't bother to read anything you post ever again.
> > >
> > > If you compare some geekbench scores (integer, single threaded)
> > >
> > > http://browser.primatelabs.com/geekbench3/78873
> > > http://browser.primatelabs.com/geekbench3/79461
> > >
> > > Ignore the crypto, because I believe that's been highly optimized on x86 and
> > > uses crypto instructions. Take a look at some of the other sub tests.
> > >
> > > Geo mean of the non-crypto single thread int subtests gives
> > > Haswell a 4.8x advantage. Given the power consumption,
> > > caches, memory subsystems, and turbo frequencies, I think
> > > this is a really good performance by the A15, but it
> > > does only achieve 1/2 the IPC of the Haswell, which is a long way from Wilco's claim of IPC parity.
> >
> > Wasn't Wilco claiming Haswell vs Cyclone parity rather than Haswell vs A15?
>
> Correct.
>
> > http://browser.primatelabs.com/geekbench3/compare/81817?baseline=79461
>
> That looks like an i7 overclocked to 4.8GHz. Pretty much all i7-4770 results are 32-bit
> and in the 3500-3600 range. After a bit of browsing I found a 64-bit i7 result:
Hmm, I thought geekbench tried to compute the clock, but maybe that's wrong. Anyway, you maybe right, which does make the A15 a little faster relatively, but probably not down to 3.5x.
>
> http://browser.primatelabs.com/geekbench3/compare/81817?baseline=43547
>
> That suggests a 3.9GHz i7 is 2.8x faster than A7 on single threaded integer with a 3x clock advantage.
I still find the crypto tests questionable. SHA1 for example.
> none (none.delete@this.none.com) on September 25, 2013 2:50 am wrote:
> > anon (anon.delete@this.anon.com) on September 25, 2013 1:56 am wrote:
> > > Doug S (foo.delete@this.bar.bar) on September 24, 2013 8:44 pm wrote:
> > > > Wilco (Wilco.Dijkstra.delete@this.ntlworld.com) on September 24, 2013 6:17 pm wrote:
> > > > > Rubbish. In Anand's Calxeda test a 2.3GHz E5-2560L beat a quad 1.4GHz A9 by a factor of 4.8x
> > > > > single threaded. That means a 4GHz i7 would beat an 1.8GHz Calxeda node by ~6.5x. Given that
> > > > > A15 is significantly faster than A9, the i7 would beat A15 by about 3.5x. That means a 4GHz
> > > > > i7 would only be ~2.3x faster than an A7 at 1.8GHz. So they are pretty close already.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > That's an awful lot of commutative math there, it is easy to trip up (or
> > > > deliberately obfuscate) with all that, especially without citations.
> > > >
> > > > But basically we know it is a steaming load of you know what, given the final claim that
> > > > the 2 watt SoC in a phone is only 2.3x slower than an actively cooled top bin Haswell.
> > > > Surely you can't be deluded enough to really believe that? If you do, you're basically
> > > > telling people they shouldn't bother to read anything you post ever again.
> > >
> > > If you compare some geekbench scores (integer, single threaded)
> > >
> > > http://browser.primatelabs.com/geekbench3/78873
> > > http://browser.primatelabs.com/geekbench3/79461
> > >
> > > Ignore the crypto, because I believe that's been highly optimized on x86 and
> > > uses crypto instructions. Take a look at some of the other sub tests.
> > >
> > > Geo mean of the non-crypto single thread int subtests gives
> > > Haswell a 4.8x advantage. Given the power consumption,
> > > caches, memory subsystems, and turbo frequencies, I think
> > > this is a really good performance by the A15, but it
> > > does only achieve 1/2 the IPC of the Haswell, which is a long way from Wilco's claim of IPC parity.
> >
> > Wasn't Wilco claiming Haswell vs Cyclone parity rather than Haswell vs A15?
>
> Correct.
>
> > http://browser.primatelabs.com/geekbench3/compare/81817?baseline=79461
>
> That looks like an i7 overclocked to 4.8GHz. Pretty much all i7-4770 results are 32-bit
> and in the 3500-3600 range. After a bit of browsing I found a 64-bit i7 result:
Hmm, I thought geekbench tried to compute the clock, but maybe that's wrong. Anyway, you maybe right, which does make the A15 a little faster relatively, but probably not down to 3.5x.
>
> http://browser.primatelabs.com/geekbench3/compare/81817?baseline=43547
>
> That suggests a 3.9GHz i7 is 2.8x faster than A7 on single threaded integer with a 3x clock advantage.
I still find the crypto tests questionable. SHA1 for example.
Topic | Posted By | Date |
---|---|---|
Charlie re: Apple and ARM | jose | 2013/09/23 03:43 AM |
Charlie re: Apple and ARM | Mark Roulo | 2013/09/23 06:38 AM |
graphics and disk matter too | RichardC | 2013/09/23 11:23 AM |
Charlie re: Apple and ARM | Jose | 2013/09/24 05:56 AM |
Previous CPU transitions | Mark Roulo | 2013/09/24 06:20 AM |
Previous CPU transitions | Ronald Maas | 2013/09/24 09:21 PM |
Charlie re: Apple and ARM | Doug S | 2013/09/23 08:16 AM |
Charlie re: Apple and ARM | Patrick Chase | 2013/09/23 08:43 AM |
Charlie re: Apple and ARM | someone | 2013/09/23 08:46 AM |
Charlie re: Apple and ARM | Patrick Chase | 2013/09/23 09:17 AM |
Charlie re: Apple and ARM | Gabriele Svelto | 2013/09/23 09:24 AM |
Charlie re: Apple and ARM | Patrick Chase | 2013/09/23 09:40 AM |
Charlie re: Apple and ARM | someone | 2013/09/23 11:42 AM |
Charlie re: Apple and ARM | Patrick Chase | 2013/09/23 05:47 PM |
Charlie re: Apple and ARM | someone | 2013/09/23 08:43 AM |
Charlie re: Apple and ARM | Doug S | 2013/09/23 09:03 AM |
Charlie re: Apple and ARM | someone | 2013/09/23 09:25 AM |
Charlie re: Apple and ARM | Doug S | 2013/09/23 09:44 AM |
Charlie re: Apple and ARM | Michael S | 2013/09/23 10:02 AM |
Charlie re: Apple and ARM | someone | 2013/09/23 11:57 AM |
Charlie re: Apple and ARM | Michael S | 2013/09/23 02:56 PM |
Charlie re: Apple and ARM | Ricardo B | 2013/09/23 11:32 PM |
Charlie re: Apple and ARM | Martin Høyer Kristiansen | 2013/09/23 12:30 PM |
Charlie re: Apple and ARM | Niels Jørgen Kruse | 2013/09/23 10:09 AM |
Charlie re: Apple and ARM | Doug S | 2013/09/23 04:09 PM |
Charlie re: Apple and ARM | Maynard Handley | 2013/09/23 11:03 AM |
Charlie re: Apple and ARM | Michael S | 2013/09/23 03:27 PM |
Charlie re: Apple and ARM | Maynard Handley | 2013/09/23 03:39 PM |
Charlie re: Apple and ARM | Doug S | 2013/09/23 04:22 PM |
Charlie re: Apple and ARM | someone | 2013/09/24 07:13 AM |
Charlie re: Apple and ARM | Doug S | 2013/09/24 09:24 AM |
Charlie re: Apple and ARM | someone | 2013/09/24 09:41 AM |
Charlie re: Apple and ARM | Doug S | 2013/09/24 04:54 PM |
The decline of Itanium | Paul A. Clayton | 2013/09/24 08:52 PM |
The decline of Itanium | Kira | 2013/09/25 05:07 AM |
The decline of Itanium | Michael S | 2013/09/25 05:15 AM |
The decline of Itanium | Kira | 2013/09/25 05:21 AM |
Does Secure64 sell hardware? | Paul A. Clayton | 2013/09/25 07:18 AM |
Does Secure64 sell hardware? | Kira | 2013/09/25 08:18 AM |
Turns out they do rx2800 now. (NT) | Kira | 2013/09/25 08:20 AM |
Thanks again. RWT has some knowledgeable posters! (NT) | Paul A. Clayton | 2013/09/25 12:38 PM |
The decline of Itanium | Doug S | 2013/09/25 08:34 AM |
The decline of Itanium | David Hess | 2013/09/25 04:10 PM |
The decline of Itanium | Doug S | 2013/09/25 07:15 PM |
The decline of Itanium | David Hess | 2013/09/27 07:11 AM |
The decline of Itanium | Doug S | 2013/09/27 04:37 PM |
The decline of Itanium | David Hess | 2013/09/28 08:43 AM |
The decline of Itanium | bakaneko | 2013/09/26 02:06 PM |
The decline of Itanium | Gabriele Svelto | 2013/09/26 02:35 PM |
The decline of Itanium | Kira | 2013/09/26 03:18 PM |
The decline of Itanium | someone | 2013/09/27 07:08 AM |
The decline of Itanium | David Hess | 2013/09/27 07:20 AM |
The decline of Itanium | someone | 2013/09/27 07:56 AM |
The decline of Itanium | Linus Torvalds | 2013/09/27 11:00 AM |
i960 | someone | 2013/09/27 12:06 PM |
i960 | Michael S | 2013/09/28 08:47 AM |
i960 | JS | 2013/09/29 01:43 AM |
The decline of Itanium | David Hess | 2013/09/28 09:00 AM |
The decline of Itanium | Michael S | 2013/09/28 09:51 AM |
The decline of Itanium | David Hess | 2013/09/28 10:59 AM |
The decline of Itanium | Michael S | 2013/09/28 11:43 AM |
The decline of Itanium | David Hess | 2013/09/28 07:53 PM |
The decline of Itanium | gallier2 | 2013/09/30 12:06 AM |
x86 MCUs | Michael S | 2013/09/30 01:13 AM |
The decline of Itanium | anon | 2013/09/27 08:52 AM |
The decline of Itanium | someone | 2013/09/27 10:29 AM |
The decline of Itanium | Kira | 2013/09/27 09:19 AM |
oops - HC 1999, not 19 (NT) | Kira | 2013/09/27 10:04 AM |
The decline of Itanium | David Hess | 2013/09/27 07:06 AM |
The decline of Itanium | someone | 2013/09/27 07:25 AM |
The decline of Itanium | Linus Torvalds | 2013/09/27 09:07 AM |
The decline of Itanium | Doug S | 2013/09/27 05:09 PM |
The decline of Itanium | Maynard Handley | 2013/09/27 06:07 PM |
The decline of Itanium | Doug S | 2013/09/27 08:12 PM |
The decline of Itanium | RichardC | 2013/09/28 05:02 AM |
Laptop Design | David Hess | 2013/09/28 09:58 AM |
Laptop Design | Brett | 2013/09/28 02:14 PM |
Laptop Design | David Hess | 2013/09/28 07:35 PM |
Laptop Design | anon | 2013/09/30 01:11 AM |
Laptop Design | Brett | 2013/09/30 05:02 PM |
Laptop Design | RichardC | 2013/09/28 04:14 PM |
Laptop Design | David Hess | 2013/09/28 07:40 PM |
Laptop Design | Michael S | 2013/09/29 02:21 AM |
The decline of Itanium | Doug S | 2013/09/28 10:23 AM |
The decline of Itanium | RichardC | 2013/09/29 04:52 AM |
PS2 | Konrad Schwarz | 2013/09/29 11:53 PM |
PS2 | none | 2013/09/30 12:19 AM |
PS2 | Doug S | 2013/09/30 10:09 AM |
PS2 | sysanon | 2013/09/30 04:09 PM |
The decline of Itanium | Megol | 2013/09/29 05:35 AM |
Apple's innovations | RichardC | 2013/09/29 06:00 AM |
The decline of Itanium | Brett | 2013/09/29 01:56 PM |
The decline of Itanium | RichardC | 2013/09/29 05:00 PM |
Apple's innovations | Brett | 2013/10/10 07:20 PM |
The decline of Itanium | RichardC | 2013/09/28 04:44 AM |
The decline of Itanium | Ricardo B | 2013/09/28 04:23 PM |
The decline of Itanium | RichardC | 2013/09/29 03:51 AM |
The decline of Itanium | Ricardo B | 2013/09/29 07:27 AM |
The decline of Itanium | RichardC | 2013/09/29 11:28 AM |
The decline of Itanium | Ricardo B | 2013/09/29 03:00 PM |
The decline of Itanium | RichardC | 2013/09/29 05:07 PM |
The decline of Itanium | anon | 2013/09/30 06:04 AM |
The decline of Intel | RichardC | 2013/09/30 06:19 AM |
The decline of Intel | Kevin G | 2013/09/30 09:53 AM |
The decline of Intel | RichardC | 2013/09/30 10:13 AM |
The decline of Intel | Kevin G | 2013/10/02 08:11 AM |
The decline of Intel | tarlinian | 2013/10/02 08:27 AM |
The decline of Intel | Kevin G | 2013/10/04 09:24 AM |
450mm and EUV insertion | David Kanter | 2013/10/04 10:24 AM |
450mm and EUV insertion | tarlinian | 2013/10/04 11:23 AM |
450mm and EUV insertion | Anonym | 2013/10/04 10:39 PM |
450mm and EUV insertion | tarlinian | 2013/10/05 09:18 AM |
450mm and EUV insertion | Anonym | 2013/10/05 11:51 AM |
450mm and EUV insertion | tarlinian | 2013/10/05 12:42 PM |
450mm and EUV insertion | Anonym | 2013/10/05 02:35 PM |
450mm and EUV insertion | tarlinian | 2013/10/05 03:21 PM |
450mm and EUV insertion | David Kanter | 2013/10/07 12:48 PM |
450mm and EUV insertion | Kevin G | 2013/10/05 04:50 AM |
The decline of Intel | Brett | 2013/09/30 05:11 PM |
The decline of Intel | Purana Archer | 2013/10/01 04:52 AM |
The decline of Intel | anon | 2013/10/01 05:27 AM |
The decline of Intel | Purana Archer | 2013/10/01 06:13 AM |
The decline of Intel | mas | 2013/10/01 03:46 PM |
The decline of Intel | Purana Archer | 2013/10/01 11:26 PM |
The decline of Intel | anon | 2013/10/02 01:05 AM |
The decline of Intel | none | 2013/10/02 01:18 AM |
The decline of Intel | Purana Archer | 2013/10/02 01:35 AM |
The decline of Intel | anon | 2013/10/02 01:57 AM |
The decline of Intel | Doug S | 2013/10/02 09:08 AM |
The decline of Intel | mas | 2013/10/02 09:40 AM |
The decline of Intel | Doug S | 2013/10/02 06:32 PM |
The decline of Intel | David Kanter | 2013/10/02 09:17 PM |
Intel vs. industry gap | David Kanter | 2013/10/02 03:17 PM |
Intel vs. industry gap | Maynard Handley | 2013/10/02 04:59 PM |
Intel vs. industry gap | tarlinian | 2013/10/02 05:13 PM |
Intel vs. industry gap | Anon | 2013/10/02 11:15 PM |
Intel vs. industry gap | tarlinian | 2013/10/03 08:01 AM |
Intel vs. industry gap | David Kanter | 2013/10/02 09:10 PM |
Intel vs. industry gap | Doug S | 2013/10/03 08:59 AM |
Intel vs. industry gap | anon | 2013/10/03 03:12 PM |
Intel vs. industry gap | Doug S | 2013/10/03 03:56 PM |
Intel vs. industry gap | anon | 2013/10/03 04:48 PM |
Intel vs. industry gap | anonymou5 | 2013/10/03 04:59 PM |
Intel vs. industry gap | mas | 2013/10/04 12:10 AM |
The decline of Intel | Klimax | 2013/10/02 02:46 AM |
The decline of Intel | anon | 2013/10/02 01:53 AM |
The decline of Intel | tarlinian | 2013/10/02 08:24 AM |
The decline of Intel | David Kanter | 2013/10/01 08:06 AM |
The decline of Intel | Purana Archer | 2013/10/01 11:09 PM |
The decline of Intel | tarlinian | 2013/10/02 07:58 AM |
The decline of Intel | David Kanter | 2013/10/02 09:45 AM |
The decline of Intel | Purana Archer | 2013/10/04 05:38 AM |
The decline of Intel | David Kanter | 2013/10/04 11:41 PM |
The decline of Intel | Kevin G | 2013/10/05 07:14 AM |
The decline of Intel | Niels Jørgen Kruse | 2013/10/05 11:49 AM |
The decline of Intel | Kevin G | 2013/10/06 07:45 AM |
The decline of Intel | Doug S | 2013/10/06 09:11 PM |
The decline of Intel | Niels Jørgen Kruse | 2013/10/07 05:14 AM |
The decline of Intel | Doug S | 2013/10/07 03:36 PM |
Tool Reuse, CAPEX Efficiency | Anonym | 2013/10/02 12:37 PM |
Tool Reuse, CAPEX Efficiency | tarlinian | 2013/10/02 02:55 PM |
capex spending | Doug S | 2013/10/01 11:06 AM |
Reducing Intel's lead with less than twice the spending?? | Paul A. Clayton | 2013/10/01 04:27 PM |
Reducing Intel's lead with less than twice the spending?? | anon | 2013/10/01 07:07 PM |
Reducing Intel's lead with less than twice the spending?? | mas | 2013/10/01 10:04 PM |
Reducing Intel's lead with less than twice the spending?? | mas | 2013/10/01 10:06 PM |
Reducing Intel's lead with less than twice the spending?? | mas | 2013/10/01 10:06 PM |
Intel fabs on 22nm | Alberto | 2013/10/01 02:23 AM |
The decline of Intel | mas | 2013/10/01 03:24 PM |
The decline of Intel | anon | 2013/09/30 05:00 PM |
The decline of Itanium | David Kanter | 2013/09/29 10:19 PM |
competitive market | RichardC | 2013/09/30 05:33 AM |
competitive market | David Kanter | 2013/09/30 07:39 AM |
competitive market | RichardC | 2013/09/30 08:08 AM |
competitive market | David Kanter | 2013/09/30 11:08 AM |
competitive market | RichardC | 2013/09/30 01:00 PM |
competitive market | Anon | 2013/10/02 11:34 PM |
competitive market | Doug S | 2013/09/30 10:13 AM |
competitive market | RichardC | 2013/09/30 10:28 AM |
The decline of Itanium | Kevin G | 2013/09/27 09:07 AM |
The decline of Itanium | Maynard Handley | 2013/09/27 10:30 AM |
The decline of Itanium | someone | 2013/09/27 11:00 AM |
The decline of Itanium | TREZA | 2013/09/27 12:50 PM |
The decline of Itanium | Megol | 2013/09/27 11:52 PM |
The decline of Itanium | Maynard Handley | 2013/09/27 04:03 PM |
The decline of Itanium | anon | 2013/09/28 02:22 AM |
The decline of Itanium | Maynard Handley | 2013/09/28 08:00 AM |
That's BS | David Kanter | 2013/09/28 08:22 AM |
The decline of Itanium | anon | 2013/09/28 04:15 PM |
The decline of Itanium | mas | 2013/09/29 08:01 AM |
The decline of Itanium | mas | 2013/09/29 08:06 AM |
The decline of Itanium | Kevin G | 2013/09/29 10:06 AM |
Apple has 2-3 CPU design teams | David Kanter | 2013/09/29 10:39 AM |
The End of Moore's Law | hobold | 2013/09/30 02:00 AM |
Lower cost to process scaling can no longer be assumed. | Mark Roulo | 2013/09/30 09:50 AM |
Lower cost to process scaling can no longer be assumed. | David Kanter | 2013/09/30 12:41 PM |
Lower cost to process scaling can no longer be assumed. | EduardoS | 2013/09/30 01:05 PM |
Shouldn't the customers have *SOME* reason to move to the new process? | Mark Roulo | 2013/09/30 02:15 PM |
Shouldn't the customers have *SOME* reason to move to the new process? | mas | 2013/09/30 07:09 PM |
Shouldn't the customers have *SOME* reason to move to the new process? | Doug S | 2013/09/30 07:16 PM |
Shouldn't the customers have *SOME* reason to move to the new process? | mas | 2013/09/30 08:05 PM |
Shouldn't the customers have *SOME* reason to move to the new process? | Doug S | 2013/10/01 11:28 AM |
Shouldn't the customers have *SOME* reason to move to the new process? | mas | 2013/10/01 03:20 PM |
Shouldn't the customers have *SOME* reason to move to the new process? | Doug S | 2013/10/01 07:51 PM |
Shouldn't the customers have *SOME* reason to move to the new process? | Exophase | 2013/10/01 12:03 PM |
Shouldn't the customers have *SOME* reason to move to the new process? | mas | 2013/10/01 03:17 PM |
Shouldn't the customers have *SOME* reason to move to the new process? | Exophase | 2013/10/01 09:18 PM |
Shouldn't the customers have *SOME* reason to move to the new process? | Doug S | 2013/10/02 09:18 AM |
Shouldn't the customers have *SOME* reason to move to the new process? | Exophase | 2013/10/02 09:28 AM |
Lower cost to process scaling can no longer be assumed. | tarlinian | 2013/09/30 06:02 PM |
Lower cost to process scaling can no longer be assumed. | David Kanter | 2013/09/30 08:20 PM |
The End of Moore's Law | Greg Gritton | 2013/10/01 08:11 AM |
The End of Moore's Law | Kevin G | 2013/10/02 09:48 AM |
The decline of Itanium | Foo_ | 2013/09/28 07:50 AM |
The decline of Itanium | Ricardo B | 2013/09/28 03:17 PM |
The decline of Itanium | Dan Fay | 2013/09/27 01:51 PM |
The decline of Itanium | Michael S | 2013/09/28 09:58 AM |
The decline of Itanium | Doug S | 2013/09/28 10:39 AM |
The decline of Itanium | Michael S | 2013/09/28 12:11 PM |
The decline of Itanium | Dan Fay | 2013/09/28 02:38 PM |
The decline of Itanium | Doug S | 2013/09/28 04:09 PM |
The decline of Itanium | Dan Fay | 2013/09/28 04:59 PM |
The decline of Itanium | mas | 2013/09/29 05:45 AM |
The decline of Itanium | none | 2013/09/29 06:10 AM |
Bay Trail die cost | mas | 2013/09/29 06:31 AM |
Bay Trail die cost | none | 2013/09/29 06:40 AM |
Bay Trail die cost | mas | 2013/09/29 07:11 AM |
Bay Trail die cost | mas | 2013/09/29 07:16 AM |
Bay Trail die cost | Doug S | 2013/09/29 10:13 AM |
Bay Trail die cost | mas | 2013/09/29 10:59 AM |
Bay Trail die cost | RichardC | 2013/10/01 05:20 AM |
The decline of Itanium | bakaneko | 2013/09/29 07:59 AM |
The decline of Itanium | mas | 2013/09/29 08:16 AM |
The decline of Itanium | mas | 2013/09/29 08:31 AM |
The decline of Itanium | bakaneko | 2013/09/29 08:48 AM |
The decline of Itanium | mas | 2013/09/29 10:12 AM |
The decline of Itanium | bakaneko | 2013/09/29 10:53 AM |
The decline of Itanium | mas | 2013/09/29 11:11 AM |
The decline of Itanium | Maynard Handley | 2013/09/29 02:15 PM |
The decline of Itanium | mas | 2013/09/29 10:28 PM |
The decline of Itanium | anon | 2013/09/30 12:26 AM |
The decline of Itanium | mas | 2013/09/30 06:20 AM |
The decline of Itanium | Doug S | 2013/09/30 07:04 PM |
The decline of Itanium | mas | 2013/09/30 07:42 PM |
The decline of Itanium | anon | 2013/09/30 10:32 PM |
The decline of Itanium | David Kanter | 2013/09/30 11:43 PM |
The decline of Itanium | anon | 2013/10/01 01:37 AM |
The decline of Itanium | David Kanter | 2013/10/01 08:17 AM |
The decline of Itanium | mas | 2013/10/01 12:54 AM |
The decline of Itanium | anon | 2013/10/01 01:39 AM |
The decline of Itanium | bakaneko | 2013/09/30 03:26 AM |
The decline of Itanium | Maynard Handley | 2013/09/29 02:08 PM |
The decline of Itanium | Maynard Handley | 2013/09/29 03:50 PM |
The decline of Itanium | mas | 2013/09/29 10:42 PM |
Semiconductor realities | David Kanter | 2013/09/30 10:30 AM |
Restricted rules for initial process use at foundries? | Paul A. Clayton | 2013/09/30 03:33 PM |
Restricted rules for initial process use at foundries? | Ricardo B | 2013/09/30 11:47 PM |
$150 7" 800p Z2580 Dell Venue 7 | mas | 2013/10/02 11:10 AM |
$150 7" 800p Z2580 Dell Venue 7 | RichardC | 2013/10/03 07:51 AM |
$150 7" 800p Z2580 Dell Venue 7 | mas | 2013/10/03 08:41 AM |
$150 7" 800p Z2580 Dell Venue 7 | RichardC | 2013/10/03 09:56 AM |
$150 7" 800p Z2580 Dell Venue 7 | Michael S | 2013/10/03 09:58 AM |
$150 7" 800p Z2580 Dell Venue 7 | RichardC | 2013/10/03 10:07 AM |
cheap would be in kindle fire | RichardC | 2013/10/03 10:12 AM |
$150 7" 800p Z2580 Dell Venue 7 | none | 2013/10/03 10:13 AM |
Samsung Galaxy Tab battery life | Michael S | 2013/10/03 01:18 PM |
Samsung Galaxy Tab battery life | none | 2013/10/03 02:17 PM |
Samsung Galaxy Tab battery life | Exophase | 2013/10/03 02:42 PM |
The decline of Itanium | none | 2013/09/29 01:15 AM |
The decline of Itanium | Doug S | 2013/09/29 10:25 AM |
The decline of Itanium | mas | 2013/09/29 11:23 AM |
Qualcomm? | David Kanter | 2013/09/29 10:45 PM |
Qualcomm? | none | 2013/09/30 12:36 AM |
Qualcomm? | Alberto | 2013/10/01 08:03 AM |
Qualcomm? | Alberto | 2013/10/01 12:03 PM |
A7 much faster at graphics than BayTrail | Thu | 2013/09/28 07:52 PM |
A7 much faster at graphics than BayTrail | Michael S | 2013/09/29 01:24 AM |
A7 much faster at graphics than BayTrail | Maynard Handley | 2013/09/29 08:41 AM |
A7 much faster at graphics than BayTrail | bakaneko | 2013/09/29 09:44 AM |
A7 much faster at graphics than BayTrail | Linus Torvalds | 2013/09/29 01:22 PM |
A7 much faster at graphics than BayTrail | none | 2013/09/29 02:37 PM |
The decline of Itanium | anoanon | 2013/09/28 03:14 AM |
The decline of Itanium | Doug S | 2013/09/28 10:44 AM |
The decline of Itanium | David Hess | 2013/09/28 08:31 AM |
The decline of Itanium | Kevin G | 2013/09/27 08:47 AM |
The decline of Itanium | David Hess | 2013/10/05 05:35 PM |
The decline of Itanium | Kevin G | 2013/10/06 07:55 AM |
The decline of Itanium | Michael S | 2013/10/06 08:13 AM |
The decline of Itanium | bakaneko | 2013/09/27 09:10 AM |
The decline of Itanium | someone | 2013/09/27 11:24 AM |
The decline of Itanium | EduardoS | 2013/09/27 12:39 PM |
The decline of Itanium | someone | 2013/09/27 01:38 PM |
The decline of Itanium | EduardoS | 2013/09/27 02:49 PM |
The decline of Itanium | someone | 2013/09/28 08:20 AM |
The decline of Itanium | EduardoS | 2013/09/28 10:05 AM |
The decline of Itanium | anon | 2013/09/27 08:22 PM |
The decline of Itanium | Maynard Handley | 2013/09/27 11:45 PM |
The decline of Itanium | anon | 2013/09/28 02:08 AM |
The decline of Itanium | EduardoS | 2013/09/28 10:08 AM |
The decline of Itanium | anon | 2013/09/28 04:17 PM |
The decline of Itanium | Michael S | 2013/09/29 02:29 AM |
The decline of Itanium | bakaneko | 2013/09/27 12:41 PM |
Difficulty of measuring performance from Architecture | Paul A. Clayton | 2013/09/27 02:23 PM |
Difficulty of measuring performance from Architecture | someone | 2013/09/27 03:46 PM |
Difficulty of measuring performance from Architecture | EduardoS | 2013/09/27 03:52 PM |
Difficulty of measuring performance from Architecture | someone | 2013/09/27 04:10 PM |
The decline of Itanium | Maynard Handley | 2013/09/27 04:09 PM |
The decline of Itanium | Michael S | 2013/09/28 10:19 AM |
why did you exclude EV7? | Michael S | 2013/09/28 10:16 AM |
why did you exclude EV7? | slacker | 2013/09/28 07:37 PM |
why did you exclude EV7? | Michael S | 2013/09/28 11:50 PM |
Wasn't Athlon XP also copper interconnect? (NT) | Paul A. Clayton | 2013/09/29 09:06 AM |
Wasn't Athlon XP also copper interconnect? | slacker | 2013/09/29 02:17 PM |
Was the SPEC CPU2000 result CU or Al? | Paul A. Clayton | 2013/09/30 04:14 PM |
Was the SPEC CPU2000 result CU or Al? | slacker | 2013/10/01 01:48 AM |
The decline of Itanium | Ricardo B | 2013/09/28 03:23 PM |
The decline of Itanium | Michael S | 2013/09/29 02:46 AM |
The decline of Itanium | Megol | 2013/09/27 10:02 AM |
The decline of Itanium | Michael S | 2013/09/28 12:31 PM |
Charlie re: Apple and ARM | Simon Farnsworth | 2013/09/25 03:06 AM |
Charlie re: Apple and ARM | anon | 2013/09/25 03:22 AM |
Charlie re: Apple and ARM | Simon Farnsworth | 2013/09/25 04:32 AM |
Charlie re: Apple and ARM | anon | 2013/09/25 04:59 AM |
Charlie re: Apple and ARM | David Kanter | 2013/09/25 12:26 PM |
Charlie re: Apple and ARM | anon | 2013/09/25 04:32 PM |
future of eDRAM | bakaneko | 2013/09/25 05:58 AM |
future of eDRAM | anon | 2013/09/25 06:43 AM |
future of eDRAM | bakaneko | 2013/09/25 08:00 AM |
future of eDRAM | anon | 2013/09/25 08:24 AM |
future of eDRAM | bakaneko | 2013/09/25 10:46 AM |
future of eDRAM | anon | 2013/09/25 04:39 PM |
future of eDRAM | bakaneko | 2013/09/26 09:51 AM |
future of eDRAM | David Kanter | 2013/09/28 09:29 AM |
future of eDRAM | bakaneko | 2013/09/27 04:23 AM |
Charlie re: Apple and ARM | Kevin G | 2013/09/25 06:18 AM |
Charlie re: Apple and ARM | anon | 2013/09/25 07:02 AM |
Charlie re: Apple and ARM | Maynard Handley | 2013/09/25 09:23 AM |
Charlie re: Apple and ARM | anon | 2013/09/25 09:59 AM |
Charlie re: Apple and ARM | Niels Jørgen Kruse | 2013/09/25 10:59 AM |
Charlie re: Apple and ARM | Maynard Handley | 2013/09/25 11:46 AM |
Charlie re: Apple and ARM | Doug S | 2013/09/25 01:15 PM |
POWER8 has 8 threads per core | Mark Roulo | 2013/09/25 03:18 PM |
Charlie re: Apple and ARM | someone | 2013/09/25 07:07 AM |
Thanks, very informative (NT) | anon | 2013/09/25 07:11 AM |
Keep in mind IBM has eDRAM elsewhere than POWER (NT) | anon | 2013/09/25 10:03 AM |
Charlie re: Apple and ARM | RichardC | 2013/09/25 06:12 AM |
It isn't just memory controllers | Mark Roulo | 2013/09/25 08:09 AM |
Charlie re: Apple and ARM | Foo_ | 2013/09/23 11:52 PM |
Charlie re: Apple and ARM | Drazick | 2013/09/23 09:29 AM |
Charlie re: Apple and ARM | Maynard Handley | 2013/09/23 10:55 AM |
Charlie re: Apple and ARM | Drazick | 2013/09/23 11:00 AM |
Charlie re: Apple and ARM | Michael S | 2013/09/23 03:01 PM |
Charlie re: Apple and ARM | Doug S | 2013/09/23 04:31 PM |
Charlie re: Apple and ARM | Maynard Handley | 2013/09/23 06:34 PM |
Charlie re: Apple and ARM | Alberto | 2013/09/24 12:11 PM |
Charlie re: Apple and ARM | Wilco | 2013/09/24 05:17 PM |
Charlie re: Apple and ARM | Doug S | 2013/09/24 07:44 PM |
Charlie re: Apple and ARM | anon | 2013/09/25 12:56 AM |
Charlie re: Apple and ARM | none | 2013/09/25 01:50 AM |
Charlie re: Apple and ARM | anon | 2013/09/25 02:06 AM |
Charlie re: Apple and ARM | Wilco | 2013/09/25 02:14 AM |
Charlie re: Apple and ARM | anon | 2013/09/25 02:28 AM |
Charlie re: Apple and ARM | Michael S | 2013/09/25 03:24 AM |
Charlie re: Apple and ARM | none | 2013/09/25 03:55 AM |
Charlie re: Apple and ARM | EduardoS | 2013/09/25 01:07 PM |
Charlie re: Apple and ARM | Doug S | 2013/09/25 09:01 AM |
Charlie re: Apple and ARM | Alberto | 2013/09/25 12:12 PM |
Charlie re: Apple and ARM | Maynard Handley | 2013/09/25 01:23 PM |
Charlie re: Apple and ARM | Wilco | 2013/09/25 01:45 AM |
Charlie re: Apple and ARM | Linus Torvalds | 2013/09/25 04:49 PM |
Charlie re: Apple and ARM | Michael S | 2013/09/26 09:52 AM |
Charlie re: Apple and ARM | Doug S | 2013/09/26 10:51 AM |
Animated GIF seems slow on iPads | Mark Roulo | 2013/09/26 12:04 PM |
Animated GIF seems slow on iPads | Doug S | 2013/09/26 01:07 PM |
Animated GIF seems slow on iPads | Mark Roulo | 2013/09/26 02:06 PM |
Animated GIF seems slow on iPads | Doug S | 2013/09/26 05:21 PM |
Animated GIF seems slow on iPads | rwessel | 2013/09/26 05:44 PM |
Animated GIF seems slow on iPads | sysanon | 2013/09/27 03:33 PM |
Animated GIF seems slow on iPads | Doug S | 2013/09/27 05:29 PM |
Animated GIF seems slow on iPads | sysanon | 2013/09/27 07:36 PM |
Animated GIF seems slow on iPads | Doug S | 2013/09/27 08:07 PM |
Animated GIF seems slow on iPads | anonymou5 | 2013/09/27 11:58 PM |
Animated GIF seems slow on iPads | J.Random Webmasta | 2013/09/28 12:11 AM |
Slow with Core i7 920 | Jouni Osmala | 2013/09/26 10:25 PM |
Animated GIF seems slow on iPads | NoSpammer | 2013/09/27 12:13 AM |
Charlie re: Apple and ARM | Maynard Handley | 2013/09/26 12:18 PM |
Charlie re: Apple and ARM | Doug S | 2013/09/26 01:19 PM |
Charlie re: Apple and ARM | Maynard Handley | 2013/09/26 01:35 PM |
Charlie re: Apple and ARM | John Poole | 2013/09/26 02:11 PM |
Charlie re: Apple and ARM | Doug S | 2013/09/26 05:31 PM |
Charlie re: Apple and ARM | John Poole | 2013/09/27 10:02 PM |
Firefox PDF reader (re: Charlie re: Apple and ARM) | David W | 2013/09/27 12:47 AM |
Firefox PDF reader (re: Charlie re: Apple and ARM) | David Kanter | 2013/09/28 09:09 AM |
Firefox PDF reader (re: Charlie re: Apple and ARM) | David Hess | 2013/09/28 09:21 AM |
Firefox PDF reader (re: Charlie re: Apple and ARM) | Michael S | 2013/09/28 10:00 AM |
Firefox PDF reader (re: Charlie re: Apple and ARM) | David Hess | 2013/09/28 10:27 AM |
Firefox PDF reader (re: Charlie re: Apple and ARM) | bakaneko | 2013/09/28 11:11 AM |
Firefox PDF reader (re: Charlie re: Apple and ARM) | Michael S | 2013/09/28 11:50 AM |
Firefox PDF reader (re: Charlie re: Apple and ARM) | EduardoS | 2013/09/28 12:50 PM |
Firefox PDF reader (re: Charlie re: Apple and ARM) | Michael S | 2013/09/28 01:05 PM |
Firefox PDF reader (re: Charlie re: Apple and ARM) | Doug S | 2013/09/28 04:15 PM |
Firefox PDF reader (re: Charlie re: Apple and ARM) | David Hess | 2013/09/28 07:03 PM |
Firefox PDF reader (re: Charlie re: Apple and ARM) | Gabriele Svelto | 2013/09/30 03:23 AM |
Firefox PDF reader (re: Charlie re: Apple and ARM) | Jukka Larja | 2013/09/30 06:23 AM |
Firefox PDF reader (re: Charlie re: Apple and ARM) | Doug S | 2013/09/30 07:19 PM |
Firefox PDF reader (re: Charlie re: Apple and ARM) | Jukka Larja | 2013/10/01 03:55 AM |
Firefox PDF reader (re: Charlie re: Apple and ARM) | Rob Thorpe | 2013/10/01 07:26 AM |
Firefox PDF reader (re: Charlie re: Apple and ARM) | Michael S | 2013/10/01 12:53 PM |
Adobe Acrobat reader start up time | Michael S | 2013/10/02 12:19 AM |
Adobe Acrobat reader start up time | bdcrazy | 2013/10/11 05:28 AM |
Firefox PDF reader - am I the only person who likes the default | Rob Thorpe | 2013/10/01 07:14 AM |
Firefox PDF reader - am I the only person who likes the default | j | 2013/10/01 10:12 AM |
There are two of us (or three) | Mark Roulo | 2013/10/01 12:15 PM |
Firefox PDF reader - am I the only person who likes the default | Rob Thorpe | 2013/10/01 03:05 PM |
Firefox PDF reader - am I the only person who likes the default | Symmetry | 2013/10/02 11:51 AM |
Firefox PDF reader - am I the only person who likes the default | Doug S | 2013/10/02 06:44 PM |
Firefox PDF reader - am I the only person who likes the default | rwessel | 2013/10/02 10:21 PM |
Firefox PDF reader - am I the only person who likes the default | Clemens Ladisch | 2013/10/02 11:20 PM |
Firefox PDF reader - am I the only person who likes the default | rwessel | 2013/10/03 12:12 AM |
Firefox PDF reader - am I the only person who likes the default | Symmetry | 2013/10/03 05:19 AM |
Firefox PDF reader - am I the only person who likes the default | Gabriele Svelto | 2013/10/03 01:05 AM |
Firefox PDF reader - am I the only person who likes the default | Doug S | 2013/10/03 09:15 AM |
Charlie re: Apple and ARM | John Poole | 2013/09/26 01:59 PM |
Charlie re: Apple and ARM | Maynard Handley | 2013/09/26 02:53 PM |
Charlie re: Apple and ARM | John Poole | 2013/10/01 09:55 PM |
Charlie re: Apple and ARM | Linus Torvalds | 2013/09/26 07:15 PM |
Charlie re: Apple and ARM | John Poole | 2013/10/01 09:45 PM |
Charlie re: Apple and ARM | Doug S | 2013/10/02 09:14 AM |
Charlie re: Apple and ARM | John Poole | 2013/10/02 09:03 PM |
Charlie re: Apple and ARM | anon | 2013/10/02 11:00 PM |
Charlie re: Apple and ARM | Doug S | 2013/10/03 09:08 AM |
Charlie re: Apple and ARM | Alberto | 2013/09/25 12:50 PM |
Charlie re: Apple and ARM | Ronald Maas | 2013/09/24 09:39 PM |