Please register or login. There are 0 registered and 412 anonymous users currently online. Current bandwidth usage: 326.30 kbit/s September 28 - 11:56pm EDT 
Hardware Analysis
Forums Product Prices

  Latest Topics 

More >>


  You Are Here: 
/ Forums / Mr. Intel, Ms. AMD, where's my performance?

 Date Written 
Continue Reading on Page: 1, 2, Next >>
Wayne Bradford Oct 15, 2004, 08:11am EDT Report Abuse
I agree it's time to cut the strings on old technology.
There are enough cards supporting that old technology
out there now.

Want to enjoy fewer advertisements and more features? Click here to become a Hardware Analysis registered user.
Gamerz Oct 15, 2004, 08:39am EDT Report Abuse
I read somewhere that all our processors, which are more advanced versions of lower performance originals, are based on an error.

Shadow_Ops_Airman1 Oct 15, 2004, 08:46am EDT Report Abuse
what would the new standard be called for the instructions, remember its legacy support that people want aswell.

AMD Athlon XP-M 2500+ (133x14= 1867MHz) (209x11= 2299MHz)
DFI LP NF2 Ultra-B (Hellfire 3EG Rev2)
Antec SX800, Neo HE 500, 4 Antec 8CM Fans
Thermalright SI-97 1 Antec Tricool 12CM Fan
CL SB XFi Xtreme Music
2x Barracuda HDs (250/400)
2x Samsung Write
Richard Bailey Oct 15, 2004, 09:03am EDT Report Abuse
The IA64, the instruction set and architecture in the low sales Itanium was Intel's answer to a new instruction set that was not limited by the problems of x86. However, due to poor marketing and industry support it is going the way of the Betamax and the SparQ Drive leaving us with the VHS and Zip Disks we have today.

Tim Schwartz Oct 15, 2004, 09:06am EDT Report Abuse
If they came out with a whole new technology to base computers on it would never be too soon. There's a market for the old and believe me there would be a market for the cutting edge, even if it's not compatible with the old. Sometimes you have to let go of the past to be able to move ahead.

J Doyle Oct 15, 2004, 09:28am EDT Report Abuse
An alternative to the x86 already exists, it's PPC. Market forces determined the sucess of the Intel architecture, not the architecture itself. It simply is not the "better mousetrap", just better at being commercially successfull. Intel's success is directly tied to Microsoft's success. Hate Microsoft or not, Intel dominates the processor market because Microsoft dominates the software market. A divorce from x86 would require a change in software. It is entirely possible that the performance limit of the x86 has been reached, or at least is very close on the horizon.

Malcolm Napier Oct 15, 2004, 12:41pm EDT Report Abuse
I think we should wait 20 more years for a new x86 instruction set - that way we will have a much better understanding of how the last 20 messed up the PC.

Jim English Oct 15, 2004, 12:50pm EDT Report Abuse
I seem to remember the same argument put forward in an Amiga magazine ten years ago - that the Motorola 680x0 chips were later and better designed than the 80x86 chips. And that there were still some instructions in the latest incarnation that were present in the original 4004, designed by Ted Hoff in '72!

Adam Miles Oct 15, 2004, 12:58pm EDT Report Abuse
I bought a cutting edge Alienware system in January 2003, so now 21 months ago. It was laden with a 3.06ghz FSB533 P4 (fastest at the time) and a Radeon 9700 Pro, also fastest at the time. It only had 512MB of 1066 RDRAM, as 1gig would have been just a bit too expensive at the time.

So, 21 months later and how is it looking? Well, the 3.06 runs rock stable at 3.3ghz, and the 9700 pro has about a 6% overclock on it. Sure the graphics card is starting to show its age as the latest cards stomp all over it, but the processor still holds its own more than well enough.

At the rate processor "performance" and raw clock speed is progressing, it won't look that dated at all come its 3rd birthday. I know by the time by PII 350 was 3 years old, I wanted to throw it out the window, I don't think the same will happen this time round!

Adam Miles

Alex-E-C-396 Oct 15, 2004, 01:02pm EDT Report Abuse

Alexander E. Calvo
Steve Vickers Oct 15, 2004, 01:28pm EDT Report Abuse
I have firmly believed this is true for the last couple of years....that greed has taken over power from technology......It is past time that the engineers start to think outa the box and if MS dosnt want to play, well then I say sink or swim....Hardware should definalty out pace software and not be handcuffed by it.

Asus A8N32-SLI DELUXE MOBO w/AMD 64 4000+ CPU
(2)BFG 7800 GTX OC 256 DDR3 GPU PCI-E
4 Gigs Corsair CMX1024-3500LLPRO
160 Gig Maxtor Diamond SATA 7200 rpm
160 Gig Maxtor Diamond SATA 7200 rpm
2 Dell E193FP 19" LCD's
Memorex DVD/CD R/W
Memorex CD/RW
Alex-E-C-396 Oct 15, 2004, 01:43pm EDT Report Abuse
Hardware should outpace software there are only a few pieces of software that out pace the hardware. Typicaly they are artistic programs. They should have companies like ADOBE recommend and develop a machine that they recommend. Then the software companies should "react" with the holy poop batman since the new processors can do this lets change the software so they will outperform the old stuff.

Alexander E. Calvo
sandy7m Oct 15, 2004, 02:10pm EDT Report Abuse
Talking about starting again why not scrap windows all together. I am now on Windows XP SP2 and it has more bugs than a Mexican bed and breakfast.

There is nothing surer then death, taxes and crap from Windows XP
Corvus Raven Oct 15, 2004, 02:37pm EDT Report Abuse
<quote>Gamerz 21st Century :

I read somewhere that all our processors, which are more advanced versions of lower performance originals, are based on an error.</quote>

yeah. by intel.

ASUS A7N8X Deluxe PCB 2.00 w/ BIOS 1005 (cause? Dunno.. ATM)
AMD XP 2800+ @ 0.0 GHz 0MHz FSB (overheating for no appearent reason)
(2) - Corsair XMS512-3500C2 (5-2-2-2T) @ 0MHz
ATI Radeon 9700 Pro @0
Enermax 500W p/s (ok.
Alex-E-C-396 Oct 15, 2004, 04:11pm EDT Report Abuse
I currently have the Windows XP service update 2 installed along with Mediaplayer 10 both which are rampant with bugs. Bill gates has designed and engineered a product so many companies must work hard to get around the bugs. What do you people think about scrapping the processor's and going for a new but backwards compatible 64bit technology?

Alexander E. Calvo
Corvus Raven Oct 15, 2004, 04:39pm EDT Report Abuse
Umm.. It works? :)

BSD.. or similar?

ASUS A7N8X Deluxe PCB 2.00 w/ BIOS 1005 (cause? Dunno.. ATM)
AMD XP 2800+ @ 0.0 GHz 0MHz FSB (overheating for no appearent reason)
(2) - Corsair XMS512-3500C2 (5-2-2-2T) @ 0MHz
ATI Radeon 9700 Pro @0
Enermax 500W p/s (ok.
Jose Garcia Oct 15, 2004, 05:27pm EDT Report Abuse

Maybe Moore's Law is in a mutation stage? We may have to wait a little longer to get greater performance.

If you read the DNA article, it's obvious that computing technology is getting ready to leapfrog. Like I asked about Moore's law, Is it mutating? Maybe computer technology won't double every 18 months(or two years.) Maybe Computer technology will Multiply Exponentialy?

Regarding the current 64 bit technology: It's nice that AMD took the initiative in the direction we all want to see. What get's me is that Microsoft did not come through as promised. Where's linux where we really need it?

J R Oct 15, 2004, 10:33pm EDT Report Abuse
Huh? Where in your article is AMD even mentioned? Your comparison focuses almost exclusively on the Pentium family. Also, the fact is that improved performance has to come from two sources: hardware and software. So far we've seen a dearth of software written to take advantage of the features of today's latest chips. For example, hyperthreading's been out for the longest while, yet few titles have been written specifically to take advantage of it.

Regarding x86 technology, that's so deeply ingrained in the mainstream computing world that it's gonna take a VERY long while to go away. Lots of people blame Microsoft's dominance for this, and they may indeed be correct about that. But as anyone who's had to write code that runs on x86 and Itanium or other architectures can tell you, ensuring compatibility across the board is no picnic, unless you wish to write in Java, in which case you can pretty much toss high performance out the window. Indeed, aside from highly intensive processes, most applications that people use don't need the extra boost that would give anyway. Intel and AMD are moving to 64 bit extensions, however. Hopefully this will eventually lead to end-to-end 64 bit computing, but I wouldn't hold my breath. The cost of implementing such a significant change is too great for the general computing population, and developers are in the biz to make money. If the larger market can't afford it, it's not gonna be produced. Us hardcore guys will have to be little more patient.

Stuart Pollock Oct 16, 2004, 06:13am EDT Report Abuse
I agree that CPU's are rather on the slow side today what I expected when I last upgraded my PC 2 years ago. I agree that moore's law is not holding true at this moment in time, and some radical work need to be done to get us to twice the processing speed we had back in 2002... Considering my rig contains a P4 2.54 CPU I didn't particually want to upgrade until I saw at least a 4Ghz processor... but 5Ghz should of been around by now...

I agree partly with the comments about graphics card GPU's, go back 5 years and you'd be lucky to get a 32MB card, now 128MB is the norm, and gamers and games developers and people manipulating graphics are running 256MB (or nice special clustered machines). But we are still only at around 866Mhz with the processors on these boards (or somewhere around there), got a feeling that we are going to get GPU's within the next 2 years that are well in the Ghz ranges..

With regards to latency, do we really need floppy drives? and IDE hard drives and IDE based CD-ROM's or DVD drives?
We have USB pens, and SATA hard drives and look what we are starting to see with the Plextor 712SA (SATA DVD/RW). Most the the perpherials we can buy now are USB based, so no need for PS/2 keyboards and mice, or parellel for our printers.....

I say drop support as standard on all motherboards for these old aging devices.... only allow SATA, and USB, Firewire and PCI-E.. If people still want Serial or Parellel or PS/2 ports let them buy extender cards...

The removal of latency should remove alot of the bottlenecks in our systems, and make the design and dev of a newer motherboard alot easier...

With regards to the cpu instruction set... alot of the instructions are still used... (apart for the one on the first pentium that couldn't divide properly!!)... yes i could do with optimising the instruction set, but they do a pretty good job...

As for software... yes Linux have a 64bit distro, which is great, but in a business enviroment MS is still the way people will go, and yet again like with the internet MS are slow to see the potencial and hurry up and release their 64Bit edition's of XP (Home, Pro and Media Centre)...

I would personally like to see a market that has cutting edge PC's and technology... give consumers the option like they did with DDR and SDRAM provide boards with both (new and old connecting technologies) and new with only new technologies... let people choose there upgrade path...

Gamerz Oct 16, 2004, 06:26am EDT Report Abuse
I say scrap legacy, Intel and Microsoft combined can force the whole world to upgrade, sure, we'll have to buy new systems, but at least we'll have stability and increased performance.

Jason Maxfield Oct 16, 2004, 07:13am EDT Report Abuse
just curious, what exactly are we suppose to see increased performance from? I have a AMD 2800+ with 1 gig of dual channel RAM, 2 80 GB ATA/133 HDD's, Abit NF7-S v.2 mobo and a 9800 Pro gfx card. this thing is running stock numbers, meaning no overclocking and I'm completely satisfied with it's execution and speed.

the point I'm trying to get to is that where is the performance u are looking for? surely any normal apps are gonna load at the snap of ur fingers with a computer such as mine. the only thing my computer even needs to have a higher performance in would be games and graphical apps, other than that everything on my computer loads fast. I don't even have a 'fast' computer compared to the new CPU's and other hardware that are out there and nothign I run but games is where i'd need anything faster for better performance.

how can anyone need things like IE or windows media to open up any faster than 1 to 5 seconds, cuz in general that's about how long my pc takes to open most apps.

all those systems people get to have cutting edge performance are kidding themselves. specialized apps and games are the only need to have those higher end performing computers.

but, I will agree that the x86 architecture is dated and probably nearing it's useful end in the pc's we see today. people are expecting to see 4 and 5 ghz chips, well that might just be an indicator that they have indeed reached the limit of what the x86 chips can do. Microsoft owns the planet as far as what OS is gonna be used on machines everywhere, so until they change the way their OS' operate we are just gonna have to make due with the current chips and software availible.

just so u know, I'd surely like to have a faster pc, because most of what I do on my pc is play MMO's, and u can always use extra performance when playing games on your pc! in fact I think the games are getting too intense of like doom 3 are very taxing on my system and I have to run it in 800 by 600 just to get a decent 40 to 45 fps with graphics on high. far cry looks awesome as well, but it's a killer on my rig too, although not as bad as doom 3.

I think enough performance is out there as it is.MS just needs to make an OS that will friggen work without needing patches every week to get rid of bugs. BTW, I i'm still using XP home with SP1 cuz SP2 is just a load of dung! so much for the 'big fix' of XP!

better apps imo will make more of an impact in performace than just the hardware itself.

Continue Reading on Page: 1, 2, Next >>



  Topic Tools 
RSS UpdatesRSS Updates

A weekly newsletter featuring an editorial and a roundup of the latest articles, news and other interesting topics.

Please enter your email address below and click Subscribe.