Why Pentium?

[kony]

Irrelevant to the FACT that your stupid pig ignorant
claim at the top is clearly just plain wrong.

Nope, they didn't start out quiet and then began whining a
few months later. If you can't hear it, GREAT, maybe...
I'd rather have normal hearing instead.

Never ever could bullshit its way out of a wet paper bag.

THERE WAS MORE THAN ONE FAN USED ON P3s, you
silly little pathetic excuse for an argumentative bullshit artist.

Yes, now would it make you feel better if I wrote that more
than one, and the ones used on Celerons did too?

What did you think, I only bought and sold one lone speed of
P3? LOL.

 

[kony]

Fraid so.


Never ever could bullshit its way out of a wet paper bag.

WITH CURRENT PROCESSORS, THE TIME IS SO SMALL
THAT ITS COMPLETELY INVISIBLE TO THE USER WITH
THE SMALLEST IMAGE POSSIBLE, you pathetic excuse
for an argumentative bullshit artist.

.... and as I wrote, it's only significant because of the
user response time being the bottleneck. Even with median
sized images, for example those from a 5 year old scanner or
cheap digicam, it's not hard to find several imaging filters
that you will be waiting on.

Maybe you don't have time to get up and get a
coffee/whatever, but you can't very well begin the next
filter the moment after you initiated the last one either,
it is a disruption to workflow directly related to CPU
speed. Of course there are other factors like memory amount
and speed but those too are seen to be increasing with the
age and cost of the systems with the faster CPU. One cannot
just discount a major portion of a system when that system
is doing ACTIVE PROCESSING of something, not just shuffling
files around.

 

[kony]

Pathetic, really.

Why would you think that an insult coming from someone who
disagrees, would have even the slightest weight to it at
all? From you Rod, it's expected, redundant, and just shows
you're out of valid arguments.

 

[kony]

Not a shred. You cant even manage to grasp THAT
MORE THAN ONE BOXED FAN WAS USED ON P3s.

I never claimed there was only one single fan. They were
all made quite similar though, as for the shape, bearings,
manufacturer, and had the same problem. Once Tualatins
came out they changed them some but they actually went even
further in the wrong direction using a fan with even worse
diameter:thickness ratio and still an equally small center
hub and bearings. To fix this they could have spec'd a
larger bearing(s), thicker blades, and lower RPM. Their
blade design also seems to have required a different type of
plastic that was also harder to form without flash on the
edges which created more wasteful turbulence pre-'sink
instead of ON the 'sink.

... all P3 boxed fans developed BEARING WHINE within months.

Why yes, I think you're starting to get a clue.

 

[kony]

On Sun, 9 Jul 2006 13:09:57 +1000, "Rod Speed"

..

No surprise that you got the bums rush.

I never expect 100% agreement, but in the end I have
reliable CPU cooling. No matter how much someone else wants
to disagree, the fans keep spinning fine. Hmmmm.

 

[Rod Speed]

Yep.

they didn't start out quiet and then began whining a few months later.

Thats the opposite of your drivel right at the top.

If you can't hear it, GREAT, maybe...
I'd rather have normal hearing instead.

Never ever could bullshit its way out of a wet paper bag.

My hearing is fine thanks. I chose to replace the hard drive and
power supply in that PVR to get a noticeably quieter system.

Yes, now would it make you feel better if I wrote that
more than one, and the ones used on Celerons did too?

Never ever could bullshit its way out of a wet paper bag.

If ALL the P3s did what you claim in that top para, there'd
be plenty of howling about it. There isnt, you're desperately
attempting to bullshit your way out of your predicament and
fooling absolutely no one at all, as always.

What did you think, I only bought and sold one lone speed of P3?
Nope.

LOL.

Never ever could bullshit its way out of a wet paper bag.

 

[Rod Speed]

... and as I wrote, it's only significant because
of the user response time being the bottleneck.

Wrong again WITH THE SMALLEST IMAGE POSSIBLE.

Even with median sized images, for example those from
a 5 year old scanner or cheap digicam, it's not hard to
find several imaging filters that you will be waiting on.

Separate matter entirely to that stupid pig ignorant
drivel ABOUT THE SMALLEST IMAGE POSSIBLE.

Maybe you don't have time to get up and get a
coffee/whatever, but you can't very well begin the next
filter the moment after you initiated the last one either,
it is a disruption to workflow directly related to CPU speed.

NOT WITH THE SMALLEST IMAGE POSSIBLE IT ISNT.

Of course there are other factors like memory amount and
speed but those too are seen to be increasing with the age
and cost of the systems with the faster CPU. One cannot
just discount a major portion of a system when that system
is doing ACTIVE PROCESSING of something, not just
shuffling files around.

Separate matter entirely TO THAT PIG IGNORANT
DRIVEL ABOUT THE SMALLEST IMAGE POSSIBLE.

 

[Rod Speed]

Why would you think that an insult coming from someone who
disagrees, would have even the slightest weight to it at
all? From you Rod, it's expected, redundant, and just shows
you're out of valid arguments.

Never ever could bullshit its way out of a wet paper bag.

 

[Rod Speed]

I never claimed there was only one single fan.

I never ever said you did.

They were all made quite similar though, as for the shape,
bearings, manufacturer, and had the same problem.

Have fun explaining mine and chrisv's which never did develop bearing whine.

Once Tualatins came out they changed them some
but they actually went even further in the wrong
direction using a fan with even worse diameter:thickness
ratio and still an equally small center hub and bearings.

Separate matter entirely to WHETHER THEY ALL
DEVELOPED BEARING WHINE IN MONTHS.

To fix this they could have spec'd a larger
bearing(s), thicker blades, and lower RPM.
Their blade design also seems to have required
a different type of plastic that was also harder to
form without flash on the edges which created more
wasteful turbulence pre-'sink instead of ON the 'sink.

Separate matter entirely to WHETHER THEY ALL
DEVELOPED BEARING WHINE IN MONTHS.

Why yes, I think you're starting to get a clue.

Never ever could bullshit its way out of a wet paper bag.

Lets have a look at that again, BEFORE you flagrantly
dishonestly molested the quoting shall we ?

<< Separate matter entirely to your stupid pig ignorant claim that
Looks just a tad different now doesnt it, you pathetic
excuse for flagrantly dishonest bullshit artist.

 

[Rod Speed]

I never expect 100% agreement, but in the end I have reliable
CPU cooling. No matter how much someone else wants
to disagree, the fans keep spinning fine. Hmmmm.

So do ALL of mine thanks, child.

 

[David Maynard]

David Maynard writes:




The default alarm termperature on the GPU of my Nvidia graphics card
is 125° C, which somewhat surprised me (seems awfully high). It
usually idles at 47° C, at gets up to around 60° when some games run.

Sounds high because you're used to CPU temp specs.

Where is the temp monitor? Die temp? Because operating junction temps to
150C are common. (the Mil Spec 125C I spoke of is ambient)

 

[David Maynard]

David Maynard writes:




Only a very tiny minority of business users are running such exotica.
A lot of machines never run much more than Outlook, Excel, Word, and
Internet Explorer.

Well, I'm not going to quibble with opinions like "tiny" but just wanted to
note that business's do more than word processing.

 

[David Maynard]

David Maynard writes:




True. And if the AMDs had just done that, I might still have them.

You must have misunderstood my sentence because that they didn't 'stop
doing something', or consuming power (possibly current latch-up too), is
why they stayed hot till power was removed.

 

[George Macdonald]

I don't think you have the same thing in mind when you talk about
decision tools. Classic decision tools--the kind hyped by the
industry and trade rags--are scarce. Excel spreadsheets don't count.

The same as "what" exactly? I've no idea what you mean by "classic" but
the field of Operations Research & Management Science is rich with
specialized software... anything from bare tools to integrated vertical
solutions.

Decision tools are extremely difficult to create because they require
an understanding of business that almost no executive actually
possesses.

The tools do not need to be created and are available from umm, vendors...
who err, specialize in such stuff. The bare tools, e.g. simulation, LP,
etc. and modelling in general, are not industry specific and can be applied
to *any* enterprise; if the buyer lacks the expertise to actualize his
model/solution, like I said there are vertical, integrated solutions which
are applicable.

 

[George Macdonald]

That company I worked for had only 50 employees, at its peak, so our
business software needs were modest and could be handled just
accounting and cost estimation packages. Most of the needed strategy
and tactics consisted of making the salesmen go out and find customers
rather than just sit around in the office, providing technicians with
everything they wanted, and keeping the owner's son out of the way.

Family businesses are often umm, problematic. There are, however many
different tools just sitting around waiting to be discovered by people who
need them, even smallish enterprises. As an example, from someone who
posts in in c.s.i.p.h.c., there's SizeFitter by Johannes Andersen
http://sizefitter.com - I figure there are thousands, if not millions, of
businesses which could make profitable use of this tool. The only trouble
is that the potential buyer often doesn't realize he has a "problem" which
has a better "solution".

BTW I am not an associate of Johannes - I just think his tool is very
elegant, clever and probably under-utilized.

 

[George Macdonald]

I choose based on past experience. After being burned twice by AMD
(in more ways than one), I've decided to switch to Intel. I know that
Intel doesn't have the specific deficiencies that caused a problem for
me with AMD, and there is no _disadvantage_ to switching to Intel, so
why not?

AMD is not the one who burned you and their current CPUs have been superior
for ~3 years.

Yes, it is. The CPU should not continue to run as it overheats.
Intel CPUs don't.

Intel's have claimed to shutdown and/or throttle since the P!!!s IIRC,
though it didn't always help. AMD processors don't "continue to run" any
longer and run considerably cooler even at full tilt - you're missing out
on safety & energy waste.

The one that burned up wouldn't boot reliably, as I recall.


Defective design is a factor here. The processor was a fire hazard.
In a different context, it would not have been able to get a UL rating
because of the fire risk.

Defective? That would mean that every PC processor made before Intel
succeeded with its thermal triggers "defective". Uhh, it's not the
processor which was a fire hazard and would fail to get UL rating, if
that's the case, but the system.

I don't remember. Athlon Thunderbird something. I only recall that
it was AMD.

I have one in the office which has been running happily for 4-5 years -
sounds to me like you found an OEM who did not use the AMD boxed fan and
cheaped out with a POS to coax a few $$ into his margin.

 

[George Macdonald]

I've used multiprocessor systems before, and snappiness is not a
function of processor speed.

To a certain extent it can be but we're not talking about processor
speed... more to the point, with dual cores, and to a lesser extent with
HyperThreading, there is a definite improvement in snapiness: the TLB and
cache doesn't have to be flushed and refilled -- note that "refill" of the
TLB requires walking page tables -- on every task switch. I can assure you
the effect is noticable instantly.

 

[Plato]

AMD is not the one who burned you and their current CPUs have been superior
for ~3 years.

Not superior, just a better purchase.

 

[Mxsmanic]

Where is the temp monitor? Die temp?

I presume so. It's the NVIDIA driver reporting the temp for the
graphics card, so wherever the driver gets it from is the source.

Because operating junction temps to
150C are common. (the Mil Spec 125C I spoke of is ambient)

Then why are the limits so much lower for CPUs?

 

[Mxsmanic]

AMD is not the one who burned you and their current CPUs have been superior
for ~3 years.

Intel CPUs work just fine. I see no reason to change.

Intel's have claimed to shutdown and/or throttle since the P!!!s IIRC,
though it didn't always help. AMD processors don't "continue to run" any
longer and run considerably cooler even at full tilt - you're missing out
on safety & energy waste.

I don't want to waste safety or energy.

Defective? That would mean that every PC processor made before Intel
succeeded with its thermal triggers "defective".

If other processors already had it, yes.

Uhh, it's not the
processor which was a fire hazard and would fail to get UL rating, if
that's the case, but the system.

Yes, that's what UL told me. Lucky for AMD.

I have one in the office which has been running happily for 4-5 years -
sounds to me like you found an OEM who did not use the AMD boxed fan and
cheaped out with a POS to coax a few $$ into his margin.

I've already mentioned that it was not the stock fan. It was a very
cheap sleeve-bearing fan and a cheap heatsink. The manufacturer was
SonBook. The CPU fan on one of the machines failed a few days after I
got it. Another took about two weeks, and I think a third lasted for
almost a year. Worse yet, the failing fans would turn when first
turned on, but would stop shortly thereafter, so when I first checked
things, it looked like all the fans were running.

There were other shortcuts in the machines. The CPU was almost behind
the PSU, so even with the fan running, it was still hot. The
components were not top quality. After the SonBook fiasco, I started
building my own machines.