text:
Dual Core Linux Performance: Two Penguins are Better than Oneby Kristopher Kubicki on 7/1/2005 5:55 AM EST
- Posted in
- Linux
69 Comments
Back to Article
sweatshopking - Saturday, May 09, 2009 - linkmaybe we should take the linux tab off the top since nobody has updated since '05.... Reply
PrincessNybor - Sunday, June 21, 2009 - linkI was just going to say the same thing. If Anandtech isn't going to cover Linux, then just remove the tab and call it a day. If you are going to even pretend to make Linux a priority, then perhaps at least ONE article per YEAR would be a nice way to start. No articles since 2005 is just embarrassing.
Ryan offered that Ubuntu article well over a year ago, and has offered nothing but excuses since then. I realize you are all busy, and I don't fault him for anything besides not coming out and saying that Linux isn't a priority at Anandtech. Reply
rossmcdonald - Thursday, September 11, 2008 - linkDidn't AT talk about doing a linux for a month article many months ago? Reply
Milleman - Sunday, September 14, 2008 - linkYepp! He/they did!
What happened to that one? They've probably lost it down the drain somewhere. Or is M$ paying them to not favor any other O/S now...? Somehow it seems that AT lost all interrest in Linux. Bad move... Reply
forkd - Monday, November 17, 2008 - linkI agree, Anandtech wasn't a bad source of linux info 'til this article stopped everything.
I'm not really upset but I am a little disappointed.
At some point they should take the Linux tab off of the website.
Years ago I subscribed to consumerreports.com for information on products I was considering on purchasing. I quickly realized that most of the articles on things i looked for were out dated by years.
Of course I never paid for my anandtech subscription so I can't complain about them leaning toward more profitable press.
Milleman - Sunday, June 15, 2008 - linkHello??
Is this the latest Linux article from Anand, made 3 years ago...?
Come on... Reply
fstratzero - Saturday, March 22, 2008 - linkI'd say testing linux is freaking hard to do. I'm a Gentoo linux user.
And having complied tons of kernels over the years, performance can range greatly in what options you use in your kernel. I found that the CFQ scheduler can hurt performance since it tries to spread out cpu usage evenly between all processes.
That and also with linux you could assign a single process to a single core. Alternatively you could "nice" the application ie lower priority and still have a really usable system.
People in our forums will compile stuff on one cpu and use the other for playing games while having tons of crap running in the background, and report their seemingly invincible performance feeling.
Although I don't know much about Suse, I'd say this review is pretty well done for people that don't "get under the hood." Yet if you do get your hands a little wet with nice and taskset, you can do just about anything and hardly feel a slow down. Reply
orbatos - Sunday, November 05, 2006 - linkWhy no Shake vs. Shake, sure 3.5 isn't available, but 3.01(?) would be fine. Where's GIMP on windows? NewTek's LightWave® 3D 7.5b != ScreamerNet 7.5b , Why not go Blender vs. Blender or Maya vs. Maya? Who uses Mozilla Composer as an alternative to Dreamweaver as opposed to the myriad of other available web dev software? Outlook? what about Thunderbird on Windows? XMMS vs. iTunes doesn't make sense, they're different types of applications, try Rhythmbox. WinZip vs. Gzip doesn't make sense, try comparing a GUI tool. MS Office vs. OO.o, at least try the windows versions! If you're comparing workalikes as opposed to the same software, don't compare Nero vs. Nero, the Linux version is terrible.
Suggestion: WaveLab is a do-all of audio manipulation, not the type of software that has direct analog under Linux, try looking at suites of software that can be used to the same effect all through a similar interface (e.g. JACK). Antivirus? ClamAV sounds decent, did you even look? Reply
hojit - Tuesday, July 12, 2005 - linkHas any one pointed out the mod15 error using the sil3112/3114 and the seagate hd's the hardware in the article seems to suggest a conflict on the amd system. I had this same issue and it killed all my speeds for things like transcoding and any thing hd intencive. Reply
MarcusAsleep - Saturday, July 09, 2005 - linkHowdy!
I was just wondering what kernel and kernel settings you were using. Since the article was on multi-tasking it seems especially relevent since the development of low-latency/preemptable options in recent years!
Any clue?
Mark. Reply
jamori - Wednesday, July 06, 2005 - linkFor the web browsing multitasking scenario...
"Even with additional instances of FireFox, the import times are much faster than the Windows counterpart of this benchmark. "
maybe i'm missing something, but the SLOWEST time on Windows is only about 30s slower than the FASTEST time on linux. The X2 4200+ is 45s slower in linux...
The chart for the compile while gaming (gaming benchmark 2) is pointless since it doesn't show -j3 for the single core processors. Even on single core processors, there is some benefit to be had in situations where job1 is waiting on the disk, job2 can finish its compile and in turn wait on the disk while job1 uses the CPU.
For instance: the way it is (with the -j1 setting) the equivalently clocked 4200+ and 3500+ perform about the same. What's to say they won't with -j3 as well? Reply
rbochan - Wednesday, July 06, 2005 - linkComment: I enjoyed the article...it may or may not be biased, but coupled with the community's comments enabled me to get the sense of relative performance I was hoping for.
My Environment: I currently have an Athlon 3800+ configuration, 1 GB 2-2-2-5 Corsair Memory, and write Fortran77 programs to do simulation. Recently changing last year's GCC compiler to Intel's 9.0 auto-parallelizing compiler yielded a 31% decrease in run time. I do simulations that need to be done dozens of times a week that take about 15 hours apiece. These are heavy in floating point calculations with some trigonometric functions as well. This is done for fun (I am retired).
My Question: I am planning (in about 6 to 8 months) to upgrade to either a Four Dual-Core Opteron system (fastest chips then available) or a Four Processor Itanium-2 System. This is strictly for the simulation (number crunching) application. Comparisons in this arena are even more difficult to come by than those in this article. You guys do not seem short on opinion and I would appreciate yours...plus any references you would suggest to help figure out which way to go.
snorre - Tuesday, July 05, 2005 - link#54, I agree. Kristopher Kubicki has been biased towards Intel ever since he joined Anandtech, and there have always been some issues with all the articles he has been involved in.
Why are there no 64-bit large-scale benchmarks, requiring 4GB+ of RAM ?
And why didn't he include Athlon 64-X2 4400+, 4600+ or 4800+ ?
And please also include some real SMP benchmarks instead of all these stupid multitasking benchmarks that nobody cares about anyways.
DrMrLordX - Sunday, July 03, 2005 - link#49, the real problem is that Kubicki's articles never have the detail of benchmarks carried out under Windows XP. We get fewer benchmarks and less hardware tested. Sure, there aren't as many programs under Linux available, perhapss, but that's no reason for him to cut out all single-app tests. People will frequently be running one single-threade or multithreaded app on dual-core CPUs, and they will also be running only two apps at once. Neither such scenario is represented well in this benchmark.
This article does not provide enough information to draw conclusions about which CPU will be best under Linux. Reply
sMashPiranha - Saturday, July 02, 2005 - linkSeemed a little Intel biased, but who doesn't have a bias? Informative nonetheless. Reply
tommy2q - Saturday, July 02, 2005 - linksomeone needs to be fired Reply
sprockkets - Saturday, July 02, 2005 - linkfunny, the web page says 51 comments, last comment by ElFenix on Jul 1,2005 at 11:50pm when my comment above is 51 at 12:03 AM on Jul 2 Reply
sprockkets - Saturday, July 02, 2005 - linkfor Steinberg Wave lab, how about Audacity? GLAME?
Doesn't Nerolinux use the command line cdrecord and such anyhow? Reply
ElFenix - Friday, July 01, 2005 - linkjust a couple minor nits to pick, and this goes back to my whole 'you guys really need to hire an articles editor' thing that i've been harping on for 2 or 3 years
on page 8, it says haplessly, where you should probably have happily. haplessly isn't a very positive word.
and, as someone else has already pointed out, the manchester is not the $558 processor in this round up.
if you get in a faster core (maybe a 1 meg l2 cache version), could you please update the article? thanks. Reply
JarredWalton - Friday, July 01, 2005 - link4400+ would have been nice, but it's hard to get all the CPUs we'd like for every article. The 4800+ is in a league of its own as far as price, so including that would dictate that we also include the P4XE 840. Delaying articles for a few weeks while we try to get CPUs sorted out is not very useful either..There will be future articles, so don't get too worried. Reply
juhl - Friday, July 01, 2005 - linkI see that "Norton AntiVirus 2004" is listed with "No Suggestions yet" in the "Linux Application" column. I'd like to make a suggestion : ClamAV - ClamAV is a very capable free virus scanner that runs on Linux - check it out at http://www.clamav.net/ Reply
Hacp - Friday, July 01, 2005 - linkHe clearly stated that this test was based on the best bang for the buck. For all of you who wanted to see tests with higher end processors, you should have stopped reading the article and waited for one that met your needs. Don't complain and ask for stuff that the article was not designed to inform us about. Reply
fishbits - Friday, July 01, 2005 - linkWhy bother to test the 840 D and draw no conclusions about it? And can you at least fix the price you quote in the one-sided swipe at the X2? I've given up on your explaining why the price of the 840 isn't also "paying through the nose," but at least fix the obvious error either in the text or the price list above it.
"we have left a lot of not-so-subtle hints as to our feelings concerning performance between the two"
Ah, you were talking about Windows and Linux there. Fits for CPUs too in this case. Reply
semo - Friday, July 01, 2005 - linklisten up
everyone who needs the anandtech next gen console articles just email me. i printed them out to read in the bus/train and i can make some scans.
firstname.lastname@example.com Reply
Avalon - Friday, July 01, 2005 - linkYou guys need to remember that this is Linux, so for everyone out there hollering that this article contradicts all the others out there that you read, all the others out there that you did read were most likely Windows based. Reply
DrMrLordX - Friday, July 01, 2005 - linkI agree that including only the X2 4200+ is a mistake. For ages, we saw benchmarks of new AMD cpus vs every Intel proc in the field, regardless of price. Kubicki shows up and insists on culling all AMD cpus from the lineup except one priced similarly(or even priced lower than) the Intel offerings in the test. I remember his initial, and rather controversial, article in which he did Linux benchmarks with a 3.6 ghz P4 vs a A64 3500+ Newcastle. Stupid! Where's the 4400+ and 4800+? If you don't have the hardware, DON'T DO THE REVIEW. If AMD has superior processors out at a much higher price, that's because AMD has better chips right now, and they damn well ought to be included in the review as well. Throw in an 840EE if you're so inclined.
FURTHERMORE, where are the single-app tests and dual-app tests? All we have are contrived multitasking tests. This is about 1/3rd of the entire content of Anandtech's initial X2 review in a Windows environment. The Pentium Ds don't look so great when you put them into a scenario in which it's running one or two apps alone. Funny how Kubicki neglected to run any such tests in this article.
This article has too little hardware, and too few tests. Thumbs down. Reply
KristopherKubicki - Friday, July 01, 2005 - linkWhere do you see that? It should be 3.3.4
Kristopher Reply
allanw - Friday, July 01, 2005 - linkgcc3.4.5? That doesn't even exist! :) Reply
xtknight - Friday, July 01, 2005 - link#39 - I meant why? Reply
KristopherKubicki - Friday, July 01, 2005 - linkxtknight: Yes.
Kristopher Reply
xtknight - Friday, July 01, 2005 - linkWhy was FireFox 1.0.2 used on Win32 and 1.0.4 used on Linux? Just wondered. Reply
KristopherKubicki - Friday, July 01, 2005 - linkSomething is wrong with the graph on the Compilation test (the -j3 for the dual core Athlon was in the Pentium 660 slot). We only ran -j3 on the dual core chips. I redid the graph and it should be rendering correctly now.
Kristopher Reply
suryad - Friday, July 01, 2005 - link#34 great question. I was about to ask that but you beat me to it. Reply
smn198 - Friday, July 01, 2005 - link#22 Give him a break - The removal of the 2nd xbox vs ps article meant that this had to come out a day early. Reply
Kocur - Friday, July 01, 2005 - link
Well, Kris, do you have any theory of why single core Athlons seem to perform better with regard to single core P4s than X4200+ with regard to dual P4s?
In my opinion there are two possibilities.
1. HT slows both 640 and 660.
2. X4200+ does not stretch its wings.
In my opinion you should have adressed this problem in the article as we have learnt to expect the opposite.
n yusef - Friday, July 01, 2005 - linkI tink tis article is fair. The Pentium D 820 is good for the price, if you don't already have a S939 mobo and RAM. It's not as ceap as you would think, becuase if the extra ~$100 for more expensive RAM, motherboard, and aftermarket HSF, but it's still cheaper for a whole system. For someone like myself who already has a S939 mobo, and DDR1 RAM, the X2s are a better bargain. The make -j3 tag should have been on all of te CPUs (it even makes non-HT single core CPUs faster), especially the 4200+.
When you get a chance, please get a 4400+, or lower your 4800+s (Anand's actually) multi to x11 so we can see how much cache affects a dual-core CPU (each core is sharing the same memory bandwidth that only one had to itself before, so even an A64 might be bandwidth limited). Reply
TheMatt - Friday, July 01, 2005 - linkOne comment I always have with these tests is why do you never see pbzip2? On *any* dual, quad, etc. machine I use, I always pester the admin to install pbzip2: http://compression.ca/pbzip2/ .
I was hoping I'd see it here to see if it gives the same speed-up with dual-core as it does with my SMP machine. I'd suggest to anyone here to try it out, it's a great program. Reply
fishbits - Friday, July 01, 2005 - link"If you can't admit that the D820 is a good performer at its price, then I don't know what's going on with you, but nowhere did he slam AMD along the way."
The D820 is really good for the price, especially if ram/mobo weren't issues. But saying you "pay through the nose" for the AMD chip and not the D840 at virtually the same price was pretty stunning.
"In our opinion, the Pentium D 820 is really an underdog in this roundup"
What the heck does that mean? The 820 looks like a really good multi-tasking performer for the dollar. How does that make it an "underdog?"
We've gotta give the guys a little slack on various errors, but in "Final Thoughts?" Should the concluding paragraphs where judgement and recommendations are handed out be read two or three times before releasing them? Or maybe by at least a second set of eyes? Reply
JGunther - Friday, July 01, 2005 - link#29
Gaming bechmarks are the ONLY benchmarks in this article where the Pentium D doesn't occupy the top spot. Find me another review site that shows this to be the case.
The D820 is definitely a good performer for its price, I'd never say otherwise. But there's no denying that Kris and his articles are slanted. There are no slams, but little statements like this:
"At $558 you pay through the nose for the additional performance of the Athlon 64 X2 4200+."
Attempt to portray AMD as the culprit, but the fact is, you pay through the nose for that additional performance whether you're looking at the 4200+ or the D840 (the latter of which is is actually the more expensive of the two).
Anand once said that visitors to his site, he found, were about 50/50 Intel or AMD users. Though statistically, it could go either way, there is no doubt in my mind that Kris' primary computer at home runs an Intel chip. It's written all over his articles. Reply
Tegeril - Friday, July 01, 2005 - linkI don't see his analysis showing the Pentium CPUs "on top" at all. He specifically states that the AMD offering beats the pants off of Intel as usual in gaming, that the memory costs on the Intel boards are higher, and that the D820 and D840 don't suck quite as much as people want it to. He simply says that at the price point of $252, the D820 becomes a tempting option.
To sacrifice minimal overall performance and save $290 - memory costs is probably a very good suggestion and is warranted by the analysis. It's pretty impartial from here.
If you can't admit that the D820 is a good performer at its price, then I don't know what's going on with you, but nowhere did he slam AMD along the way. Reply
JGunther - Friday, July 01, 2005 - linkThey're going for $660 on ZipZoomFly, which is sold out again, but they were in stock yesterday.
All I'm saying is, look around. Other review sites have come to the same conclusions: the AMD dual cores are better than their Intel couterpoints. Better deals? No. But this is not a "budget Linux dual core system" article, so let's leave the "best bang for your buck" talk for another time. I'd only ask that it be a performance-oriented review, like it claims to be, instead of him choosing to compare CPUs at only the price-point where Intel comes out on top. Cutting one CPU out because it's just $60 too much seems a bit arbitrary and biased to me.
I tend not to get worked up about the whole AMD vs. Intel stuff-- my laptop at home is runnning a Pentium 4 in it. But when I clicked on this article, and saw who wrote it, I knew EXACTLY which CPU was going to be at the top of the charts. That should never happen. That's all. Reply
Tegeril - Friday, July 01, 2005 - linkI think the compiling graphic is simply in error. Why would the 660 have a-j3 score better than the D 820. That doesn't make much sense. I'd bet the X2 is supposed to occupy that space and the 660 and 640 got shifted down by accident. Reply
mikellpp - Friday, July 01, 2005 - linkNow why do you suppose there are no -j3 compile times for any of the Athlons in the last compile test? The author sooo wants intel to look good, he just can't bear to see AMD's better times. Are we supposed to be stupid readers? Reply
Tegeril - Friday, July 01, 2005 - linkUgh "None of his [dual core] CPUs tested..." is what I meant. Reply
Calin - Friday, July 01, 2005 - linkWhy the Athlon64 X2 has no -j3 compilation benchmarks?
Also, in short, one can compare the Intel D840 and the AMD X2 as they cost about the same. And not everyone will keep their mainboards, as not everyone upgrades every six months. I think most buyers will buy both a new mainboard and a new processor. I would have thought of buying myself an Athlon64, but I would like an Socket939, and I think their price (compared to the 754) are highway robbery.
I'll wait with the upgrade Reply
Tegeril - Friday, July 01, 2005 - linkJGunther.
None of his CPUs tested topped $600. Newegg has the 4400+ for $719. That is not in the same price range. He drew no unfavorable conclusions, finding AMD fantastic in gaming and showed its dual core option that competes with the D820 and D840 also performs well in multitasking environments.
Your high performance quote is meaningless when you look on the "the hardware" page and read: "These processors are a bit on the high end"
Stop creating controversy where there is none. Reply
JGunther - Friday, July 01, 2005 - link#19, If he wanted to do some equal price comparisons, there's also the 840 EE vs. the 4800+. Those should have been tested as well-- the article's talking about "high performance Linux machines", so the most prudent thing to do would be to show which CPU actually gives the best performance and let the reader know the respective prices, so that they can come to their own judgements.
If Kris wants to nail home the point that doller for dollar, the Intel CPUs are the better deal by omitting benchmarks of competing, though higher priced, CPUs, let him do it on his own time, on a site that doesn't have the same integrity and non-bias standards as Anandtech should.
There is only one dual core AMD chip being compared to two dual core Intel chips, despite the fact that the 4400+ is only a marginal increase in price. I suspect this is to keep his benchmark graphs more Intel-heavy near the top, but if it's because he simply doesn't have a 4400+ (they're in stock at Newegg and ZipZoomFly), as #20 suggests, then he should have waited to post the article until he had a more balanced roundup of CPUs.
Yeah I know my words are harsh, and I'm sorry. But this isn't the first time Kris has done this. It's irresponsible 'journalism' and reflects poorly on the site, and users *should* speak out against it. Reply
TheJet - Friday, July 01, 2005 - linkOne thing to note, I usually run -j3 on my _single_ processor Celeron 466 *NIX workstation and get significantly better performance than a standard make. So really, performance numbers should have been shown for -j3 across the board, not just for the dual core parts.
Furen - Friday, July 01, 2005 - linkHe has mentioned (repeatedly) that he doesnt have an X2 4400 and that Anand is the one who has the X2 4800, so he had to make do with what he had. I, personally, like the article (though I hate pentium Ds ^^), just wish there was more data on some of the tests, heh. Reply
IKeelU - Friday, July 01, 2005 - link#17, He's comparing simiarily-priced CPUs. Would it be more fair to compare a $1000 AMD CPU to intel's $558? Reply
StealthyOne - Friday, July 01, 2005 - linkwhere is the pentium EE? :-) Reply
JGunther - Friday, July 01, 2005 - link#4, it's 'cause Kris is writing the article. 'nuff said. ONCE AGAIN he's skewed the benchmarks by throwing the top of the line Intel dual core chip up against the entry level AMD chip. Nice job.
Also, ditto on #7 and #12... way to criticize the AMD part for its price, Kris, without mentioning that the Pentium-D requires a mobo upgrade while the X2 does not. Reply
semo - Friday, July 01, 2005 - link#6 that's what i'm thinking.
plus, i thought that with dma enabled, the cpu would not have to do too much work to burn a dvd Reply
atlr - Friday, July 01, 2005 - linkI look forward to some database server/web server tests. Reply
appu - Friday, July 01, 2005 - linkKris, great work! You might want to consider
amaroK (http://amarok.kde.org) as an equivalent
of iTunes under Linux, or even gtkpod. XMMS is
better treated as an equivalent of Winamp 2.x. Reply
Furen - Friday, July 01, 2005 - linkI have one question: why was the compile job on the x2 system only run with -j1? Not trying to flame you or anything, just a wondering... Reply
bob661 - Friday, July 01, 2005 - linkKristopher Kubick,
"At $558 you pay through the nose for the additional performance of the Athlon 64 X2 4200+"
That's the price for the P-D 840 not the X2 4200. Reply
SLIM - Friday, July 01, 2005 - linkI think #7 has hit the nail on the head. One other large difference in the prices besides the memory is the extra $100+ spent on a 955x motherboard or a comparable nforce4 sli intel edition (not sure if these support dual core yet though). The price difference, as has been pointed out several time before, between the intel cpus and amd cpus is just about negated once you tack on the extra cost of the MB and memory.
You could definitely choose a 945 MB and save about $100 but I have yet to see the pentium D benched on that platform, and I don't think there is an sli platform for intel that's available for under $225.
GoatHerderEd - Friday, July 01, 2005 - linkIll stick with my K6-3 550 (= Reply
Furen - Friday, July 01, 2005 - linkhaha, what a cool article name and icon =) Reply
ProviaFan - Friday, July 01, 2005 - linkOn the OS and Kernel rows in the table on the Hardware page, the contents are reversed... :) Reply
blackbrrd - Friday, July 01, 2005 - linkI tried putting together a Pentium D820 and an Amd 64 x2 4200+ in a norwegian webshop (cpu+motherboard+1gb ram) and they came out about equally priced Reply
Questar - Friday, July 01, 2005 - linkWouldn't the buffer underruns on the DVD burning tests be caused by disk contention and not CPU load? Reply
The DvD - Friday, July 01, 2005 - linkInteresting review. Nice work, Kristopher.
btw, shouldn't there be a j=3 graph for the 4200+ in the compiling multitasting benchmark? Reply
Frallan - Friday, July 01, 2005 - linkInteresting... AMD does not show Intel the door in this one. However it would be very interesting to se total costs of system and the 4400+ as well.
Gratz Intel! Reply
Viditor - Friday, July 01, 2005 - linkI must say that this review very much surprises me! The Pentium D looks much stronger than it has in any of the other reviews...congrats to Intel on this one. Reply
Tiamat - Friday, July 01, 2005 - linkThe "siamese" penguin image gave me a nice laugh Reply
Viditor - Friday, July 01, 2005 - linkI will NOT say first post!
One question so far...were the default memory settings on the AMD setup 1T or 2T? Reply
shane3in1 - Tuesday, July 12, 2011 - linkI was wondering the same thing. Reply


text:
NEW YORK — On a sizzling day at Citi Field, the sweat pouring down Cole Hamels' hand was giving him trouble with his grip.
No excuse, Hamels said.
Still, nothing ever seems to go smoothly for him this season — or against the Mets.
Hamels gave up three runs in a 35-pitch first inning and the Philadelphia Phillies never recovered today, losing 5-4 to New York after a couple of rallies fell short.
"Sometimes your body just perspires in a different way and you try to control it and it doesn't work as easily as it did in the past," Hamels said. "So you just have to go out and hope it doesn't really affect as much as it did. You just have to keep battling."
Jimmy Rollins hit a leadoff homer, and Chase Utley had a two-run shot in the ninth for the Phillies. They put the potential tying run on second before Bobby Parnell retired Darin Ruf on a game-ending liner to second.
Marlon Byrd, David Wright and Daniel Murphy each had an RBI single for the Mets, who handed Hamels his latest defeat and snapped Philadelphia's seven-game winning streak at Citi Field. Juan Lagares had a run-scoring single among his three hits.
"You can't always go out with your best stuff, but you have to make the adjustments," Hamels said. "I wasn't able to make the adjustments as quickly as I would have liked in that first inning."
Hamels (4-12) allowed four runs and seven hits over five innings before he was pulled for a pinch-hitter. The three-time All-Star and 2008 World Series MVP leads the National League in losses.
He has always struggled with the Mets. The left-hander, who was 2-0 with a 1.57 ERA in three previous July starts, dropped to 6-12 in 24 outings against New York.
"He has trouble pitching here," Phillies manager Charlie Manuel said. "The Mets have always been tough on him here. They grind out their at-bats on him, they make him pitch. Today it was hot and that might have been what they were set out to do."
The series finale Sunday will feature a marquee matchup of All-Star pitchers: Mets ace Matt Harvey against lefty Cliff Lee.
Zack Wheeler wiggled out of early trouble in his sixth major league start for the Mets, but the prized right-hander needed 106 pitches to get through 4 2-3 innings in 93-degree heat.
Fellow rookie Gonzalez Germen (1-1) escaped a bases-loaded jam and struck out three in 1 2-3 hitless innings for his first career win.
"He did an amazing job," Byrd said. "That could be a scary lineup to face when you're a young kid."
Philadelphia went 1-for-10 with runners in scoring position and stranded 10 overall.
Coming off a gem in San Francisco but pitching for the first time in 10 days, Wheeler gave up a two-strike single to Hamels to start the fifth. The Phillies loaded the bases with nobody out, but all they managed was Utley's sacrifice fly.
All-Star slugger Domonic Brown flied out on a 3-0 pitch. Wheeler walked Ruf to load the bases again — and was lifted one out short of qualifying for a win.
Wheeler kept his back to Terry Collins as the manager marched to the mound, then handed over the ball and disappeared down the dugout runway. Collins followed moments later, and Wheeler was back on the bench to greet Germen with a high-five after he struck out streaking Delmon Young to preserve a 3-2 lead.
"Right now, the kid's doing his job," Young said. "He's been pitching in big situations."
Wright hit a run-scoring single in the fifth, and Murphy added his RBI single in the seventh. LaTroy Hawkins worked the eighth, and Parnell got three outs for his 18th save despite allowing Utley's second homer in two days.
It was the first home run given up by Parnell since Chase Headley connected in San Diego on Aug. 4 last year.
Still struggling to command his lively pitches and get ahead, Wheeler has shown the ability to bear down in a jam. He held Philadelphia hitless in five at-bats with runners in scoring position, leaving opponents 4-for-32 (.125) in those situations during his brief big league career.
"I really concentrate. I really pride myself, if guys are in scoring position, that they're not going to score," Wheeler said.
Rollins drove Wheeler's third pitch to right for his 45th career leadoff homer, breaking a tie with Brady Anderson for fourth place in major league history.
It was Rollins' first home run in 162 at-bats since May 31. He has a 16-game hitting streak against the Mets.
New York came right back in the bottom of the first with the help of two walks by Hamels, who issued one free pass over 23 innings in his previous three starts combined. Byrd lined a run-scoring single, Lagares fisted an RBI single into shallow right, and Anthony Recker knocked in another by beating out a double-play ball after third baseman Michael Young double-clutched.
Notes: Rollins' other leadoff homer this season came on May 10 in Arizona. ... Delmon Young had three hits for the second straight day. ... Harvey is 3-0 with a 1.37 ERA in four career starts against Philadelphia. Lee is 5-1 with a 2.09 ERA in nine games against the Mets. ... New York stole two bases against Hamels, who also picked off a pair of runners.

subset: commoncrawl


text:
ASRock FM2A88X Extreme6+ Reviewby Ian Cutress on 3/19/2014 11:59 AM EST
44 Comments
Back to Article
niva - Wednesday, March 19, 2014 - linkThese benchmarks are making me depressed for AMD CPUs. I guess it's time to switch to Intel after not having purchased an Intel chip since 1996. Reply
nathanddrews - Wednesday, March 19, 2014 - linkCome on in, the water's fine. Reply
Malorcus - Wednesday, March 19, 2014 - linkI hear you man, I did the same with my current Ive Bridge CPU. I am looking to build a media computer using an AMD APU though. They still have their niche, but it is not in high end computing/gaming. Reply
ddriver - Wednesday, March 19, 2014 - linkYou'd be surprised by the amount of needed and commercially viable tasks for which those poor CPUs are more than fast enough. It is a sad thing to see AMD struggling to compete with Intel's value products. Reply
Fallen Kell - Thursday, March 20, 2014 - linkAMD has sadly not had a real competing product in the high end side for 6 or 7 years now. On the low end, AMD was competing, until Intel decided to compete in this market segment. The last two updates that Intel has made were more focused on the lower end than on the high end. This is finally cutting into the one thing keeping AMD alive. I really hope AMD does survive because those of us that are old enough to remember know that Intel hates the consumer and only really pushes technology when it is competing. We would have CPU's that are only soldered directly into motherboards with no ability to upgrade, completely locked down CPUs with no ability to overclock, locked in memory bus speeds that are tiered based on the CPU/motherboard that you purchased with higher performance memory compatibility costing you extra, etc., etc....
But I really don't see a way that AMD can compete at this point. They are still hemorrhaging money (not nearly as bad as a year ago when they lost $1.2 BILLION, but even after restructuring to cut 31% of their operating costs, they still lost $162 million last year). While I understood the reason for acquiring ATI, I believe ATI is worse off due to that acquisition. ATI went from being a profitable company competing well in their market, to one that is losing money and is seemingly almost a generation behind Nvidia in their offerings (I say this based on the fact that the brand new released top of the line AMD graphics cards can barely beat the last generation of cards from Nvidia in performance and can not come anywhere near the Nvidia offerings in power/performance or heat/performance, and Nvidia is getting ready to release its true next generation of cards even while they simply released the last generation of cards at their full potential to beat AMD's current cards now that AMD finally had a competing product). The major losses that AMD as a whole has, is taking its toll on the R&D AMD can afford to do in terms of increasing the efficiency of their designed with respect to power and cooling requirements while still being able to push the performance of their cards. Reply
Demiurge - Friday, March 21, 2014 - linkFunny, I thought the same thing about Intel CPU's when GPU's started to encroach on the high performance features such as physics, ray-tracing, signal processing, and other high intensity applications. There's a bigger picture that I think a lot of people miss. The market has already shifted away from CPU's being the centerpiece of high performance applications. AMD has the right strategy with buying ATI and the paradigm of Heterogeneous Computing, but like Intel with the P4: it's too little too late. If they had the software, they might've been able to pull this off, but that is exactly what they are trying to do with Mantle. I think only unanimous adoption would've guaranteed a win. It was a big risk, and it would have been an amazing upstart, but I don't think it will pay off as much as they need it to. Just a modest opinion... and so a long rant ends... ;-) Reply
pandemonium - Thursday, March 20, 2014 - linkAMD hasn't been competitive to Intel for the consumer since 1999 or so? They've always been cheaper, and always been far lower in gaming and general desktop usage results as well. You are very, very, very late to the party, lol. Reply
mr_tawan - Thursday, March 20, 2014 - linkI believe it was Intel Core series (2006) that started to get ahead of AMD's CPU. Before that, AMD CPUs was both perform better and cheaper. Intel CPUs were power hungry and expensive while did not yield excellent performance.
The raw ALU performance on the current line of AMD CPU is quite low because of the design decision to reduce the space occupied by the CPU while add even more GPU on the die, and then make them work together more nicely. It's the direction the AMD heads to.
I believe that one day even the FX line would be APU just like those A-series. Reply
Vinny DePaul - Thursday, March 20, 2014 - linkI feel your pain. I am an AMD fan. I want to keep using AMD but the CPU is running too hot. It is heating up the room! I switch to Intel. It is just easier.... I hope the AMD's involvement in PS4 and Xbox One will shape the future in games and software. Reply
Xpl1c1t - Thursday, March 20, 2014 - linkThis is exactly what I did going from a Athlon XP Palomino, to Athlon 64 Venice, to a Core i5 Lynnfield.
I'd consider purchasing an AMD processor again if the whole APU thing becomes quite competent and powerful at a smaller and more efficient node. I'd promptly and gladly buy an APU with the equivalent of 2 IVB cores and a 7870 onboard if it could me mounted on a Pico-ITX board... Reply
fteoath64 - Friday, March 21, 2014 - linkAMD/ATI needs to be very aggressive in lowering the power demands of their gpu. What NV has done in Maxwell should tell them a very important thing. Lowering the power demands means, one can cram more cores into the die, hence it will boost performance. There is so much one can cram into a specific node-technology but the power demands meaning heat dissipation is going to be a real issue that is hard to solve.
With the latest R9 series running at such high heat and high power demands, it is going to impossible to cram even half that performance into an APU without resorting to water cooling so the challenge is huge for AMD to tackle. I hope they can make headway into power optimization so that we can get more serious APU chips with powerful gpus for once and help move the industry along.
Ammohunt - Thursday, March 20, 2014 - linkcpu performance is one thing getting a stable glitch free windows system has always been the true challenge. I had never seen a Win7 BSOD until i ran an FX-6100 AMD Build which i promptly replaced with an intel rig. As a server it runs linux like a champ though. Reply
Demiurge - Friday, March 21, 2014 - linkI have multiple laptops, all Intel based, at work that BSOD Win7. It isn't the CPU, it's the drivers. I know because mine doesn't crash anymore after updating the drivers. I'm pretty sure it isn't the CPU that was the weak point of failure in most problems because the CPU is one of the few things that gets tested and validated the most. Not saying it can't happen, but it is far more likely you or the device manufacturers screwed up. Trust me, I own a Creative X-Fi =)... sometimes I don't get sound on reboot. I know the hardware's good there too. Reply
MrBungle123 - Friday, March 21, 2014 - linkI've noticed instability with AMD rigs before and discovered that the issue was that the stock voltage was too low. AMD is always trying to compete from a process node behind so I think they drive the Vcore as low as possible to try and bring down their TDP numbers and as a consequence bring the CPUs to the edge of instability. Reply
0ldman79 - Saturday, March 29, 2014 - linkOdd.
I've found that most of my AMD chips can work fine with a little less voltage at stock speeds.
Of course they don't stay that way, the tech in me overclocks them and gets Cool'n'Quiet working so they idle nice and cool then ramp up when needed. Reply
Demiurge - Friday, March 21, 2014 - linkNot sure why...I see something a little different...
Tomb Raider is probably very heavily AMD CPU (just assuming relative to the other benchmark performance) optimized because the $200 APU + GTX 770 is actually outperforming (ever so slightly) the $1000 and $320 I7... In the F1 game the exact opposite is happening ~84fps vs ~129fps... from what I see in the other games, it looks like about a -15% typical difference toward the APU just by looking at a high level. That's not bad considering the price/performance ratio.
The numbers (to me) aren't important as a CPU comparison for the vague remarks I made about suspected optimization, but it does matter if you are comparing the game performance in order to make a decision about which CPU to buy if I play a particular set of games. Reply
PUGSRULE! - Monday, August 10, 2015 - linkAs of today 8-10-15 an Intel i7-4960X costs $1,100 versus an AMD A10-7850k that goes for $130. If you have an unlimited budget, yeah go for the Intel. But dollarwise, you cannot do better with the AMD. It's like comparing a Hennessey Venom GT to a Mustang. Reply
TETRONG - Wednesday, March 19, 2014 - linkHmm, I agree. It's confusing why they keep reviewing and devoting so much time to something that hasn't been viable for a long time. Anyone can compare performance/price and conclude that there is no good AMD buy relative to Intels Core/Xeon lineup. It doesn't sound so bad until you factor in electricity which completely negates anything AMD might otherwise have going for them. Whatever you would save with the cheaper chip would get eaten up by the utilities -
No thanks Reply
tech6 - Wednesday, March 19, 2014 - linkI think they can be viable at a certain price point. Offering "good enough" performance for office and non-3D gaming computers is AMDs strength and that is where OEMs should be aiming also. Making a $100+ "Extreme" AMD board makes no performance sense at all. Reply
bobbozzo - Wednesday, March 19, 2014 - linkA mini-ITX Kaveri is attractive for HTPC builds, thanks to the excellent integrated graphics. Reply
PEJUman - Wednesday, March 19, 2014 - link^This^
I love my kaveri ITX build:
1. it's quite capable for HTPC-NAS unified solution with the large numbers of SATA 3 out of A88X 2. $130 A10-7850K CPU+GPU pricing @ microcenter.
3. $90 ASrock A88X-ITX+ @ newegg.
Sold my ivy bridge ITX HTPC & nehalem X58 NAS. each are more capable than the Kaveri CPU. but now I run both Reply
PEJUman - Wednesday, March 19, 2014 - linksystems on 1 kaveri system alone, saving a boatload of idle power consumption + getting more capable GPU for MADVR in the process. Reply
duploxxx - Wednesday, March 19, 2014 - linknot sure how you look at charts, but the issue with these reviews has always been to compare equal products, which is very obvious many tech sites can't. Again today this review is a mucked up comparison.
Why not do a decent test with the onboard gpu and for example mantle and see the difference again, these amd series are not thrown into the market to compete on that CPU front, they are there for general purpose and mid stream market. Who ever believes he need a 4770 for general use (not all are video freaks) should think twice, but yet they can't since they are stuck in believing just benchmark results....
309$ vs 184$
with that price difference i buy a 128Gb latest gen SSD and you know what the AMD will fly over any application while the intel with a normal HD would cripple. so useless compare of benchmarking as if one would watch a usb3 copy being few secs faster - slower, people buy a chinese brand usb or budget usb3 device which on its own will already be slower...
the mucked up mind is with the reviewers and believers looking purely at benches while daily almost every user is stuck with stupid MS OS. Reply
Viewgamer - Wednesday, March 19, 2014 - linkI wanted to see overclocked performance.
It's a shame that he didn't even bother to benchmark the overclocked CPU.
Also complaining that you get high temperatures with overclocking on the stock CPU cooler is stupid.
Intel Haswell CPUs operate at extraordinarily high temperatures without any overclocking and yet the reviewer has the nerve to complain about Kaveri temperatures after overclocking the chip by 700mhz. Reply
Ian Cutress - Wednesday, March 19, 2014 - linkOverclocked performance is given in the overclocking section under the PovRay column in that table. Here it shows the score PovRay gets at the given overclock.
Also, I talk repeatedly about the VRM temperatures - not the CPU temperatures. 'At stock' and 'using the stock cooler' are not interchangeable phrases. I cannot find anywhere in this review that I use the phrase 'stock cooler'. The heat given off at stock by the VRMs (a point which I highlight many times), not the CPU, can be the cause for concern, especially when the system is overclocked.
If you would like to discuss the above issues, I do have an email you can contact. Reply
Tom01 - Wednesday, March 19, 2014 - linkThere is no reason to give up AMD. The AMD FX-9590 is equal to an Intel Core i7-4770.
That is very fast.
I personally am an Apple-Intel user, but would prefer AMD-chips. Reply
DigitalFreak - Wednesday, March 19, 2014 - linkLMAO
A 220 watt AMD process is equal to an 84 watt Intel processor? Reply
Tom01 - Thursday, March 20, 2014 - linkYes, speed wise. Reply
Lucian2244 - Wednesday, March 19, 2014 - linkAs i remember this has always been a "problem" with most AMD based boards, their VRM runs hot. I guess this can be an issue in the long term but who has the time to test that :). Reply
alyarb - Wednesday, March 19, 2014 - linkRecently, I paid ~$120 for a "new" Asrock board from Newegg. I received a box with no plastic wrap, no seal on the ESD bag containing the board. The socket had bent pins under the plastic cap and neither Newegg nor Asrock assumed any responsibility or offered any recourse besides a $60 repair job that would take 2 months.
I ended up eating the $120 and bought an ASUS board that came new and undamaged. I've been dealing with Newegg since the beginning and was let down by this, so I get my LGA boards from Amazon now :(. ZIF sockets and less fragile stuff is OK to get from Newegg. Reply
Hawkleberryfin - Wednesday, March 19, 2014 - linkWhy no 8350 or other AM3+ in your comparisons? Reply
alexruiz - Wednesday, March 19, 2014 - linkIan, I have a few questions from your testing:
- What mode was the SATA controller set on initial boot to the UEFI BIOS? IDE or AHCI? In my experience, all the AsRock mobos have IDE as default. If if was indeed set to IDE, and this was a ECS or Biostar motherboard, you guys would have eaten them alive, but with the infatuation with Asrock around this forum, they get a free pass on this one.
- Fan controls, you say you liked them. Are you referring to the graph, or the settings? If you are referring to the settings, again, in my experience, all AsRock motherboards default to full blast. Does it mean you liked all the fans at full speed as default? On a setup that very likely will be used on HTPC duties, having to go and silence every single fan in the BIOS is a NO-NO. Level 9 target as default (full blast)? Really? Again, if this had been ECS or Biostar, you would have eaten them alive for not having an easy "quiet" fan setting (Ironically, Biostar probably has the best fan settings controls, full manual control for power users looking for max coooling, and a "quiet" setting that requires only one selection in the BIOS. )
- Hot-swap SATA AHCI. Did you have the chance to try and see if windows would recognize a SATA hard drive plugged as hot-swap? Again, in my experience, AHCI hot swap is broken in AsRock mobos, at least the AM3+ and FM2 ones.
- Did the motherboard post normally on first power up, or did it require a CMOS clear? Again, the AsRock mobos I have used usually require a CMOS clear out of the box. What other FM2+ motherboards are under testing?
Motherboard flex? How solid and rig did the PCB feel?
Did you try F11 as boot override? It works, but it takes a lot of luck and several tries to catch it.
I would like to see the FM2+ motherboards comparison once it is complete. For what I see, the infatuation with AsRock at AnandTech starts with the editors. AsRock is popular because they pack a lot of features (bunch of fan headers for example) so they give a sense of value for the money, but when the product feels unpolished, I prefer to not have the half baked feature (broken hot-swap SATA AHCI for example) Reply
SolMiester - Wednesday, March 19, 2014 - linkI just built an HTPC with the mATX extreme 4 plus A88 chipset, same as this but smaller. You are right, I did need to clear the CMOS, however Sata port were set correctly at ahci, I have no idea why you think they would be set to IDE on a board with no IDE controllers. Reply
hrga - Wednesday, May 28, 2014 - linkI appreciate alex post as most of bugs did indeed be here since implementation like that BIOS boot override feature which really should have been quite a bit better especially when there's default BIOS SpalshUp wallpaper screen before disabling it. Well thats in fact with older legacy BIOS more annoying
As for IDE option goes thats something present for all chipsets that has ability (drivers) to run under old WinXP w/o AHCI drivers for chipset streamlined. Thou i dont know who would run WinXP full time nowadays.except for some tests. Its quite a bit cleaner to capture screenshots without antialiasing artifacts even when Aero eyecandies fully disabled and put them into nitty 8b palette .png
But those wishing to run WinXP nowadays i gues would be experienced enough to either go to BIOS to change AHCI to IDE. For a55/A75/A85/A78/A88 i believe there are no ability to run them under "stock" WinXPSP3 so IDE in that BIOS is really a nuance. And Linux kernels that support chipset couldnt pass without providing its basic features and thats AHCI. Did some prehistoric SATA-150 drives ever didnt support AHCI as it was optional in those days? Reply
Ian Cutress - Monday, March 24, 2014 - linkHi Alex
- ASRock have default AHCI since Z77 at least, perhaps even a little before that. I have always criticized boards in the past for not having AHCI as default, and in my testing I turn it to AHCI if it is not and explicitly point it out. So you have nothing to worry about there.
- ASRock tends to vary their fan settings depending on the motherboard. Some of them are, as you say, stuck on full blast. This was set to 'default' by default, which gives the fan profile you see in A-Tuning. The custom multi-point gradient you can see in the BIOS also shows this.
- I have not tested hot swap. I will have a look in future ASRock motherboards, I'm now four products further down the line in my testing.
- I've not had issues with Motherboard flex from the big four in a couple of generations. Typically flex happens when motherboards have four PCB layers or less - anything over $100 these days tends to have at least six. But you can still build a solid four layer board.
- I usually go into the BIOS for boot override so I can double check the settings as I go through. It terms of hitting the button at the right time, it usually depends on when the USB driver from the BIOS is implemented. Best way to help yourself in this is to put the keyboard in a USB 2.0 slot, those are initiated first. Some motherboards are better for this than others, but you have as much chance on the same board of getting into the BIOS as boot override.
Each of the motherboard manufacturers have their quirks. ASRock likes to try a lot of little things each generation and see what sticks - some of these work well, and some of these do not. They have been amenable to suggestions over the 3+ years I have been at AnandTech, and they are taking some of them on board. There is no infatuation here - if I could look at these motherboards in a double blind study I would do, but enough of the product is personalised that that is not possible. I aim to look at each motherboard afresh, and sometimes there are features on motherboards that don't make sense for 99% of people that inflate cost. Motherboard manufacturers also have to guess a lot of the hardware specifications 8-12 months ahead of launch, and it can be hard to get them right and still remain competitive (and get it all to work). Sometimes each of the companies do come out with some bad stuff, and sometimes they come out with the goods. Awards are well deserved and should be for the best, hence why at AnandTech we rarely give them out compared to some others that have an award fetish because it helps promote their site/get them more review samples. We are lucky enough not to be in that position, and potentially help direct evolution of product, for any company that wants to listen. Reply
Bob Todd - Wednesday, March 19, 2014 - linkPretty nice feature set for the price, especially before any sales or rebates. However the comparatively dreadful CPU performance still makes the market look pretty small. Excellent for HTPC usage or that small subset that wants to do medium settings 720p gaming without a discrete card. 8x 6Gbps is quite nice, but I don't imagine many people going for midrange CPU performance are going to buy oodles of SSDs to fill all of those (mechanical disks or gigabit limited NAS setups won't really see the benefit). Getting your ass kicked by a 3 generation old 2500K that was in the same realm pricing wise is nothing to get excited about. The once meaningful 'budget' advantage mostly disappeared way back with the SB Celeron chips. And with Bay Trail Intel ended the one mainstream segment that AMD was kicking their ass in since Bobcat (yes AMD has the better iGPU, but the CPU isn't fast enough to do anything meaningful with it). And I realize that was mostly an off-topic rambling since this article is about the board not the CPU. I just miss you AMD. Please be competitive again. Reply
popej - Wednesday, March 19, 2014 - link"Despite the Realtek ALC1150 having a 115dB signal-to-noise rating, our RMAA test gave a result nearer 100".
Do you mean dynamic range measurement in RMAA? According to ALC1150 datasheet, dynamic range is 104dB. Reply
Elmstreet - Thursday, March 20, 2014 - linkJust so I get this correct, most of the gaming benchmarks are comparing the Intel i7-4960x, which currently sells for over $1,000 on NewEgg, with an AMD A10-7850k that is selling for just under $200. Based upon my disposable income, this is not a fair comparison at all. This is highly biased towards Intel.
If it was to be a proper comparison, the Intel chip would also need to be in the $200 range. Perhaps an i5-4570?
I'm not trying to bash on Intel at all. I agree with almost every single post on here about how AMD has been failing for such a long time, and that Intel has taken over. But, come on. At least make the fight balanced. Reply
fteoath64 - Friday, March 21, 2014 - linkTrue that comparison between Intel and AMD always has a huge price difference. It would be better to compare IGP to IGP and discrete gpu with discrete gpu of the same price range of system. Much like TomsHardware did in terms of setting up a budget and getting the best components for the budget, then optimise it a little like +$100 gives this!. + $200 gives these choices with these performance figures. This in effect, people tend to buy AMD for their gpu and prices than anything else. IF they are into discrete cards, tendency is for Intel cpus.
Other reason to get Kaveri is HSA, of course for those in the know. But the drivers and OpenCL 2.0 is not available as yet. So, question would be , next version of Kaveri might have bugfixes and optimizations to really boost HSA functions, or might not (as in Richland from Trinity jump). People tends to compare 2 or 3 key components that are "must haves" like 128GB SSD, then discrete gpu or decide only iGPU graphics. Reply
Ian Cutress - Monday, March 24, 2014 - linkThis is a review of the motherboard after all, designed to compare against other motherboards of this type as we review them.
This is also my new 2014 benchmark suite, implemented for Kaveri launch. If every time I updated the suite I tested a bunch of processors for the first review, we wouldn't get any reviews of anything for a few months (and no-one gets paid). So we are testing as we go, as is usually the case. I plan to do an update to my Gaming CPU articles when I get the chance to test a few more CPUs. At the minute the number of motherboards I have in to test is shockingly long. Reply
5thaccount - Thursday, March 20, 2014 - linkI know this isn't a review of the APU, but I'm very curious why it wasn't benched against a Celeron / i3 / i5 in the system and game benchmarks. I wouldn't expect this to come near i7 / Xeon territory (although, to it's credit, it did better than I was expecting). Was it only to strictly compare relative performance to the fastest Intel can provide? I'd be curious to see how it fared against similarly priced and cheaper Intel CPUs - especially in the game benchmarks. Reply
aike - Friday, March 21, 2014 - linkAll the shock practice on the devices can be used keep on effort just by advantage about keeping effort or possibly at home process. All the devices undeniably construct over to any <a href="http://www.katalog.cc/">rolex replica</a> private??? lenses temperament, considering that it adds something to a?? lenses is visually and additionally trend. Reply
aike - Friday, March 21, 2014 - linkGenuinely, each one of on top of exploit fundamental purpose typically the copy wholesale handbags turned out to be some type of shrewd undermine concerning trendy finishing touches an increasing number of gals get to approve perhaps even booty.http://www.oakleafgardenmachinery.co.uk/superrepli... Reply
DrMrLordX - Saturday, March 22, 2014 - linkThank you for taking the time to review this board, Mr. Cutress. I am curious about CPU throttling under heavy IGP load. Did you experience this problem? Some have attributed this to VRM temperatures, but others have observed that this may be related to a design decision on AMD's part to keep total power delivery to the chip within a specific TDP envelope, even when overclocking is present.
I have been trying to figure out which AM2+ boards can mitigate or defeat this throttling behavior through UEFI settings. There is another way not involving the UEFI:
but it would be much nicer to tweak the UEFI to defeat this p5 state behavior. People with "good" cooling on the CPU and VRMs are still getting throttling, at least on some boards, some of the time . . . it's hard to nail down exactly who has this problem. Reply


text:
Welcome to the new Three Days Grace website! Current members should have received an email with instructions for resetting your password. If you haven't, you can click here to do that. New members can sign up using the link in the top right.
The page you are looking for does not exist. Try using the menu above to find what you are looking for.


text:
Yes but Ra-den is only one boss and a massive sized loot table that everyone will want. That and having no normal mode ra-den first version of bis needs to be the 12 bosses only for simplicity then work the ra-den items in a secondary list.
Yes but Ra-den is only one boss and a massive sized loot table that everyone will want. That and having no normal mode ra-den first version of bis needs to be the 12 bosses only for simplicity then work the ra-den items in a secondary list.
Anaxie is passionate about this game. Sometimes it comes across as hostile/rude. He doesn't dance around subjects, he's blunt and to the point with his posts.
I was just reading this thread http://www.mmo-champion.com/threads/...-5-4-Wait-what and noticed he was banned. After reading it I'm guessing thats why.
I'm not sure when WoL rankings became a standard for skill because most of the top 100 parses for any class typically involve a player ignoring fight mechanics in favor of personal dps. Also given how close the dps difference are in the top 200 it basically comes down to rng crits and kill times (if your raid has low dps you are pretty much screwed). This is fine for guilds that have everything on farm and meters are the only motivating thing left, but for players still progressing through content using the top of WoL as a benchmark is a bad idea. You should always be theorycrafting and min/maxing your class, but 99 times out of 100 if you are struggling on a boss it's because people are screwing up the mechanics not because of dps.
Last edited by Kinmaul; 2013-02-10 at 05:42 PM. Reason: grammar
I'd assume its a temp ban, because a full ban should only be for some crazy flaming or trolling on forums for no purpose.
On an off note, does ANYONE know why SoJ isn't working on the PTR? I've tried it several times on dummies and all I get after using a TV is the mastery side-damage. I've even looked at my skada meter and it shows nothing about this "extra damage" the seal is supposed to do. I'm assuming this is a bug, and that they will fix it soon.
Yes, it's bugged. I imagine (hope) it'll be fixed next build.
On the internet you can't be right about something and point it out to people in a rude way, in real life those people are called teachers.
Also WoL is useless if you don't know what you're looking for, ranks come down to gear, how much you cheese and how your raid helps you to cheese. For instance you can tell your raid to not aoe at all on spirit kings maddning shout allowing you to solo aoe all the raid to "break" them.
You can tell your entire raid to not touch legs on Garalon leaving you with 100% uptime on them. Also you can make your raid kill a pack of adds on wind lord exactly when your CDs are back. The list goes on and on, point is that WoL top ranks are more about showing off how good a spec can do on any encounter if done the right way (a wierd and ignoring tactics way).
If you want a proper WoL parse look down couple ranks and see there or even better take the top parses, look back on their calendar and look for a fight they didn't "cheese". Trying to "reach" the top ranks without cheesing yourself isn't gonna happen unless another Ultraxion type fight comes along and even then you can time your raid to kill the boss exactly when your "cheeser" has done his last burst phase.
Don't use WoL wrong.
Last edited by Huntingbear_grimbatol; 2013-02-10 at 09:17 PM.
I generally only look at top guild first or second kill logs, they're usually the best. As for people talking about teachers....you realize people like anaxie don't have to be here to teach you...right? They take time out of their schedules to help you, if you don't want to respect that, then you don't deserve the help anyways.
Enough discussion on Anaxie and the ban. If you have an issue with the conduct of Moderators or with a ban, feel free to message Sunshine or a Super-Moderator (Blue Mod) on the forums to discuss it further.
Keep this great thread on topic, please!-Krekko
Last edited by Krekko; 2013-02-10 at 11:19 PM.
-Retribution, the path of the protector or mender brought to it's natural conclusion; destroying evil before the weak need to be shielded from it, and before it can wound the innocent.
Fix My DPS | Fix My Heals | Fix My Tanking |
WoW Level Scaling Feature
Q: Today I had to bench myself as the raid leader on Sha of Fear 10m H progress because Ret DPS is terrible. Any buffs in sight?
A: I'm assuming you understand the problem where DPS is very hard to measure on that fight since everyone is so spread out
That made my day... sorreh
I'll probably get lyched for this, but here we go anyway.
It's not as bad fight as your first impression gives (at least my feelings were). P1 doesn't matter at all and for P2 you just have to go div. purpose + lights hammer + exo glyph to not feel completely useless in adds.
Defensively, for huddles especially we have alot of good stuff; Unbreakable spirit = -40% for self every huddle (or Purity, assuming it works, not tried) and selfless healer flash to save a low hp ally. bubble sac / loh / devo aura for those "3 healers in huddle" calls.
(can't post links) worldoflogs.com/reports/rt-juu6d5k2izxldeo9/analyze/dd/source/?target=111&s=2928&e=4161 Log for our last kill, 7/17 in adds and total damage done in P2 - sure it's not top but playing Ret can't expect to be #1 either, we just bring too much to raid.
---------- Post added 2013-02-11 at 11:24 AM ----------
Didn't check rng of the fight tho, major part how many huddles you sit, of course.
light's hammer is kinda awful for p2 sha, adds being kitted in the most retarded spots means they aren't getting hit for long, ES is mostly fine, but it's also very strat dependent, i.e my guild doesn't have me or rvvo switch on adds till the much later waves when the boss is around 25% and our dmg on adds isn't terrible for the uptime we have on them. Ret's are great on 25 man sha btw fucking HA or DP fucking so stronk
Yeah, I'm fairly confident no one uses light's hammer for sha, the adds move too much. Like Vigi said, in a 25m setting Rets can generally sit on the boss and just passive cleave with DS and HoTR and then swap to adds super late in the fight. Obviously we won't be top add damage, but we do a similar amount of damage as to if we were to run around killing adds the whole time. We only really lose the censure damage of rolling multiple stacks in adds.


text:
Buffalo Wild Wings Grill & Bar Map
240 E. Towne Mall
608-268-0802 | Make Restaurant Reservations | Menu
Now that you know where you want to enjoy a meal, it's time to find the restaurant. Print out this Buffalo Wild Wings Grill & Bar map and take the driving directions with you so you can locate the restaurant easily.
Find out which restaurants and chefs top the list of GAYOT's 2016 Annual Restaurant Awards.


text:
You're reading the news with potential spoilers, make them spoiler free, dismiss
The Plan
(Movie, 2014)
Wish Taxi
(Movie, 2013)
The Plan
(Movie, 2014)
Character Trailer
Oh In-hye's Seduction Techniques
Preview of Multiple Scenes
30s Trailer
Production Briefing
Official Trailer
Commenting guidelines
- Stay on topic and do not spam.
- Emoticons are fun, but actual thoughts are appreciated.
- Refrain from abusive language.
- Post only in English, as this is an English language community.
- Do not share pages or media unrelated to the topic you are commenting on.
- Do not request or mention illegal download/streaming services.
- No graphic content allowed.
- Respect the right of other users to share their opinion. Arguments are welcome, fights are not.
Comments which break the rules will be erased. Repeated rule breaking will result in blacklisting.
To participate to HanCinema, you must sign up or log in. Sign up, Why ?
To participate to HanCinema, you must sign up or log in. Sign up, Why ?
|Old message board
Subscribe to HanCinema Pure to remove ads from the website (not for episode and movie videos) for US$2.99 per month (you can cancel anytime).
The first step is to be a member, please click here : Sign up, then a subscribe button will show up.
Drama of the week
By Cédric Collemine | Privacy policy | Contact | Partners | Advertising by


text:
GOING VIRAL: Your new favorite music video is 'The Fox'
Norwegian band 'Ylvis' might have just won the internet.
The duo, made up of Bård Ylvisåker and Vegard Ylvisåker, uploaded a music video to YouTube for their song titled, simply, "The Fox," on Tuesday, and the video has already racked up over 7 million views (and counting).
There's really no way to explain the awesomeness that takes place on screen during this video. You just have to watch it.


text:
The GPU Advances: ATI's Stream Processing & Folding@Homeby Ryan Smith on 9/30/2006 8:00 PM EST
- Posted in
- GPUs
43 Comments
Back to Article
BikeAR - Monday, October 02, 2006 - linkI may be living in a vacuum these days, but did anyone notice the following comment on the
F@D site, "Help" page?...
Intel has been helping support our project(Stanford/Intel Alzheimer's Research Program), but has announced that it is ending their contribution to distributed computing in general and no longer supports any distributed computing clients, including F@H.
What is up with this? Reply
Staples - Monday, October 02, 2006 - linkI'd love to know how a fully loaded X1900 folding would be compared to an E6600 Core 2 Duo? These GPUs have always been said to be 100s of times faster than CPUs at what they are designed to do so I'd love to see if it is really true or not. If not, it looks like we may have been lied to for so so many years. Reply
Ryan Smith - Monday, October 02, 2006 - linkUnfortunately it looks like they'll be using larger units. We thought we'd be able to use the same units for both the normal and GPU-accelerated clients, but this appears to not be the case. There's no direct way to compare the clients then, the closest we could get is comparing the number of points given for a work unit. Reply
peternelson - Sunday, October 01, 2006 - link"So far, the only types of programs that have effectively tapped this power other than applications and games requiring 3D rendering have also been video related, such as video decoders, encoders, and video effect processors. In short, the GPU has been underutilized, as there are many tasks that are floating-point hungry while not visual in nature, and these programs have not used the GPU to any large degree so far."
Erm, not so! Try looking at GPGPU.org
Also see the books GPU Gems and GPU Gems 2. Reply
mostlyprudent - Sunday, October 01, 2006 - linkBTW, a type-o in the 1st paragraph of the article: "...manipulate data in ways that goes far beyond" -- should read "in ways that GO far beyond..".
I knew about SETI, but was completely unaware of F@H. Thanks. I will look to get involved! Reply
imaheadcase - Sunday, October 01, 2006 - linkDid anandtech just post a article on the weekend when most PC users are at home so they can read it? Amazing! :P Reply
CupCak3 - Sunday, October 01, 2006 - linkWhen loading the client, our team number is 198. :)
If anyone has any questions and/or would like to join the TeAm, come and visit us http://forums.anandtech.com/categories.aspx?catid=...">here. We have many people which would be more than happy to answer any question.
I'll try to answer some of the questions and comments which have been posted thus far:
NVIDIA support may come later. This is a BETA right now so only a small number of devices will be supported. The supported ATI line will expand and when NVIDIA gets the kinks worked out on using GPGPU processing for their cards, I"m sure the Pande group would be glad to them up :)
No one knows about Crossfire support yet. We'll know more about this tomorrow.
Same goes for using CPU + GPU.
Scalability: A multithreaded client I've heard is in the works but I'm sure its on hiatus with the GPU client coming into BETA.
That is correct in saying for each core, a separate folding@home client must be loaded. Right now the max amount of RAM one core will use is between 100 and 120 megs of RAM. Other workunits utilize around 5 or 10 megs. The client will only load workunits with this amount of RAM usage if you have the resources to spare. (so not just having 1 256 meg stick in your XP box and then using 110 megs of that for folding) We still yet do not know the RAM requirements for the vid cards.
The Pande Group has posted that 1600 and 1800 series cards will be the next ones supported :) (if all goes well of course)
Linux and Max OSX client is also available for those wondering.
I hope this helps!
Messire - Sunday, October 01, 2006 - linkHi folks
It is surprising to me that this Stanford project works only on the most modern and powerful ATI GPUs, because i know of an another Stanford project called BrookGPU. Here is the URL: http://graphics.stanford.edu/projects/brookgpu/">http://graphics.stanford.edu/projects/brookgpu/
It is only in beta now and seems to be abandoned a little bit, but they've made a very usable GENERAL PURPOSE streaming programming language wich works on much more older GPUs as well. And it is very fast...
lopri - Sunday, October 01, 2006 - linkI know this question is somewhat off the discussion at the moment, but I can't help but ask. Would this crank up the GPU usage to 100% as it does to CPU? All the time? Then it could be a problem for average users, because the X1900 is hot as it is even in idle.
GhandiInstinct - Sunday, October 01, 2006 - linkDon't get me wrong, I'd love to contribute, as I have with SETI, but what evidence is there that this will help anything or even at all?
I mean we've had super computers working in science for a while now and I haven't heard of any major breakthroughs because of it, and if my computer is going to exhaust a little extra heat I want some numbers to crunch before I do so.
That's all. Reply
photoguy99 - Sunday, October 01, 2006 - linkBasic research is like that - it may takes a lot of years to benefit from it.
Look at Einstein, his work was fundamental research but the benefits are still being realized 100 years later.
So even if they have major breakthroughs they may be at such a foundational level that the actual cure for Alz. comes 25 years later.
Nature of the beast. Reply
JarredWalton - Sunday, October 01, 2006 - linkhttp://folding.stanford.edu/results.html">Published Results
Current research includes:
http://folding.stanford.edu/FAQ-diseases.html#AD">Alzheimer's, Cancer, Huntington's Disease, Osteogenesis Imperfecta, Parkinson's Disease, Ribosome and antibiotics.
And of course, there's always http://folding.stanford.edu/faq.html">the Folding@Home FAQ.
Do they know in advance that all of the issues are related to protein folding? No, but I'd assume they have good cause to suspect it. The problem is that it takes time; breakthrough results might not materialize soon, next year, or even for 5-10 year. Should research halt just because the task is difficult? Personally, I think FAH has a far greater chance of impacting the world during my lifetime than SETI@Home.
Cheers! Reply
Baked - Sunday, October 01, 2006 - linkI wonder if a X1600 card will work. I've tried both the graphics and command line version of F@H on my new system but both had problem connecting to F@H server. Hopefully this new F@H version will work. Reply
JarredWalton - Sunday, October 01, 2006 - linkNext step is to extend to X1800 and probably from there to X1600. Beyond that, the G70 chips are probably the next up would be my guess. Reply
smitty3268 - Sunday, October 01, 2006 - linkI assume the new client uses the cpu + gpu, and not just the gpu? Also, it would be nice to have some sort of explanation for the poor nvidia performance in the next article. Is it just their architecture, or has Folding@Home been getting assistance from ATI and not NVidia?
This doesn't make much sense:
Additionally, as processors have recently hit a cap in terms of total speed in megahertz, AMD and Intel have been moving to multiple-core designs, which introduce scaling problems for the Folding@Home design and is not as effective as increasing clockspeeds.
The Folding@Home design is quite obviously a massivly parallel design, as shown by the fact that hundreds of thousands of computers are all working on the same problem. Therefore, doubling the amount of cores would double the amount of work being done and this seems to be happening faster than the old incremental speed bumps.
Otherwise, it was a good article. Reply
z3R0C00L - Monday, October 02, 2006 - linkIt's Simple.. F@H uses Dynamic Branching Calculations. nVIDIA GPU's are technologically inferior to ATi VPU's when it comes to shading performance and branching performance.
As such.. nVIDIA's highly mighty GeForce 7950GX2 would perform much like an ATi Radeon x1600XT. In other words.. too slow. Reply
tygrus - Monday, October 09, 2006 - linkThe Nvidia FP hardware is fast enough but the overall design doesn't fit well with the software(task) design of F@H. For other tasks the Nvidia GPU's may be very fast. The next Nvidia GPU & API will hopefully be better.
The CPU handles the data transformation and setup before sending to GPU for the accelerated portion. Then the CPU overseas the return of data from the GPU. The CPU also looks after the log, text console, disk read/write, internet upload&download, and other system ovreheads.
More information is available from ???
i just found a really great article which covers the public release: http://techreport.com/onearticle.x/10907">http://techreport.com/onearticle.x/10907
Talk w/Vijay Pande
ATI is currently 8X faster than Nvidia. Nvidia has our code, running it internally, hope we can close the gap. But even 4X difference is large, and ATI is getting faster all of the time.
Lot of work goes into qualifying GPUs internally so they can run.
Making apps like this run on a GPU requires a lot of development work. Currently, science is best served by using ATI chips. Nv may come in future.
The CPU has to poll the GPU to find out if it finished a block and needs help (data from GPU->CPU etc). This takes a context switch and CPU time to wait for the reply (ns wait not fixed number of cycles). Any acutual work is done in the remaining time slice or more. The faster the GPU, the more it demands uses the CPU. Slow the CPU in half and you may be slowing GPU by upto half. Reply
Ryan Smith - Sunday, October 01, 2006 - linkThe new client "uses" the CPU like all applications do, but the core is GPU-based, so it won't be pushing the CPU like it does on the CPU-only client, I don't know to what level that means however.
As for the Nvidia stuff, we only know what the Folding team tells us. They made it clear that the Nvidia cards do not show the massive gains that ATI's cards do when they try to implement their GPU code on Nvidia's cards. Folding@Home has been getting assistance from Nvidia, but they also made it clear that this is something they can do without help, so the problem is in the design of the G7x in executing their code.
As for the core stuff, this is something the Folding team explicitly brought up with us. The analogy they used is trying to bring together 2000 grad students to write a PhD thesis in 1 day, it doesn't scale like that. They can add cores to a certain point, but the returns are diminishing versus faster methods of processing. This is directly a problem for Folding@Home, which is why they are putting efforts in to stream processing, which can offer the gains they need. Reply
smitty3268 - Sunday, October 01, 2006 - linkDoes the G7x have as much support for 32bit floats as ATI does? It seems like I read somewhere that one of the two had moved to 32 bit exclusively while the other was still much faster at 16/24 bit fp. Could that be why they aren't seeing the same performance from NVidia? Reply
Clauzii - Monday, October 02, 2006 - linkProbably that, and the fact that the big ATI models contain 48 shaders - pretty beefes the calculations up! Reply
photoguy99 - Sunday, October 01, 2006 - linkThe folding team just hasn't designed their architecture efficiently for parallelism within a system.
No doubt they are brilliant computational biologists, but it's simply an oxymoron to claim a system can scale well using thousands of systems but not with the cores within those systems - Nonsense.
In fact I challenge anyone from their coding team to explain this contradiction.
Now if they say look, we're busy, we just haven't had time to optimize the architecture for multi-core yet, then that makes perfect sense. But to say inherently the problem doesn't lend itself to that is not right.
JarredWalton - Sunday, October 01, 2006 - linkNot at all true! See above comments, but data dependency is a key. They know the starting point, but beyond that they don't know anything. So they might generate 100,000 (or more) starting points. There's 100K WUs out there. They can't even start the second sequence of any of those points until the first point is complete.
Think of it within a core: They can split up a task into several (or hundreds) of pieces only if each piece is fully independent. It's not like searching for primes where scanning from 2^100000 to 2^100001 is totally unrelated to what happened in 2^99999 to 2^100000. Here, what happens at stage x of Project 2126 (Run 51, Clone 9, Gen 7) absolutely determins where stage x+1 of Project: 2126 (Run 51, Clone 9, Gen 7) begins. A separate task of Project: 2126 (Run 51, Clone 9, Gen 6) or whatever can be running, but the results there have nothing to do with Project: 2126 (Run 51, Clone 9, Gen 7). Reply
photoguy99 - Monday, October 02, 2006 - linkJared, I respectfully submit that you are not correct.
Think of it this way - what is the algorithmic difference between submiting jobs to distributed PCs vs. distributed processes within a PC?
Multiple processes within a PC could operate indepedently and easily take advantage of the multi-core parallelism. A master UI process could manage the sub processes on the machine so the that user would not even require special setup by the user.
I'm telling you the problem with leveraging multi-core is not inherent to the folding problem, it's just a limitation of how they've designed their architecture.
Again not to take away credit from all the goodness they have achieved, but if you think about it this is really indisputable. I'm sure their developers would agree. Reply
JarredWalton - Monday, October 02, 2006 - linkAre we talking about *can* they get some advantage from multiple cores with different code, or are we talking about gaining a nearly 2X performance boost? I would agree that there is room for them to use more than one core, but I would guess the benefit will be more like a 50% speedup.
Right now, running two instances of FAH nearly doubles throughput, but no individual piece is completed faster. They could build in support for executing multiple cores without user intervention, but that's not a big deal since you can already do that on your own. Their UI could definitely be improved. The difficulty is that they aren't able to crank out individual pieces faster; they can get more pieces done, but if there's a time sensitive project they can't explore it faster. For example, what if they come on a particular folding sequence that seems promising, and they'd like to investigate it further with 100K slices covering several seconds (or whatever). If piece one determines piece 2, and 2 determimes 3... well, they're stuck with a total time to calculate 100K segments that would be in the range of thousands of years (assuming a day or two per piece).
Anyway, there are tasks which are extremely difficult to thread, though I wouldn't expect this to be one. Threading and threading really well aren't the same, though. Four years from now, if they get octal core CPUs, that increases the total number of cores people can process, but they wouldn't be able to look at any longer sequences than today if CPUs are still at the same clockspeed. (GPUs doing 40X faster means they could look at 40X more length/complexity.)
Anyway, without low level access to their code and an understanding of the algorithms they're using, the simple truth is that neither of us can say for sure what they can or can't get from multithreading. Then there's the whole manpower problem - is it more beneficial to work on multithread, or to work on something else? Obviously, so far they have done "something else". :) Reply
smitty3268 - Monday, October 02, 2006 - linkLooking at their website, they are working on a multithreaded core which would take advantage of smp systems. Regardless of how well that turns out, a 40x increase is not going to happen until we get > 40 cores in a cpu, so this GPU client is still a very big deal.
I understand what you mean about data dependence and not being able to move on to more involved simulations due to time factors of individual work units, but it seems like this would be fairly easy to solve by simply splitting the work units in half or in quarters, etc. This could definitely be difficult to do, though, depending on how their software has been designed. Perhaps they would have to completely rewrite their software and it isn't worth the trouble. Reply
JarredWalton - Tuesday, October 03, 2006 - linkI don't think they can split a WU in half, though, or whatever. Best they can do would be to split off a computation so that, i.e. atoms 1-5000 are solved at each stage on core 1 and 5001-10000 are on core 2. You still come back to the determination of the "trajectory". If you start at A and you want to know where you end up, the only way to know is to compute each point on the path. You can't just break that calculation into A-->C and then C-->B with C being halfway.
I know the Pande people are working on a lot of stuff right now, so GPUs, PS3, SMP, etc. are all being explored to varying extents. Reply
icarus4586 - Wednesday, October 04, 2006 - linkThe reason that modern GPUs are so powerful is that they have many parallel processing pipelines, which is only a little different than saying that they have many processing cores. Even the diagram given in this article is titled: "Modern GPU: 16-48 Multi-threaded cores." If the F@H algorithm can be optimized to use the parallelism that exists within modern GPUs, it should also be optimizeable for the parallelism of multi-core CPUs. Reply
smitty3268 - Sunday, October 01, 2006 - link
As for the core stuff, this is something the Folding team explicitly brought up with us.
I still don't really see what the actual problem is, but I'll certainly take their word for it. Maybe if I ever get a degree in biochemistry I'll try and figure out what's going on :)
Thanks for the info. I think I'll go ahead and install F@H. It's something I've occasionally meant to do but I keep forgetting about it. Reply
Furen - Sunday, October 01, 2006 - linkI think it's about data dependency. Let's say you start 2000 processes on different PCs and run them for 1 unit time. The result from this is 2000 processes at 1 unit time, not 1 process at 2000 units time, which is probably what you'd prefer. Having a massive speed up on a single node means that that node can push a single "calculation" farther along. I'd guess that the client itself is not multithreaded because of the threading overhead, it may not be worth the effort to optimize heavily for a dual-core speed up since the overhead will take a chunk out of that but a 40x speed up is another thing altogether. Reply
JarredWalton - Sunday, October 01, 2006 - linkThe way FAH currently works is that pieces of a similation are distributed; some will "fail" (i.e. fold improperly or hit a dead end) early, others will go for a long time. So they're trying to simulate the whole folding sequence under a large set of variables (temperatures, environment, acid/base, whatever), and some will end earlier than others. Eventually, they reach the stage where most of the sequences are in progress, and new work units are generated as old WUs are returned. That's where the problem comes.
If we were still scaling to higher clock speed, they could increase the size/complexity of simulations and still get WUs back in 1-5 days on average. If you add multiple cores at the same clock speed as earlier CPUs (i.e. X2 3800+ is the same as two Athlon 64 3200+ CPUs), you can do twice as many WUs at a time, but you're still waiting the same amount of time for results that may be important for future WU creation.
Basically, Pande Group/Stanford has simulations that they'd like to run that might take months on current high-end CPUs, and then they don't know how fast each person is really crunching away - that's why some WUs have a higher priority. Now they can do those on an X1900 and get the results in a couple days, which makes the work a lot more feasible to conduct.
That's one scenario, at least. Reply
ProviaFan - Sunday, October 01, 2006 - linkThe problem with F@H scaling over multiple cores is not what one might first think. I've run F@H on my Athlon X2 system since I bought it when the X2's became available in mid-2005. Since each F@H client is single-threaded, you simply install a separate command line client for each core (the GUI client can't run more than one of itself at once), and once they are installed as Windows services, they distribute nicely over all of the available CPUs. The problem with this is that each client has its own work unit with the requisite memory requirements, which with the larger units can become significant if you must run four copies of the client to keep your quad-core system happy. The scalability issues mentioned actually involve in the difficulty in making a single client with a single unit of work multi-threaded. I'm hoping that the F@H group doesn't give up trying to make this possible, because the memory requirements will become a serious issue with large work units when quad and octo core systems become more readily available. Reply
highlandsun - Sunday, October 01, 2006 - linkTwo thoughts - first, buy more RAM, duh. But that raises a second point - I've got 4GB of RAM in my X2 system. If resource consumption is really such a problem, how is a GPU with a measly 256MB of RAM going to have a chance? How much of the performance is coming from having superfast GDDR available, what kind of slowdown do they see from having to swap data in and out of system memory?
As for Crossfire (or SLI, for that matter) why does that matter at all, these things aren't rendering a video display any more, they don't need to talk to each other at all. You should be able to plug in as many video cards as you have slots for and run them all independently.
It sounds to me like these programs are compute-bound and not memory bandwidth-bound, so you could build a machine with 32 PCIEx1 slots and toss 32 GPUs into it and have a ball.
icarus4586 - Tuesday, October 03, 2006 - linkIt depends on the type of core, and the data it's working on. There's an option when you set up the client for whether or not to do "big" WUs. I've found that a "big" WU generally uses somewhere around 500MB of system memory, while "small" ones use 100MB or less. I would assume that they'd target it to graphics card memory sizes. Given that the high-end cards they're targeting have 256MB or 512MB of RAM, this should be doable. Reply
gersson - Saturday, September 30, 2006 - linkI'm sure my PC can do some good...3.5Ghz C2D and x1900 Crossfire.
I've done some Folding @ home before but could never get into it. I'll give it a spin when the new client comes out. Reply
Pastuch - Saturday, September 30, 2006 - linkI just wanted to say thanks to Anandtech for writing this article. I have been an avid reader for years and an overclocker. People always talk about folding in the OC scene but I never took the time to learn just what folding@home is. I had no idea it was research into Alzheimer's. I'm downloading the client right now. Reply
Griswold - Sunday, October 01, 2006 - linkUnfortunately, many overclocked machines that are stable by the owners standards dont meet the standards of such projects. The box may run rock stable but can you vouch for the the results to be correct due to the fact that the system is running outside of its specs?
If you read the forums of these projects, you will soon see that the people running them arent too fond of overclocking. I've never seen any figures, but I bet there are many, many work units being discarded (yet you still get credit) because they're useless. However, the benefit still seems to outweight the damage. There are just so many people contributing to the project because they want to see their name on a ranking list - without caring about the actual background. I guess this can be called a win-win situation. Reply
JarredWalton - Sunday, October 01, 2006 - linkIf a WU completes - whether on an OC'ed PC or not - it is almost always a valid result. If a WU is returned as an EUE (or generates another error that apparently stems from OC'ing), then it is reassigned to other users to verify the result. Even non-OC'ed PCs will sometimes have issues on some WUs, and Standford does try to be thorough - they might even send out all WUs several times just to be safe? Anyway, if you run OC'ed and the PC gets a lot of EUEs (Early Unit Ends), it's a good indication that your OC is not stable. Memory OCs also play a significant role. Reply
nomagic - Saturday, September 30, 2006 - linkI'd like to put some of my GPU power into some use too. Reply
Griswold - Sunday, October 01, 2006 - linkRead the article. Reply
Furen - Saturday, September 30, 2006 - linkHas ATI updated it at all? I dont have an ATI video card around here so I can't go check it out but from what I've seen it's was an extremely barebone application. Reply
JarredWalton - Saturday, September 30, 2006 - linkYou mean the converter for AVIVO? It's still pretty basic, but it converts a lot faster than other applications I've used. AVIVO video decoding has definitely improved, though. Reply
ViRGE - Saturday, September 30, 2006 - linkAFAIK encoding still isn't hardware accelerated. It's just fast because it turns out the equivalent of fast/non-quality mode from other encoders. Reply
inoculate86 - Thursday, March 24, 2011 - linkWould be really cool if some hardware review sites like Anandtech ran Folding@Home benchmarks for CPUs and GPUs reviews, so people who are really into folding can easiier pick out the best hardware to buy. these days, its not just video games people want performance for anymore! Reply


text:
If the infected computer is connected to LAN, disconnect it and re-connect only after all other computers have been checked and cleaned.
- Download the executable file rmfloxif.exe
- Then run the tool for removal of infected files. The tool will automatically scan all available discs and will try to heal the infected files. If an active virus is found in memory, the tool will ask the user to reboot the computer. Healing will be performed during operating system boot-up sequence, so any active virus cannot interfere with the healing process.
- Update you AVG after restart and run a complete test.
Perlu menghapus virus tertentu lainnya?
Kembali ke halaman Penghapusan Virus untuk memilih alat penghapus virus lainnya."


text:
Digital Phone iDCS-28BKPDF28SED/XAR
Samsung has the products and services that you need to drive performance, improve collaboration and set your business apart. Please provide your contact information below. A product specialist will get back to you as soon as possible.(*)Required fields.
Your request has been submitted. Thank you
for your interest in Samsung IT Business products.
Samsung doesn't want simply to support your business. We want to make it better.
Sign up below to access the latest Samsung IT Business news!
Your request has been sumitted. Thank you
for your interest in Samsung IT Business products.
Digital Phone iDCS-28BKPDF28SED/XAR