text:
Promotion Exclusions
*Promotion(s) are valid on Internet and Phone orders only. Due to manufacturer restrictions, offers exclude select new release and other select products. Sitewide offers exclude all products from Hari Mari, UGG, Birkenstock, Patagonia, OluKai, Go Pro, Costa and certain other manufacturers.
Offer is limited to one transaction per code. Offer cannot be combined with any other offer/coupon or used for previously purchased merchandise, exchanges, special orders or toward gift card purchases. Offer valid while supplies last, no substitutions, back-orders or rain checks. Offer void where prohibited by law. In case of returned merchandise, coupon savings may be deducted from refund. All promotion offer times are Central Time Zone. Offer valid for a limited time only.
While IslandersOutfitter.com attempts to provide accurate and timely information, there may be inadvertent technical or factual inaccuracies and typographical errors. We reserve the right to make corrections and changes to our website and/or promotions.

subset: commoncrawl


text:
Hyundai expanded its recall of Velosters on Thursday over faulty sunroofs that could spontaneously explode.
The automaker recalled about 13,600 of the vehicles over the same problem in December, and is now adding about 6,100 more to the list, according to The Associated Press.
That brings the total to 16,900 recalled vehicles in the U.S.
The Velosters added to the recall were built from July 4, 2011 through Oct. 31, 2011, according to the AP.
No injuries or crashes have been reported, although Reuters reported that 11 consumer complaints had been filed with the U.S. National Highway Traffic Safety Administration.
Hyundai will notify owners, and dealers will inspect the sunroof's integrity and replace the sunroof glass assembly, as necessary, free of charge.
The safety recall will begin in March, the Los Angeles Times reported.
Distributed by Internet Broadcasting. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.


text:
2007 Chevrolet (Chevy) Impala Blower Motors
2007 Chevrolet (Chevy) Impala Blower Motors
Complementary Norton Shopping Guarantee included for your protection.
NO BLOWER MOTORS AVAILABLE FOR CHEVROLET (CHEVY) IMPALAOther Impala models available:
- No-Hassle Returns
- Live Representatives
- DOT/SAE Certified
- Limited Lifetime Warranty
- Most Orders Shipped Priority Mail
- Distribution Centers in NJ, GA, NV
- 2048-Bit SSL Encrypted
- Norton Verified & Secure
Lifetime Warranty Guaranteed
Every part comes with a limited lifetime warranty.Quality Guaranteed
We carry only the highest-quality brands in the industry, including TYC, KOYO, DEPO, and Modine, just to name a few. All parts meet OEM quality standards, and in most cases exceed the quality of the original product.Easy Returns Guaranteed
We offer a no-questions 100% money back guarantee on all items returned within 30 days of delivery.Correct Item Guaranteed
If you receive an incorrect item from us, we will immediately pay for return shipment and send you the correct item. (For items over $100 we will ship the new item after receiving the original, which we will pay for).Item in Good Condition Guaranteed
If the part we ship to you arrives in damaged or non-working condition, we will ship another item out to you immediately. (For items over $100 we will ship the new item after receiving the original, which we will pay for.)Fast Shipping Guaranteed
Most orders are shipped out the same day as they're received.Best Price Guaranteed
Our prices are hands-down some of the lowest you'll find on the net. If you find a product sold for a lower price by another vendor, we will beat or match their price.
I have had a really great experience with your company! I didn't know where to find the part I needed for my vehicle, so was very happy to come across your FaceBook page. The part came in faster than I expected! It was overall one of the best online shopping experiences. Very fast! I will definitely be shopping with you guys again. The part I needed was my passenger car door handle, go figure. With 3 small children at home it was bound to happen I guess, ha! Thanks again for your great work!


text:
The Intel SSD DC S3700 (200GB) Reviewby Anand Lal Shimpi on 11/9/2012 8:01 AM EST
- Posted in
- Storage
- IT Computing
- SSDs
- Intel
- Cloud Computing
30 Comments
Back to Article
RealNinja - Tuesday, November 06, 2012 - linkLooks like a nice enterprise drive. Will be interesting to see how reliable the new controller is in the "real world."
For my consumer money...still gotta go with Samsung right now. Reply
twtech - Tuesday, November 06, 2012 - linkLooks like a nice workstation drive as well. With that kind of write endurance, it should be able to handle daily multi-gigabyte content syncs. Reply
futrtrubl - Saturday, November 10, 2012 - linkUmm, with that write endurance it should be able to handle daily multi-TERAbyte syncs, seeing as it is rated at 10x capacity/day for 5 years. Reply
CeriseCogburn - Wednesday, January 02, 2013 - linkI watched the interview, and saw all 3 of the braggarts spew their personal fantasies and pride talk, then came here to take a look, and I'm not impressed.
I do wonder how people do that. Reply
DanNeely - Tuesday, November 06, 2012 - link"I had to pull Micron's P400e out of this graph because it's worst case latency was too high to be used without a logarithmic scale. "
Could you add the value to the text then? Reply
crimson117 - Tuesday, November 06, 2012 - linkMove away from NAND - to what? Reply
stmok - Tuesday, November 06, 2012 - link...To Phase Change Memory (PCM). Reply
DanNeely - Tuesday, November 06, 2012 - linkEverything old (CDRW) is new again! Reply
martixy - Friday, November 09, 2012 - linkRight... so we got that covered. :)
Now we're eagerly awaiting the next milestone towards the tech singularity. Reply
Memristor - Wednesday, November 07, 2012 - linkTo Memristor Reply
JonnyDough - Thursday, November 15, 2012 - linkThere are a ton of new technologies that could replace NAND. There might even be a "betamax" or "HD DVD" in there that miss the mark and lose out to some better or cheaper tech. We'll just have to wait and see what comes to market and catches on. It won't be mere enthusiasts or gamers who decide, it will be the IT industry. It usually is. Reply
mckirkus - Tuesday, November 06, 2012 - linkOn interesting point to note is that if you run benchmarks on a RAMDisk, you get random 4k write IOPS in the neighborhood of 600MB/s. So in that regard, flash has a long way to go before the 6Gbit/s limitations of SATA 3.0 really hurt enterprise performance. Reply
extide - Tuesday, November 06, 2012 - linkI am not sure I understand this. First of all random 4K against a ramdisk will be HIGHLY dependent on the hardware, and I am sure you could see wayy better numbers than 600MB/sec. Also, 600MB/sec is pretty close to 6Gbit/sec, anyways. Reply
jwilliams4200 - Friday, November 09, 2012 - linkI think mckirkus is trying to say that there is a lot of headroom before sustained 4KiB random I/O SSD throughput will saturate a SATA 6Gbps link.
For example, the sustained QD32 4KiB random write speed for the S3700 is apparently less than 150MB/s (35K IOPS). It will need to double and double again before it saturates a 6Gbps SATA link Reply
mayankleoboy1 - Saturday, November 10, 2012 - linkHow long do we have to wait before SATA Express drives and interface get commercial ? Reply
justaviking - Saturday, November 10, 2012 - linkIf I read this the "Update" section correctly, Oracle recommends modifying their settings to change the way the log files are written.
Would it be possible to re-run the the Swingbench tests using the modified settings? I'd love to see how performance changes, especially on THIS drive, and then also on some others for comparison purposes. Reply
blackbrrd - Saturday, November 10, 2012 - linkI am guessing most people will run their Oracle database behind a raid card with some nvram to cache, which would remove the problem if the raid controller combined the writes. It would be interesting to see the performance behind a typical raid controller card with nvram cache. Reply
iwod - Sunday, November 11, 2012 - linkI am a regular Anandtech Reader, ( actually it is on my RSS Feeds so i read it everyday ) and i dont ever record Anand doing a Review on Toshiba SSD. So when i saw the performance of the MK4001 i had to look it up in Google to know it is an SAS SLC Enterprise SSD.
The article did eventually have a brief mention of its Spec. But i thought it was very late in the article. Would have help it the spec was actually listed out before hand.
It seems to me the Magic is actually in the software and not the hardware. A 1:1 mapping of NAND data Address table making Random Read and Write a consistent behaviour seems more like Software magic and could easily be made on any other SSD Controller with enough amount of RAM in it. The only hardware side of things that requires this tweak is ECC Memory.
And again we are fundamentally limited by Port Speed. Reply
mmrezaie - Monday, November 12, 2012 - linkI agree! Reply
alamundo - Monday, November 12, 2012 - linkGiven the enterprise focus, this drive seems to be competitive with the Intel 910 PCI card. It would be interesting to see the 3700 benchmarked against the 910. Reply
Hans Hagberg - Monday, November 12, 2012 - linkAn enterprise storage review today is not really complete without an array of 15K mechanical disks for comparison. This is still what is being used for performance in most cases and that is what we are up against when we are looking to motivate SSDs in existing configurations.
And for completeness, please throw in PCI-based SSD storage as well. Such storage always come up in discussions around SSD but there is too little independent test data available to take decisions.
Another question when reading the review is about the test system being used. I couldn't find this information?
Also - enterprise storage is most often fronted by high-end controllers with lot's of cache. It would be interesting to see an analysis of how that impacts the different drives and their consistency. Will the consistency be equalized by a big controller and cache in front of it?
The Swingbench anomaly is unfortunate because database servers are probably the primary application for massive implementation of SSD storage. It would be nice if the anomaly could be sorted out so we could see what the units can do. Normally, if one cares for enterprise performance, you are careful with alignment and separation of storage (data, logs etc.) so I agree with the Intel statement on this. Changing the benchmark would tear up the old test data so I'm not sure how to fix it without starting over.
The review format and test case selection is excellent. Just give us some more data points.
I would go as far as to say I would pay good money to read the review if the above was included. Reply
Sb1 - Tuesday, November 13, 2012 - link"An enterprise storage review today is not really complete without an array of 15K mechanical disks for comparison."
... "And for completeness, please throw in PCI-based SSD storage as well."
I __fully__ agree with Hans Hagberg
I thought this was a good article, but it would be an excellent one with both of these.
Still keep up the good work. Reply
Troff - Wednesday, November 14, 2012 - linkI agree as far as PCI-based SSDs go, but I see no point in including the 15K mechanical drive array for the same reason you don't see velocipedes in car reviews. Reply
ilkhan - Tuesday, November 13, 2012 - linkSo what I see here is that for an enterprise server drive, go with this Intel. For a desktop drive, this intel or a samsung 840pro, for a laptop drive, the samsung 840pro is best.
That about sum it up? Reply
korbendallas - Friday, November 16, 2012 - linkInstead of average and max latency figures, I would love to see percentiles: 50%, 90%, 99%, 99,9% for instance. If you look at intel's claims for these drives, they're in percentiles too.
If your distribution does not follow a bell curve, which is the case in many of the SSDs you are testing, average is useless. And as you already know (and why you didn't include it before now), max is useless too. Reply
dananski - Saturday, November 17, 2012 - linkI'd really like to see more graphs like the ones on "Consistent Performance: A Reality" showing how much variation drives can have in instantaneous IOPS. These really do a great job of showing exactly what Intel has fixed and I can see the benefit in some enterprise situations. A millisecond hiccup is an eternity for the CPU waiting for that data.
Personally I'd now like to know:
* How much of a problem this can be on consumer drives, where sustained random IO is less common?
* Is this test a good way to characterise the microstutter problem for a particular drive?
* How badly are drives with uneven IOPS distributions affected by RAID? (I know this was touched on briefly in the webcast with Intel) Reply
junky77 - Sunday, November 18, 2012 - linkthe consistency of current consumer SSDs? Reply
virtualstorage - Tuesday, March 12, 2013 - linkI see the test results upto 2000 seconds. With a enterprise array, there will be continuos ios in 24/7 production environment. What is the performance behavior of Intel SSD DCS3700 with continuous io's over many hours? Reply
damnintel - Wednesday, March 13, 2013 - linkheyyyy check this out damnintel dot com Reply
rayoflight - Sunday, October 06, 2013 - linkGot two of these. Both of them failed after approx. 30 boot up's. They arent recognised anymore by the bios or as external harddrives on a different system, as if they are completely dead. Faulty batch? Or do they "lock up" ? Anyone had this problem? Reply


text:
Review of Banco Av Villas
Page reviewed 2013-09-23
Recommendations:Publish posts more often.
Ask business partners, customers and friends to become fans.
Ask more questions to your fans.
Respond to your fans questions and comments more quickly.
Like other Pages and interact with them.
On Facebook, everyone's got something to say. But what does it all mean for you?
Read our new guide to modern media intelligence and find out how top social media managers spur engagement, measure results, and shape their company's brand voice in real time.


text: It's the day after the Coup … click on below to see who Michele nominated for nomination! Come talk about the aftermath with us in our forums! Chima and Natalie are nominated for eviction. August 14, 2009By J. D. MontgomeryBig Brother FacebookshareTwittertweetGoogle+sharePinterestpin it About the author J.D. Montgomery accidentally stumbled into the world of entertainment when he first joined the Yak's team all the way from medical school on the isle of St. Maarten. Entertainment media is probably the last place you'd expect a 3rd year medical student to wind up in, but YakkityYaks is where he's at. J.D. used his fast-paced learning style to quickly further himself as one of the Yak's top entertainment contributors. While he has no background in the entertainment industry, he is an avid fan of television, movies, and music and his passion for the exciting world of entertainment translates into his wide array of reports. When J.D. is not writing, you can find him busy studying for his medical boards and wandering the halls of the hospital … not Grey's Anatomy or House, MD style (fortunately or not). He also has a BS in Neuroscience and is always looking for ways to channel his medical background for the Yak. Too bad he's not a vet. Chima is no longer in the Big Brother house!!The Have/Have-Not Competition is Over! Related StoriesGet your Big Brother Feeds!June 15, 2017WHAT?? Why the Big Brother twist BB Takeover disappeared…August 10, 2015CBS Big Brother Returns! Epic or Fail?June 25, 2015Big Brother 17 Open Casting CallsFebruary 11, 2015Did Frankie Break the #RenomRule ?August 18, 2014Big Brother: Derrick's Grandfather has DiedJuly 25, 2014


text:
NVIDIA's GeForce 8800 (G80): GPUs Re-architected for DirectX 10by Anand Lal Shimpi & Derek Wilson on 11/8/2006 6:01 PM EST
- Posted in
- GPUs
111 Comments
Back to Article
Nightmare225 - Sunday, November 26, 2006 - linkAre the FPS posted in this article, Minimum FPS, Average FPS, or Maximum? Thanks! Reply
multiblitz - Monday, November 20, 2006 - linkI enjoyed your reviews always a lot as they inclueded the video-capbilities for a HTPC on previous cards. Unfortunately this was this time not the case. Hopefully there will be a 2. Part covering this as well ? If so, it would be nice to make a compariosn on picture quality as well against the filters of ffdshow, as nvidia is now as well supporting postprocessing filters... Reply
DerekWilson - Tuesday, November 21, 2006 - linkWhat we know right now is that 8800 gets a 128 out of 130 on HQV tests.
We haven't quite put together an HTPC look at 8800, but this is a possibility for the future. Reply
epsil0n - Sunday, November 19, 2006 - linkI am not agree with this:
"It isn't surprising to see that NVIDIA's implementation of a unified shader is based on taking a pixel shader quad pipeline, and breaking up the vector units into 4 scalar units. Now, rather than 4 pixel quads, we see 16 SPs per "quad" or block of stream processors. Each block of 16 SPs shares 4 texture address units, 8 texture filter units, and an L1 cache."
If i understood well this sentence tells that given 4 pixels the numbers of SPs involved in the computation are 16. Then, this assumes that each component of the pixel shader is computed horizontally over 16 SP (4pixel x 4rgba = 16SP). But, are you sure??
I didn't found others articles over the web that speculate about this. Reading others articles the main idea that i realized is that a shader is computed by one and only one SP. Each vector instruction (inside the shader) is "mapped" as a sequence of scalar operations (a dot product beetwen two vectors is mapped as 4 MUD/ADD operations). As a consequence, in this scenario 4 pixels are computed only by 4 SPs. Reply
DerekWilson - Tuesday, November 21, 2006 - linkHonestly, NVIDIA wouldn't give us this level of detail. We certainly pressed them about how vertices and pixels map to SPs, but the answer we got was always something about how dynamic the hardware is able to dynamically schedule the SPs optimally according to what needs to be done.
They can get away with being obscure about how they actually process the data because it could happen either way and provide the same effect to the developer and gamer alike.
Scheduling the simultaneous processing one vec4 MAD operation on 4 quads (16 pixels) over 4 groups of 4 SPs will take 4 clock cycles (in terms of throughput). Processing the same 16 pixels on 16 SPs will also take 4 clock cycles.
But there are reasons to believe that things happen the way we described. Loading components of 16 different "threads" (verts, pixels or whatever) would likely be harder on the cache than loading all 4 components of 4 different threads. We could see them schedule multiple ops from 4 threads to fill up each block of shaders -- like computing 4 consecutive scalar operations for 4 threads on 16 SPs.
At the same time, it might be easier to maximize SP utilization if 16 threads were processed on one block of SPs every clock.
I think the answer to this question is that NVIDIA knows, they didn't tell us, and all we can do is give it our best guess. Reply
xtknight - Thursday, November 16, 2006 - linkThis has been AT's best article in awhile. Tons of great, concise info.
I have a question about the gamma corrected AA. This would be detrimental if you've already calibrated your display, correct (assuming the game heeds to the calibration)? Do you know what gamma correction factor the cards use for 'gamma corrected AA'? Reply
DerekWilson - Monday, November 20, 2006 - linkI don't know if they dynamically adjust gamma correction based on monitor (that would be nice though) ...
if they don't they likely adjusted for a gamma of either (or between) 2.2 or 2.5.
Also, thanks :-) There was a lot more we wanted to pack in, but I'm glad to see that we did a good job with what we were able to include.
Derek Wilson Reply
bjacobson - Sunday, November 12, 2006 - linkThis comment is unrelated, but could you implement some system where after rating a comment, on reload the page goes back to the comment I was just at? Otherwise I rate something halfway down and then have to spend several seconds finding where I just was. Just a little nuissance.
Thanks for the great article, fun read. Reply
neo229 - Friday, November 10, 2006 - link
Both cards are extremely quiet during operation...
This is a very suspect quote. A card that requires two PCIe power connectors is going to dissipate a lot of heat. More heat means there must be a faster, louder fan or more substantial and costly heat sink. The extra costs associated with providing a truly quiet card mean that the bulk of manufacturers go with the loud fan option. Reply
DerekWilson - Friday, November 10, 2006 - linkIf manufacturers go with the NVIDIA reference design, then we will see a nice large heatsink with a huge quiet fan.
Really, it does move a lot of air without making a lot of noise ... Are there any devices we can get to measure the airflow of a cooling solution?
We are also seeing some designs using water cooling and theres even one with a thermo-electric (peltier) cooler on it. Manufacturers are going to great lengths to keep this thing running cool without generating much noise.
None of the 8 retail cards we are testing right now generate nearly the noise of the X1950 XTX ... We are working on a retail roundup right now, and we'll absolutely have noise numbers for all of these cards at load. Reply
aweigh - Friday, November 10, 2006 - linkYou can just use the program DX Tweaker to enable Triple Buffering in any D3D game and use your VSYNC with negligable performance impact. So you can play with your VSYNC, a high-res and AA as well. :) Reply
aweigh - Friday, November 10, 2006 - linkI'm gonna buy an 88 specifically to use 4x4 SuperSampling in games. Why bother with MSAA with a card like that? Reply
DerekWilson - Friday, November 10, 2006 - linkSupersampling can make textures blurry -- especially very detailed textures.
And the impact will be much greater with the use of longer more detailed pixel shaders (as the shaders must be evaluated at every sub-pixel in supersample).
I think transparency / adaptive AA are enough.
On your previous comment, I don't think we're to the point where we can hit triple buffering, vsync, high levels of AA AND high resolution (2560x1600) without some input lag (triple buffering plus vsync with framerates less than your refresh rate can cause problems).
If you're talking about enabling all these options on a lower resolution lcd panel, then I can definitely see that as a good use of the hardware. And it might be interesting to look at more numbers with these type of options enabled.
Thanks for the suggestion. Reply
aweigh - Saturday, November 11, 2006 - linkI never knew that about SuperSampling. Is it something similar to Quincux blurring? And would using a negative LOD via RivaTuner/nHancer counteract the effect?
How about NVIDIA's Digital Sharpness setting in Color Correction? I've found a smidge of sharpening can do wonders to improve overall clarity.
By the way, when you said Adaptive AA, were you referring to ATI cards? Reply
Unam - Friday, November 10, 2006 - linkDerek,
Saw your comment regarding the rationale for the test resolution, while I understand your reasoning now, it still begs the question how many of your readers have 30" LCD flat panels? Reply
DerekWilson - Friday, November 10, 2006 - linkThere might not be many out there right now, but it's still the right test platform for G80. We did test down to 1600x1200, so people do have information if they need it.
But it speaks to who should own an 8800 GTX right now. It doesn't make sense to spend that much money on a part if you aren't going to get anything out of it with your 1280x1024 panel.
Owners of a 2560x1600 panel will want an 8800 GTX. Owners of an 8800 GTX will want a 2560x1600 panel. Smooth framerates with the ability to enable 4xAA in every game that allowed it is reason enough. People without a 2560x1600 panel should probably wait until prices come down on the 8800 GTX or until games that are able to push the 8800 GTX harder to buy the card. Reply
Unam - Tuesday, November 14, 2006 - linkDerek,
A follow up to testing resolutions, the FPS numbers we see in your articles, are they maximum, minimum or average? Reply
Unam - Friday, November 10, 2006 - linkWho the heck runs 2560x1600? At 4XAA? Come on guys, real world benchmarks please! Reply
DerekWilson - Friday, November 10, 2006 - linkwe did:
1600x1200, 1920x1440, and even 1280x1024 in Oblivion Reply
dragonsqrrl - Thursday, August 25, 2011 - link....lol, owned. Reply
Sharky974 - Thursday, November 09, 2006 - linkThe new features of DX10 stuff was captivating at first, but quickly grew tiresome and needlessly complex. The IQ comparisons the same thing, some simplicity is needed here. Tell us in a nutshell what looks better and why. The mouse over pictures are well nigh useless as well, and all look like crap. Whatever needs to be changed to get the IQ point across, needs to be changed already, I'm guessing 200 zoom is a problem for starters.
Then who's bright idea was it to only test one resolution, through the whole article?
Then who's bright idea was it to dedicate just as many graphs as performance, one per game, to not only power draw, but the even more useless performance per watt? Meaning 66% of your data graphs, in an article about a paradign changin, long-anticipated, brand new GPU, are related to the power usage of the card. Are you electric workers monthly.com now?
I am very surprised more of the comments weren't negative, this review was a total failure.
And yeah, what's with all the non-standard resolution testing? All the big sites like H, Anand, and FS go round and round talking about the incredible depths they go to get the bottom of real world performance as it relates to the real world, average user, and then you guys use stupid resolution likes 1280X960 (FS uses that particular one), that nobody on earth uses, regularly! It's really, really stupid. Hell for that matter, nobody uses 1600X1200 or any non-LCD native res anymore either, yet those are all staples of any review, and so these "real world" articles aren't very real world at all. But that's somewhat of a tangent issue, and I actually dont mind a lot of different resolutions tested, just as long as the big common ones are hit (which is not always the case) Reply
DerekWilson - Friday, November 10, 2006 - linkI'm always working on bringing down the complexity of my explainations. It's one of my weak points as a writer. It's difficult for me to take something and present it at a high level that doesn't reflect exactly what the thing is. Analogies are great -- I like them -- but I have a hard time using them because I can't ever think of analogies that are accurate enough.
Any suggestions you have for helping me explain things completely, accurately, effectively, and (especially) in the most straight forward manner possible are very welcome.
As for the IQ comparisons -- these were much more simplified than I had intended (because Anand told me we couldn't do rollovers with 40 images on one page -- it would load too slow). This is our version of putting things in a nutshell. I could get to the point faster though --
gamma correct aa is great for edges, but it causes problems with thin lines and transparency/adaptive AA making textures look mushy. transparency/adaptive aa are great but have a large performance hit -- except in 8800 which keeps these features playable and offers higher IQ. CSAA is great at brining higher AA levels to edges, but the loss of Z data at the sub-pixel level makes it less effective at solving the thin line problem than equivalent MSAA modes. The roll overs illustrate all this.
Thats as simple as I can make it -- I hope it helps.
We did not only test at one resolution -- In every game we tested at 1600x1200, 1920x1440, and 2560x1600. In oblivion we tested at 1280x1024 as well.
All our resolution data was in the last graph on each page -- resolution scaling. There are two graphs per page on performance. As you can see, at resolutions below 2560x1600, the 8800 GTX is almost over kill.
1600x1200 is a standard LCD panel resolution and has been for quite some time. It's actually quite affordable now as well. 1280x1024 (while popular) is often too low to matter in a high end performance analysis piece (and where it did matter we tested it). 1920x1440 is a 4:3 resolution that will give 1920x1200 panel owners a very good idea of performance (differnce is usually under 5% in many games). 2560x1600 is a standard resolution for 30" LCD panels.
I can understand being upset if you missed the performance data at other resolutions, but it seems like the rest of your complaints are that we put too much data in the article. I doubt this will change in the future, but is there anything else we could have done to make this article better? We are very willing to listen to feedback, especially on articles as big as this.
Derek Wilson Reply
flexy - Friday, November 10, 2006 - link>>>
complaints are that we put too much data in the article. I doubt this will change in the future,
i doubt you can make it RIGHT for everyone...however i share the opinion w/ MOST that it is an excellent review. TOO much data is seldom bad, NOT on a site where you can expect geeks and nerds digging every bit of information :)
I remember times when reviews where FAR less detailed...and what can be better than going in-depth into AA/AF modi, showing their differnce in detail ? I think this was right on and i value such in-depth coverage !
The DX10 coverage MAYBE was "too much info" for some...but then legitimate IMHO. We're talking about totally new h/w architecture, totally new and revamped DX API and the first hardware supporting it..so it was defintly a good place to cover this.
Also...you always have the option to skip parts of a review...and the MORE detailed it is...the more it is a helpful resource (also later) to come back and read up. You dont need to comprehend any bit of information at once, but it's good to know it's there.
my $0.2 Reply
jiulemoigt - Thursday, November 09, 2006 - linkThe first really big issue is that a poly can have more than one color on it, due textures, subsurface scattering, displacements, bump maps, normal maps, occulion passes, specular highlight, transparency, and a few others I can not think of off the top of my head, you could probaly find out just by asking in any cg forum like cgtalk or any dev who has worked with a profesional 3d package. That being said it may have confused people to try and explain how it really works.
The other issue is to deal with gamma correct AA, maybe my moniter is showing a way different image but I'm not really sure how you can even compare
as the light is highlighting the building from two different direction in the images, the nvidia image is coming from the left and behind the buildings and the ati image is coming from the right and about midway down the image in front of the little building,
though a question that should be asked what time of day is it supposed to be the nvidia looks like dusk, and the ati looks blown out even for high noon, though the one above seems to be the same time of day and the nvidia is blown and the ati is shadowing correctly... really odd for the images, which suggests that some other filter is causing the issue on both cards like hdr, or something else.
DerekWilson - Thursday, November 09, 2006 - linkYes a poly can have more than one color on it, and I agree our explaination could have been better ... but it is a difficult topic to talk about.
The whole basis of multisample AA relies on the assumption that the color of a poly *within one pixel* will not vary significantly. Of course, this is not always true. This is, in fact, the reason supersample AA does make a difference -- it takes into account the actual color of the pixel at the position of the sub-pixel. This is also why its so much more expensive.
I didn't mean to imply that an entire poly must have only one color. But it's hard to talk about MSAA without pointing out the fact that the algorithm assumes one color per pixel per poly (calculated at the pixel center in most cases).
We did enable HDR, but we tried our hardest to take the screenshots at exactly the same ammount of time after loading the scene (Valve's HDR uses dynamic exposure which does change saturation over time and with light level coming into the camera).
While this would impact general image comparison, it doesn't impact the effect of gamma correct AA on thin lines (which is what we were trying to show).
Thanks for the feedback -- if there's anything you can add to help us be more specific in our description, we would certainly appreciate it. We would like to avoid simply leaving details out -- we'd like to learn how to better impart knowledge. Reply
Nimbo - Thursday, November 09, 2006 - linkThis must be the first GPU article that does not derive in a flame war between ATI and Nvidia fanboys... Reply
flexy - Thursday, November 09, 2006 - linki actually dont care. I look at performance and comparisons, and then chose what card to get :) Although w/ ATI for years already.
If one card, however, has some substantial advantage over another, i'll gladly point that out and also gladly debate with others why i'd prefer card X over Y.
Thats the difference between a fanboy and a enthusiast, i think. As long as i can back up statements w/ facts instead of just defeinding a "brand".
the other "problem" is really that same gen cards USUALLY are pretty much on par prformance wise...so debating/defeninf brand X over Y does make as much sense as defending ferrari over lamborghini :)
But then..if we wouldn't do that and even discuss about the "littlest" details and have lengthy conversations on forums eg. WHICH AA methods is better and why...and why 5 FPS there are better...and/or why this AF method is better than the other...it would be pretty boring.
I mean we're hardware-enthusiasts, and gfx-cards are (IMHO) the most interesting component in a PC :)
DigitalFreak - Thursday, November 09, 2006 - linkI thought we were done with the days of >$499 single GPU cards after the 7900GTX launch. Guess not. Reply
VooDooAddict - Thursday, November 09, 2006 - linkGreat article.
Now I just need to figure out if a 8800GTX will fit in a mATX UltraFly Case. Reply
Araemo - Thursday, November 09, 2006 - linkEveryone is repeating microsoft's claim that dx10 will be Vista-only.
the inq (I know, I know....) reported http://www.theinquirer.net/default.aspx?article=35...">here that there will be a directx '9.0L' for XP that supports the new rendering features of DirectX10, but without the new virtualization/driver model improvements. Reply
haris - Thursday, November 09, 2006 - linkYou must have missed the article they published the very next day http://www.theinquirer.net/default.aspx?article=35...">here. saying they goofed. Reply
Araemo - Thursday, November 09, 2006 - linkYes I did - thanks.
I wish they would have updated the original post to note the mistake, as it is still easily accessible via google. ;) (And the 'we goofed' post is only shown when you drill down for more results) Reply
Araemo - Thursday, November 09, 2006 - linkIn all the AA comparison photos of the power lines, with the dome in the background - why does the dome look washed out in the G80 images? Is that a driver glitch? I'm only on page 12, so if you explain it after that.. well, I'll get it eventually.. ;) But is that just a driver glitch, or is it an IQ problem with the G80 implementation of AA? Reply
bobsmith1492 - Thursday, November 09, 2006 - linkGamma-correcting AA sucks. Reply
Araemo - Thursday, November 09, 2006 - linkThat glitch still exists whether or not gamma-correcting AA is enabled or disabled, so that isn't it. Reply
iwodo - Thursday, November 09, 2006 - linkI want to know if these power hungry monster have any power saving features?
I mean what happen if i am using Windows only most of the time? Afterall CPU have much better power management when they are idle or doing little work. Will i have to pay extra electricity bill simply becoz i am a cascual gamer with a power - hungry/ ful GPU ?
Another question pop up my mind was with CUDA would it now be possible for thrid party to program a H.264 Decoder running on GPU? Sounds good to me:D Reply
DerekWilson - Thursday, November 09, 2006 - linkoh man ... I can't believe I didn't think about that ... video decoder would be very cool. Reply
Pirks - Friday, November 10, 2006 - linkdecoder is not interesting, but the mpeg4 asp/avc ENCODER on the G80 GPU... man I can't imagine AVC or ASP encoding IN REAL TIME... wow, just wooowww
I'm holding my breath here Reply
Igi - Thursday, November 09, 2006 - linkGreat article. The only thing I would like to see in a follow up article is performance comparison in CAD/CAM applications (Solidworks, ProEngineer,...).
BTW, how noisy are new cards in comparison to 7900GTX and others (in idle and under load)? Reply
JarredWalton - Thursday, November 09, 2006 - linkI thought it was stated somewhere that they are as loud (or quiet if you prefer) as the 7900 GTX. So really not bad at all, considering the performance offered. Reply
DerekWilson - Thursday, November 09, 2006 - linki'm sure there was a lot burried in there ... sorry if it wasn't easy to find.
8800 gtx and gtx are both no louder than 7900 gtx. 1950 xtx still takes the cake for loudest graphics card around by a long shot -- especially after it heats up in a game. Reply
crystal clear - Thursday, November 09, 2006 - linkMy comments in Daily Tech on this subject-
More "G80" Derivatives in February R
E: More info would be nice
By crystal clear on 11/8/06, Rating: 2
By crystal clear on 11/8/2006 8:03:43 AM , Rating: 2
If you link VISTA -SANTA ROSA platform-Core2DUO(merom)CPU line up(T7300,7500,7700 models)then a matching Graphics card
to complete the link.
So a G80 for laptops/notebooks?
The pairing of Intels Santa Rosa platform with Vista in the 2Q 07 is next big thing for the first tier notebook manufacturers & all they need is a matching G80 for this setup.
Nvidia currently caters to Desktop requirement/needs with the new G80 releases,wonder how the notebook/server versions will be-with Vista ofcourse.
yyrkoon - Thursday, November 09, 2006 - linkVitual memory is probably a good thing for most cases, but in the graphics arena, this *could* potentially make for sloppy/ bad coding practises. Knowing a lot of game devers (some of which actually work for well known companies), I've heard them from time to time complain about maxing a 16x PCI-E pipe. What I'm trying to say here, is that while it would be a good thing for never having to run out of texture memory, but that system memory, and definately the swap disk can not hold a candle to the memory bandwidth that most Video cards are capable of. End result, is that you definately *will* get a performance hit. All this, and we already know the memory bandwidth capabilities of modern PCs, suffice it to say, the most we'll see from current systems is what ? 12-13K GB/s ? Even a 7800GS can do roughly 35 GB/s on card. A 7600GT ? 22GB/s ?
Still I think Directx10 is a very good thing, and as I didnt read the whole article, perhaps a missed a little ? Reason being, I've been reading about Directx10 since April, and a friend of mine was privy to some of this information after an interview with ATI.
http://www.gamedev.net/reference/programming/featu...">http://www.gamedev.net/reference/programming/featu... Reply
saratoga - Thursday, November 09, 2006 - linkI don't know how they threading really works, but its quite possible VM support is required in order to allow multiple threads to run without stepping all over each other,. Reply
saratoga - Thursday, November 09, 2006 - linkSorry, should read "I don't know how THEIR threading works" Reply
falc0ne - Thursday, November 09, 2006 - linkI don't know what is the problem but I'm really unable to see the images within the latest articles from Anand...Can anyone give me a suggestion? What might be the cause of that?
The thing is I'm really, really interested in these articles and I need to see those images. Thanks
yyrkoon - Thursday, November 09, 2006 - linkOh, er, then in the options tab of Firefox, (tools->options->content) check the "load images" check box ;) Reply
falc0ne - Thursday, November 09, 2006 - linkwell...it would've been simple but I'm afraid is not that...It might be the addblock extension from firefox, other than that I have nooo ideeea...Well I will use the IE tab option instead and load the pages using IE 7. Thanks anyway:) Reply
yyrkoon - Thursday, November 09, 2006 - linkChecked the exceptions list ? I know that firefox makes it really simple to block images from a site (to a point of being too easy). Reply
JarredWalton - Thursday, November 09, 2006 - linkIf you've got AdBlock on Firefox, press Ctrl+Shift+A and you can see what it's blocking. If it blocks the images.anandtech.com stuff, you can then see which RegEx isn't working right and edit that. Reply
yyrkoon - Thursday, November 09, 2006 - linkIf you're using Firefox, get, and install the extension "flashblock". Just did this myself today, tired of all the *animated* adds bothering me while reading articles.
Sorry AT guys, but we've had this discussion before, and its realy annoying. Reply
JarredWalton - Thursday, November 09, 2006 - linkDo you want to be able for us to continue as a site? Because ads support us. Anyway, his problem is related to not seeing images, so your comment about blocking ads via flashblock is completely off topic. Reply
yyrkoon - Thursday, November 09, 2006 - linkOf course I want you guys to continue on as a site, just wish it were possible without annoying flashing adds in a section where I'm trying to concentrate on the article.
As for the off topic part, yeah, my bad, I mis-read the full post (bad habit). Feel free to edit or remove that post of mine :) Reply
archcommus - Thursday, November 09, 2006 - linkWhat browser are you using? Reply
falc0ne - Thursday, November 09, 2006 - linkfirefox 2.0 Reply
JarredWalton - Thursday, November 09, 2006 - linkIf Firefox, I know there's an option to block images not on the originating website. In this case, images come from image.anandtech.com while the article is on www.anandtech.com, so that my be the cause of your problems. IE7 and other browsers might have something similar, though I haven't ever looked. Other than that, perhaps some firewall or ad blocking software is to blame - it might be getting false positives? Reply
archcommus - Thursday, November 09, 2006 - linkWow to Anandtech - another amazing, incredibly in-depth article. It is so obvious this site is run by dedicated professionals who have degrees in these fields versus most other review sites where the authors just take pictures of the product and run some benches. Articles like this keep the AT reader base very very strong.
Also wow to the G80, obviously an amazing card. My question, is 450W the PSU requirement for the GTX only or for both the GTX and GTS? I ask because I currently have a 400W PSU and am wondering if it will be sufficient for next-gen DX10 class hardware, and I know I would not be buying the highest model card. I also only have one HDD and one optical drive in my system.
Yet another wow goes out to the R&D monetary investment - $475 million! It's amazing that that amount is even acceptable to nVidia, I can't believe the sales of such a high end, enthusiast-targeted card are great enough to warrant that. Reply
JarredWalton - Thursday, November 09, 2006 - linkSales of the lower end parts which will be based off G80 are what make it worthwhile, I would guess. As for PSU, I think that 450W is for the GTX, and more is probably a safe bet (550W would be in line with a high-end system these days, although 400W ought to suffice if it's a good quality 400W). You can see that the GTX tops out at just under 300W average system power draw with an X6800, so if you use an E6600 and don't overclock, a decent 400W ought to work. The GTX tops out around 260W average with the X6800, so theoretically even a decent 350W will work fine. Just remember to upgrade the PSU if you ever add other components. Reply
photoguy99 - Thursday, November 09, 2006 - linkI just wanted to second that thought -
AT articles have incredible quality and depth at this point - you guys are doing great work.
It's actually getting embarrasing for some of your competing sites, I browsed the Tom's article and it had so much fluff and retread I had to stop.
Please don't forget the effort is noticed and appreciated. Reply
shabby - Wednesday, November 08, 2006 - linkIt wasnt mentioned in the review, but whats the purpose of the 2nd sli connector? Reply
JarredWalton - Wednesday, November 08, 2006 - linkPage 17:
"The dual SLI connectors are for future applications, such as daisy chaining three G80 based GPUs, much like ATI's latest CrossFire offerings."
Using a third GPU for physics processing is another possibility, once NVIDIA begins accelerating physics on their GPUs (something that has apparently been in the works for a year or so now). Reply
Missing Ghost - Wednesday, November 08, 2006 - linkSo it seems like by substracting the highest 8800gtx sli power usage result with the one for the 8800gtx single card we can conclude that the card can use as much as 205W. Does anybody knows if this number could increase when the card is used in DX10 mode? Reply
JarredWalton - Wednesday, November 08, 2006 - linkWithout DX10 games and an OS, we can't test it yet. Sorry. Reply
JarredWalton - Wednesday, November 08, 2006 - linkIncidentally, I would expect the added power draw in SLI comes from more than just the GPU. The CPU, RAM, and other components are likely pushed to a higher demand with SLI/CF than when running a single card. Look at FEAR as an example, and here's the power differences for the various cards. (Oblivion doesn't have X1950 CF numbers, unfortunately.)
Notice how in this case, X1950 XTX appears to use less power than the other cards, but that's clearly not the case in single GPU configurations, as it requires more than everything besides the 8800 GTX. Here's the Prey results as well:
So there, GX2 looks like it is more power efficient, mostly because QSLI isn't doing any good. Anyway, simple subtraction relative to dual GPUs isn't enough to determine the actual power draw of any card. That's why we presented the power data without a lot of commentary - we need to do further research before we come to any final conclusions. Reply
IntelUser2000 - Wednesday, November 08, 2006 - linkIt looks like putting SLI uses +170W more power. You can see how significant video card is in terms of power consumption. It blows the Pentium D away by couple of times. Reply
JoKeRr - Wednesday, November 08, 2006 - linkwell, keep in mind the inefficiency of PSU, generally around 80%, so as overall power draw increases, the marginal loss of power increases a lot as well. If u actually multiply by 0.8, it gives about 136W. I suppose the power draw is from the wall. Reply
DerekWilson - Thursday, November 09, 2006 - linkmax TDP of G80 is at most 185W -- NVIDIA revised this to something in the 170W range, but we know it won't get over 185 in any case.
But games generally don't enable a card to draw max power ... 3dmark on the other hand ... Reply
photoguy99 - Wednesday, November 08, 2006 - linkIsn't 1920x1440 a resolution that almost no one uses in real life?
Wouldn't 1920x1200 apply many more people?
It seems almost all 23", 24", and many high end laptops have 1900x1200.
Yes we could interpolate benchmarks, but why when no one uses 1440 vertical?
Frallan - Saturday, November 11, 2006 - linkWell i have one more suggestion for a resolution. Full HD is 1920*1080 - that is sure to be found in a lot of homes in the future (after X-mas any1 ;0) ) on large LCDs - I believe it would be a good idea to throw that in there as well. Especially right now since loads of people will have to decide how to spend their money. The 37" Full HD is a given but on what system will I be gaming PS-3/X-Box/PC... Pls advice. Reply
JarredWalton - Wednesday, November 08, 2006 - linkThis should be the last time we use that resolution. We're moving to LCD resolutions, but Derek still did a lot of testing (all the lower resolutions) on his trusty old CRT. LOL Reply
Sunrise089 - Thursday, November 09, 2006 - linkThen I suppose he's in the market to part with an ugly old high-end CRT. I'd love to buy it from him. Seriously. Reply
JarredWalton - Thursday, November 09, 2006 - linkYou want an older 21" Cornerstone CRT? It's a beast, but you can have it for the cost of shipping (which unfortunately would probably be ~$50). I'd also sell my Samsung 997DF 19" CRT for about $50, and maybe an NEC FE991-SB for $50 (which unfortunately has a scratch from my daughter in the anti-glare coating). If anyone lives in the Olympia, WA area, you know how to contact me (I hope). I'd rather someone come by to pick up any of these CRTs rather than shipping, as I don't think I have the original boxes. Reply
DerekWilson - Thursday, November 09, 2006 - linklol next thing you know links to ebay auctions are gonna start showing up in our articles :-) Reply
yyrkoon - Thursday, November 09, 2006 - linklol, I've got a 21" techtronics I'll sell for $200 usd, plus shipping ;) Hasnt been used since I purchased my Viewsonic VA1912wb (well, been used very little ). Reply
imaheadcase - Wednesday, November 08, 2006 - linkcan't stand AA benchmarks myself :)
Question: Do you have any info on what kinda card nvidia releasing this feb? Is it something in between these 2 cards or something even lower?
Im looking for a $300ish g80! :D Reply
flexy - Wednesday, November 08, 2006 - linkif ANYTHING counts then how those high-end cards perform WITH their various AA settings.... the power of those cards (and the money spent on :) RIGHT translated into ---> IMAGE QUALITY/PERFORMANCE.
Please dont tell you you would get an G80 but do NOT care about AA, this does NOT make any sense...sorry...
I am especially impressed reading that transparency AA has such a LITTLE performance impact. What game engine did you test this on ?
On the older ATI cards (and am i right that T.A. is the same as "adaptive antialiasing" ? )...this feature (depending on game engine) is the FPS killer....eg. w/ games like oblivion (WHERE ARE THE GOTHIC 3 BENCHEIS BTW ? :)...much vegetation etc. game-engines.
Enable transparency AA and see all those trees, grass etc. without jaggies.
imaheadcase - Thursday, November 09, 2006 - linkWell lots of people don't are for AA. Even if i had this card I would not use it. I visually see NO difference with it on or off. Its personal test. I don't even see "jaggies" on my older 9700 PRO card. Reply
flexy - Thursday, November 09, 2006 - linkyou sure are talking about ANTIALIASING ???
What resoltions do you run ? Not that my CRT can even handle more than 1600x1200..but even w/ 1600 i get VERY prominent jaggies if i dont run AA.
I made it a habit to run at least 4xAA in ANY game, and some engines (hl2:source engine) etc. run extremely well with 4xAA, even 6xAA is very playable at elast with HL2.
The very recent games, namely NWN2 and G3 now dont support AA, playing at 1280x1024 and it looks utterly horrible ! If you say you dont see jags in say ANY resolution under 1600..very hard to believe Reply
imaheadcase - Thursday, November 09, 2006 - linkYes im talking about antialiasing. I normally play BF2 and oblivion at 1024x768 (9700 pro remember).
Fact is most people won't see them unless someone points them out. The brain is still better at rendering stuff the way you want to see it vs hardware :) Reply
flexy - Thursday, November 09, 2006 - linkok..but then it's also a performance problem. If it doesn't bother you, well ok.
I also have to settle w/ the fact that many RECENT games are even unable to do AA..however i wish they would.
But once i get a 8800 i will do &&&& to get the most out of IQ, AA, AF, transparency/texture AF, you name it. ALONE also for the reason that i would need a super-high end monitor first to even run resolutions like 2000xsomething...and as long as i have a lame 19" CRT and CANNOT even go over 1600 (99,99% of games even running everything on 1280x or 1360x) i will use all the power to get out best possible IQ in those low resolutions.
Also..looking at the benchmarks..its NOT that you lose any real time gaming-experiencee since THOSE monster cards are made for exactly this...eg. running oblivion with all those settings at MAX AND AA on and HDR...and you are still in VERY reasobale FPS ranges.
dwalton - Thursday, November 09, 2006 - linkWhen using older cards sacrificing IQ for performance is typically acceptable. Who needs AA when running F.E.A.R on a 9700 Pro.
However, on a just launched high-end card, why would anyone feel the need to sacrifice IQ for performance? Some may say resolution over AA, but I find it hard to believe that there is a lot of gaming enthusiasts with deep pockets, who play with insane resolutions yet no AA.
JarredWalton - Thursday, November 09, 2006 - linkIf I look for jaggies, I see them. On most games, however, they don't bother me much at all. Running at native resolution on LCDs or at a really high resolution on CRTs, I'd take that over a lower res with 4xAA. If you have the power to enable 4xAA, great, but I'm certainly not one to suggest it's required. I'd rather be able to enable vsync without a massive performance hit (i.e. stay above 60 FPS) than worry about jaggies. Personal preference. Reply
munim - Wednesday, November 08, 2006 - link"With the latest 1.09 patch, F.E.A.R. has gained multi-core support,"
Where is this? Reply
JarredWalton - Wednesday, November 08, 2006 - linkI wrote that, but it may be incorrect. I'm trying to get in contact with Gary to find out if I'm just being delusional about Quad Core support. Maybe it's NDA still? Hmmm.... nothing to see here! Reply
JarredWalton - Wednesday, November 08, 2006 - linkOkay, it's the 1.08 patch, and that is what was tested. Since we didn't use a quad core CPU I don't know if it will actually help or not -- something to look at in the future. Reply
Nelsieus - Wednesday, November 08, 2006 - linkI haven't even finished reading it yet, but so far, this is the most comprehensive, in-depth review I've seen on G80 and I just wanted to mention that beforehand.
:) Reply
GhandiInstinct - Wednesday, November 08, 2006 - linkWhat upcoming games will be the first to be fully made on DX10 structure? And does the G80 have full support of DX10? Reply
timmiser - Thursday, November 09, 2006 - linkMicrosoft Flight Simulator X will be DX10 compliant via a planned patch once Vista comes out.
JarredWalton - Wednesday, November 08, 2006 - linkAll DX10 hardware will be full DX10 (see pages 2-4). As for games that will be DX10 ready, Halo 2 for Vista will be for sure. Beyond that... I don't know for sure. As we've explained a bit, DX10 will require Vista, so anything launching before Vista will likely not be DX10 compliant. Reply
shabby - Wednesday, November 08, 2006 - linkThey're re-doing a dx8 game in dx10? You gotta be kidding me, whats the point? You cant polish a turd. Reply
JarredWalton - Wednesday, November 08, 2006 - linkThey did the same thing with the original Halo, porting it (and slowing it down) to DX9. MS seems to think making Halo 2 Vista-only will get people to upgrade to the new OS. [:rolls eyes:] Reply
stmok - Wednesday, November 08, 2006 - linkHow else are they gonna get gamers to upgrade to Vista? :)
(by cornering them into adopting Vista, using DirectX 10.0)
Its sad and pathetic at the same time.
DirectX 10.0 should be a "transitional" solution...That is, it covers both XP and Vista. This allows people to gradually upgrade their hardware, and if they wish, to Vista. What MS is doing now, is throwing everyone (developers and consumers) into the deep end, and expecting them to pay for the changes. (I suspect some would be put off by this, while the majority will continue to accept it...Which is unfortunate).
Great article BTW. Interesting to see the high-end stuff...But I doubt I can afford it in this lifetime!
I have two questions!
(1) Any chance of looking at a triple video card setup?
(I saw a presentation slide which had 2 video cards in SLI, while a third showed something else on screen).
(2) Any idea when the GF8600-series comes?
(mainstream market solution). Reply
yyrkoon - Thursday, November 09, 2006 - linkGreat, links arent working ?
http://www.gamedev.net/reference/programming/featu...">http://www.gamedev.net/reference/programming/featu... Reply
yyrkoon - Thursday, November 09, 2006 - linkhttp://www.gamedev.net/reference/programming/featu...">
This article was written by a friend of mine back in April after an interview with ATI. Perhaps this will clear some things up. Reply
yyrkoon - Thursday, November 09, 2006 - linkWhen you break all hardware/software ties to something that has been around for 4-5 years? Its not that easy making it "transitional". From a software perspective, D3D10 is not compatable with XP in the least.
I for one, think this is a step in the right direction. Reply
JarredWalton - Thursday, November 09, 2006 - linkSupposedly all of the changes to the WDDM make porting DX10 back to Windows XP "impossible", although I'm more inclined to think the correct term would be "difficult" and you also have to add in "it doesn't fit with MS marketing protocol". WDDM is quite different in Vista however, so maybe there's some substance to the claims. Reply
cosmotic - Wednesday, November 08, 2006 - linkOn page 9:
--Briefly explain what a sub-pixel is in the sentence before-- Reply
JarredWalton - Wednesday, November 08, 2006 - linkDue to the size of this article and the amount of time it took to get ready, let me preempt any comments about the spelling and grammar. I am in the process of editing the final document as I read through it, and there are spelling/grammar errors. If they bother you too much, check back in an hour. If you read this an hour from now and you still find errors, then you can respond, though it would be useful to keep all responses in a single thread like this one.
Thanks in advance,
Jarred Walton
xtknight - Thursday, November 16, 2006 - linkOn p 12 (gamma corrected AA):
"This causes problems for thing like thin lines." Reply
acejj26 - Wednesday, November 08, 2006 - link"If DirectX 10 sounds like a great boon to software developers, the fact that DX10 will only be supported in Windows XP is certain to curb enthusiasm. "
I believe this should say "DX10 will only be supported in Windows Vista..."
Not to be rude, but shouldn't the article be edited BEFORE being published?? Reply
JarredWalton - Wednesday, November 08, 2006 - linkThe text is basically complete, and minor spelling issues aren't going to change the results. Obviously, proofing 29 pages of article content is going to take some time. We felt our readers would be a lot more interested in getting the content now rather than waiting even longer for me to proof everything. I know the vast majority of readers don't bother to comment on spelling and grammar issues, but my post was to avoid the comments section turning into a bunch of short posts complaining about errors that will be corrected shortly. :) Reply
Iger - Wednesday, November 08, 2006 - linkPff, of course we would! If I would like to read a novel I would find a book! Results first - proofing later... if ever :) Thanks for the article! Reply
JarredWalton - Wednesday, November 08, 2006 - linkDid I say an hour? Okay, how about I just post here when I'm done reading/editing? :) Reply
JarredWalton - Wednesday, November 08, 2006 - linkOkay, I'm done proofing/editing. If you still see errors, feel free to complain. Like I said, though, try to keep them in this thread.
--Jarred Reply
LuxFestinus - Thursday, November 09, 2006 - linkPg. 3 under <b>Unified Shaders</b>
<i>Until now, building a GPU with unified shaders would not have desirable, let alone practical, but Shader Model 4.0 lends itself well to this approach.</i>
Should read as follows:
<i>Until now, building a GPU with unified shaders would not have <b>been</b> desirable, let alone practical, but Shader Model 4.0 lends itself well to this approach.</i>
Good try though.;) Reply
shabby - Wednesday, November 08, 2006 - link$600 for the gtx and $450 for the gts is pretty good seeing how much they crammed into the gpu, makes you wonder why the previous gen topped 650 bucks at times. Reply
dcalfine - Wednesday, November 08, 2006 - linkHow does the 8800GTX compare to the 7950GX2? Not just in FPS, but also in performance/watt? Reply
dcalfine - Wednesday, November 08, 2006 - linkIgnore ^^^
Hot card by the way! Reply
neogodless - Wednesday, November 08, 2006 - linkI know you touched on this, but I assume that DirectX 10 is still not available for your testing platform, Windows XP Professional SP2, and additionally no games have been released for that platform. Is this correct? If so...
Will DirectX 10 be made available for Windows XP?
Will you publish a new review once Vista, DirectX 10 and the new games are available?
Can we peak into the future at all now? Reply
JarredWalton - Wednesday, November 08, 2006 - linkDX10 will be Vista only according to Microsoft. What that means according to some game developers is that DX10 support is going to be somewhat slow, and it's also going to be a major headache because for the next 3-4 years they will pretty much be required to have a DX9 rendering solution along with DX10. Reply
DerekWilson - Wednesday, November 08, 2006 - linkNo DX10 for winxp -- but you've got OGL with extensions.
We will certainly take a look at DX10 performance once we have DX10 apps.
Have fun glimpsing :-) Reply


text:
This program seeks to enhance what is understood about mentoring as a prevention and intervention strategy for youth who are at risk of involvement or already involved in the juvenile justice system. While mentoring appears to be a promising intervention for youth, more evaluation work is needed to further highlight the characteristics and components of a mentoring program that are most effective. Research is also needed to demonstrate the specific components of mentoring programs that have a significant impact in reducing juvenile delinquency and offending. This solicitation will fund research studies that will inform the design and delivery of mentoring programs. OJJDP expects that the results of this effort will encourage a more effective utilization of resources and enhance the implementation of evidence-based best practices for juvenile mentoring. This program will be authorized by an Act appropriating FY 2013 funds for the Department of Justice.
Learn more. [1]
[1] http://www07.grants.gov/search/search.do?&mode=VIEW&oppId=212575


text:
Wet Seal Second Skin Jegging - Long
Sold Out
A member of our very own denim line, Blue Asphalt's Second Skin jegging in the light wash shade puts traditional skinny jeans to shame with a mega stretchy and super slim fit. Features include a basic five pocket design with creased front whiskered detailing, short fly and button closure, 10" skinny leg opening that is perfect for tucking into boots, and a 34" long length inseam. Model is 5'11" and wears a size 7
- 83% Cotton / 15% Polyester / 2% Spandex
- Machine Wash
- Imported


text:
Baby Alpaca, Super Fine Alpaca, Extra Fine Merino Wool and Nylon, blended together creating a super soft extra lightweight yarn with the meterage of a 4ply weight. The chainette construction gives the finished fabric a beautiful soft weightless feel, to knit and wear.
Brushed Fleece is a super soft blend of extra fine merino wool and baby alpaca. The yarn has a soft marl colour effect and is quick to knit making it very wearable, warm and lightweight.
A super soft, brushed effect blend of 32% nylon, 27% wool, 25% alpaca and 16% yak, which is created using the patented soffili production method. This results in a stunning, voluminous, light and airy yarn.


text: Internet sweepstakes cafes Are you concerned that the growth in Internet sweepstakes cafes will lead to more problem gambling? Comments Email Print March 11, 2013 Updated Related LinksThe Big Issue: March 14, 2011What happens if we're no longer witnesses? Morning Roundup Business headlines from Crain's Cleveland Business and other Ohio newspapers — delivered FREE to your inbox every morning. Sign up for the Morning Newsletter.


text:
Samsung Galaxy S III Performance Preview: It's Fastby Brian Klug & Anand Lal Shimpi on 5/3/2012 6:13 PM EST
- Posted in
- Samsung
- Smartphones
- Mobile
- SoC
- Exynos 4 Quad
- Galaxy S III
92 Comments
Back to Article
mavere - Thursday, May 03, 2012 - linkThe performance is damn impressive. If only the phone's externals matched the internals... Reply
deadsix - Thursday, May 03, 2012 - linkThis, I think the Galaxy Nexus and HTC One X all look better. It looks really cheap. Reply
RussianSensation - Thursday, May 03, 2012 - linkI think it looks better in white than in dark blue. If you get a nice after market carbon fibre cover for the back, it'll look like a large iPod touch, which is not too bad imho.
Also, sometimes products look ugly in pictures but look a lot better in person. The performance sure is impressive though. Reply
B3an - Friday, May 04, 2012 - linkI've watched some hands on videos on Youtube of this phone, it does look nicer in the vids. I have a S2 and think the S3 looks nicer. The thing thats always bothered me about my S2 (international version) is the bump that sticks out on the bottom back side, where the speaker is. Looks tacky. Where as the S3 just has a completely flat back which looks much nicer.
The only issue i have with the S3 is that the display is almost definitely pentile, and certainly looks it from the full size close up images here. If this was SAMOLED+ (non-pentile) instead of SAMOLED then that display would be the ballz.
Love the performance though! Better than expected. I really wanted a Snapdragon S4 SoC with a better GPU, but now i'll happily take the Exynos 4 Quad. Reply
RussianSensation - Friday, May 04, 2012 - link"I really wanted a Snapdragon S4 SoC"
Well the AT&T version might have different CPU, possibility even like HTC One X differs in US vs. international markets. So don't count the S4 out just yet, especially since it would go nicely with the LTE capable chipset. Reply
p3ngwin - Saturday, May 05, 2012 - linkno one is getting sub-7" Super AMOLED PLUS 720P screens until towards the end of the year.
it's just too expensive to put in a smartphone right now. Reply
Skiddywinks - Thursday, May 03, 2012 - linkI wouldn't say it looks cheap, but it certainly doesn't look as good as the S2. Reply
SamsungAppleFan - Friday, May 04, 2012 - linkRegardless of which galaxy you guys think looks better, I can assure you this phone will look beautiful in your hands. If you guys insist on glass that shatters and ceramics that chip, get another phone. Nuff said. Reply
frostyfiredude - Thursday, May 03, 2012 - linkHow does it feel in use compared to the HTC One series? Benchmarks look good, but we all know that doesn't quite tell the whole story. Reply
lilmoe - Monday, May 07, 2012 - linkI would say the Galaxy S3's UI feels better, if the previous Touchwiz4.0 VS Sense3.5 difference tells us anything. I know Sense 4 was stripped down a lot, but I also hear that the HTC One X with Sense 4 doesn't yet fully utilize GPU rendering (UI side of things). Some users complain of stuttering with the OneX, and I've seen some myself on some videos. The browser on the OneX is just not on par with the overall device, it has lots of useless refreshes, text re-flows, and page redraws to the point where it affects the browsing performance very negatively. On the other hand, I have yet to see any video where the Galaxy S3 lags or stutters in any department. Even the Galaxy S2 was superior in smooth performance than any other newer device out there. I don't see why Samsung won't improve on that with the S3.
Add to that the fact that Exynos almost always has superior benchmarks in its class, in addition to better software optimization. I say the HTC ONLY wins in the more professional ans sleeker looks of both the device and the UI. Reply
Shri - Wednesday, May 09, 2012 - linkYes.. Earlier release had a stuttering due to Sense 4.0..
But a software update has made it all clear and is now butter smooth...
Seriously, I have nothing to do with a such a high performance S3... Having a top notch score doesnt tell the whole story to a must buy phone.... Surely the look also counts.. First look will be the first impression.... And HTC One X has it with an decent scores wit All round positives... Reply
jayhawk11 - Thursday, May 03, 2012 - linkLooks like they aren't messing around with this new Mali-400. It will be interesting to see how Apple responds. Reply
Aenean144 - Thursday, May 03, 2012 - linkA 32 nm A5X will be more than competitive. It's a good question whether Apple will choose to use it rather than a die shrunk A5 though. A higher clock A5 will match these benchmarks. An A5X will be 50% faster. Maybe even close to 100%. Reply
B3an - Friday, May 04, 2012 - linkA5X with the same GPU is still too large and power hungry even at 32nm to go in to a phone. Look at the insanely large batteries already needed for iFad 3, a one node shrink isn't going to massively change the power usage enough. The only way they could possibly get that in a phone at 32nm is by using extremely low clocks. Then the GPU might still compare but the CPU would be much slower, even slower than the iPhone 4S for CPU performance. 32nm A5 is more likely, which i highly doubt would match the Exynos 4 Quad atleast on CPU performance. Reply
Anaxarxes - Friday, May 04, 2012 - linkThe reason why the new iPad needs such an enormous battery is its 2048*1536 screen. A5X is more power hungry than A5 of course, but only in high workload. idle and even in small tasks, A5X equals A5 in terms of power consumption if not beats it. So a 32nm A5X with little tweaks would take it dangerously close to the S3.
S3 is a monstrous phone both in size and in performance. I think Samsung used a bigger screen:
-720p on a 4.2" display is harder and much more expensive to build due to high ppi.
-4,8 inch gives more room for the battery which the quad core CPU needs more than anything.
But I think that people might not want a bigger screen than already over sized S2. But again geeks tend to droll over specs than usability, so it'll win their hearts. Reply
B3an - Friday, May 04, 2012 - linkA5X uses way more power with that GPU. It also need extra cooling added on top of the chip and still gets hotter.
And as proven many times with Tegra 3 already, quad core does not use more power. So once again you're wrong. And being as the S3 has the first 32nm quad core it will likely use considerably less power than the A5 and other dual-core SoC's.
The S2 wasn't at all over sized, it's also thinner than the iPhone as well which helps compensate. It's funny you mention usability because the tiny midget screen the iPhone has is totally unacceptable and makes using it harder even if you dont have large hands. Theres a reason nearly all other phones are using larger screens - because they're better! Reply
Anaxarxes - Friday, May 04, 2012 - linkYou just cant compare Tegra 3 with a normal quad core. Tegra is an hybrid product with a companion core that switches the quad cores on and off and simply becomes single core under idle load. The reason why A5X has a heat spreader is because of the quad core GPU. Under heavy load it becomes quite hot. But under normal load it is THE SAME CPU as the A5 if not further developed to use less power.
Hold an S2 with one hand and try to touch the upper cross corner of the screen with your thumb while firmly holding it in your palm. You just CAN'T. Because it's too big. And don't get me started with the Galaxy Note joke.
Do you think Apple sticks to 3,5" screen because they cannot develop a larger screen product? Do you seriously believe that?
Apple strategy is simple, really. Do something that makes sense for the average user. Design in a such way that the product just feels right ergonomically and aesthetically.
Samsung is more like an OEM. Pick the best shit out there and combine. There you go! The fastest phone with the brightest screen. No, thanks. I'd have a design that is thoroughly thought and developed. Reply
SamsungAppleFan - Friday, May 04, 2012 - linkDo you think really think Samsung didn't develop a 3.5 inch screen for their G series cause they couldn't? Do you seriously believe that? ;)
Apple stuck to 3.5 because that's what dictator Steve said is the perfect magical size. Now that people know better they're upping to 4 inches with the next iPhone. They're just following the trend like any other company. Wake up. Meeehhhh Meeehhh.
And unfortunately for you, everyone review of the note was full of praise. Are you saying all those 5 million people who bought the galaxy note is a fool? Hardly. Need a napkin? You are oozing your hate sauce everywhere. Reply
Anaxarxes - Friday, May 04, 2012 - linkI'm not hating anything. I love competition, but Samsung's products are not for me.
Samsung couldn't have done a 3.5" galaxy simply because they could not have differentiated themselves enough to make a sale. If all specs and sizes are similar, who do you think will sell more, Apple or Samsung?
And yes 3.2-3.7" is still the best size for a smartphone for useability.
But keep in mind that without dictator Steve, you'd never have had Galaxy. You'd be typing with your 8mp camera/qwerty/ BlackJack.
Apple's screen size increase is purely battery limitation related. If there could be a 8Whr battery in the size of the current iPhone's battery, Apple would have never upped the screen size in the next gen.
I tend to be a fanboy of good products that have been designed well. Unfortunately Samsung products does not feel that way. Reply
teldar - Saturday, May 05, 2012 - linkI'm 6'2", don't have huge hands for a guy my size. I have a droid X in an otter box case.
I use it ALL THE TIME.
I can hold it comfortably in one hand and get to anything I want to reach with that hand's thumb. Again, this is a 4.3" screen phone in an otter box.
Just because your hands are too small for a large screen phone and you don't want a large screen phone does not mean that nobody can or wants to use one.
Please try to keep in mind there is a difference between your preferences and everyone else's.
As far as the 5" screen goes, I have been saying for two years that I would like a 5" screen. I don't care that much about size as I was carrying a phone and a PDA until I got my X.
Bring on the 5" HTC flagship with the quad core S4 and Adreno 320 which is supposed to be released later this year. Reply
steven75 - Sunday, May 06, 2012 - linkYou must have some massive pockets and/or never sit down with your phone in your pocket. I'll point out that the majority of people do not remove their phone from their pocket while sitting or walking because it's already comfortable. Reply
steven75 - Sunday, May 06, 2012 - link"Theres a reason nearly all other phones are using larger screens - because they're better!"
More like because they need a reason to differentiate from Apple and fit larger larger batteries to handle the OS with the most inefficient power usage.
In the US Apple sells more iPhone on each carrier it's on that all Android phones on the same carrier combined. If the display size was an huge problem, that wouldn't happen. Reply
Aenean144 - Friday, May 04, 2012 - linkAn A5X from Samsung's 32 nm node will be about 95 mm^2. This would be about 25% smaller than the current A5 (~124 mm^2) in the iPhone 4S. With a 20% savings in power as well, it'll be about the same power envelope.
Apple has prioritized GPU over CPU when they have these constrained situations. At least GPU of a certain baseline. You can make the call right now that the dual-core A9 in the 2012 iPhone will be no more than 1 GHz. Reply
steven75 - Sunday, May 06, 2012 - linkiFad...really? Are you 12? Reply
jamisont - Friday, May 04, 2012 - linkperfect example would be 45nm A5 on Ipad 2 vs 32nm A5 on new Ipad.. similar performance but better battery life. Reply
aliasfox - Friday, May 04, 2012 - linkIf Apple can't get a new chip out in time (A15 based A6 or something), my bet would be something along the lines of a die shrunk, 32nm A5 with a ~50% speed bump. Remember, A5 in the iPhone runs at 800 MHz, so even a 50% speed bump would only bring it to 1.2 GHz.
If we were to scale the iPhone 4s benchmarks presented here by 50%, the new scores would be fairly comparable to the GS3 on the graphics front and not be too far behind on the browser side of things.
I guess it would be interesting to see what they have to do to bring 2012 levels of SoC performance and LTE while maintaining some semblance of battery life without increasing the phone to the size of a small tablet - we all know that the reason everyone else's 'flagship' phones are 4.5"+ is because it provides more room for a battery, and this is something Apple's been keen to avoid so far. Reply
zorxd - Friday, May 04, 2012 - linkBrowser benchmarks are not CPU benchmarks. Unless you compare two phones with the exact same version of the browser.
Apple's A5's CPU (or A5X, it's the same) is no faster than any other Cortex A9.
A 1.2 GHz A5 would have a CPU comparable to the Galaxy S2, so it would still be 2011 levels of performance.
Apple skipped the CPU upgrade the last time, so I believe this time they will show something much more powerful. They might have a quad core A9 too, a dual A15, or at the bare minimum, a high frequency dual A9. Reply
Aenean144 - Friday, May 04, 2012 - linkI really doubt that Apple will have a Cortex-A15 SoC for the 2012 iPhone.
There's only two possibilities: a 32 nm A5X or a 32 nm A5. If it is a 32 nm A5X, it'll be no more than 1 GHz. If it is a 32 nm A5, it'll be 1 GHz, maybe 1.2 GHz.
Both options will be competitive to the Galaxy S3. For 95%, maybe 99%, of a consumer's workload, dual-core will be perfectly fine, if not overkill. Quad-core is overkill. 95% of the software out there are either single threaded or only has one thread that really requires CPU power.
With the A5X in an iPhone, Apple is giving up the 5% of folks who would use software that is embarrassingly parallel such as computational modeling, in favor for higher performance in gaming or anything that can use the GPU. With games being the dominant app in the app store, it is certainly the right choice. Reply
krumme - Thursday, May 03, 2012 - linkI was i doubt about the effect of pentile, but then re-read this january article about the nexus display:
Now this is damn solid reviewing, comparing different own measuring and calculation technique with own subjective experience. Looking forward for another detailed, solid, phone review. The effects of battery life is of outmost importance to me, or else i will have to cancel my preorder.
Btw glad we didnt get some fancy material, with a nice marketing name, only to be shattered in real life. We want flexible plastic :) Reply
steven75 - Sunday, May 06, 2012 - link"Btw glad we didnt get some fancy material, with a nice marketing name, only to be shattered in real life. We want flexible plastic :)"
It's too bad they didn't make a nice looking plastic phone like the One X or Lumia 900 and instead had to make something that looks like a 2008 design. Reply
snoozemode - Thursday, May 03, 2012 - linkPlease write HTC One X (MSM8960) or HTC One X (Tegra 3), after all, this is a hardware site right? Reply
Fleeb - Thursday, May 03, 2012 - linkWasn't Tegra 3 reviewed already? Reply
RussianSensation - Thursday, May 03, 2012 - linkHTC One X (international) = Tegra 3
HTC One X (AT&T) = One XL (L for LTE) = Snapdragon S4. Reply
jjj - Thursday, May 03, 2012 - linkCPU perf is not really tested,here even more so than in the full reviews,it's all way too much browser orientated and you get a huge impact from the browswer and momory/storage perf - the results are relevant for each specific device but aren't painting a clear picture of the SoC.
In the full review i wish you wouldn't ignore storage perf,battery life when gaming and battery life when idle (standby time). Reply
remain_insane - Thursday, May 03, 2012 - linkI think what you are asking for is irrelevant. Those specific test results would be important if you were to buy the soc by itself to use as you saw fit, but that is not how it is. You get this soc with this phone, and that is how it should be tested. Reply
sonicmerlin - Friday, May 04, 2012 - linkAlso I have to laugh when the author writes "so and so found the browser to be *buttery smooth*". Oh for gods sake the author and/or his friend are blind if they think any Android browser is smooth. The endless frame skipping that essentially every ICS browser has is maddening. And response lag increases dramatically on heavy websites.
As if a "quad-core" SoC is going to make a difference. Reply
SamsungAppleFan - Friday, May 04, 2012 - linkI have the new iPad 3. It stutters as well in image heavy sites like Engadget and The Verge. And not only that image heavy pdfs takes about a second for them to clear up with each swipe of the page.
The iPad 3 needed a quad core processor as well as gpu. All these micro stutters are a little annoying to say the least. I can still live with that because I do a lot of reading and retina density really does help. Reply
darkcrayon - Saturday, May 05, 2012 - linkMy iPad 3 does not stutter on Engadget or The Verge. Are you using Safari or a 3rd party browser without the smooth UIWebView scrolling enabled (which unfortunately is most of them since it's a private API call to enable it).
I can tell you that at least by watching top and Instruments, scrolling quickly in Safari on a page like Engadget does not seem to be CPU bound on either an iPad 2 or iPad 3, so not sure what the issue is you're having on your device.
PDFs are nowhere near as fast as Safari on web pages, but I haven't manipulated any on a newer Android device for comparison. Does Android have native PDF viewing? (I had to download a reader for my Cyanogenmod 9 TouchPad). Reply
yjwong - Saturday, May 05, 2012 - linkSamsung is known to implement a multitude of optimizations in the browser. The changes made are pretty evident in the Samsung Galaxy S2 (on Gingerbread), where every other Android browser lagged (including the G2x and Nexus S). S2 didn't have any "frame skipping" to talk about, even with 1080p video playing in Flash. I'm pretty sure it will be the same in the S3. Reply
Devo2007 - Thursday, May 03, 2012 - linkI see Samsung still insists on having their Battery is Charged notification. Looks like if I get this phone, I'll be making sure to install a custom rom that disables that, as there's nothing worse than being woken up overnight because my phone wants to tell me it's now charged. (on various Samsung phones, it would even vibrate or alert you even if the volume was muted). At the very least, it would light up the screen.
Pointless, since a lot of people charge their phones overnight.
On a side note, anyone know if there's a notification LED? Reply
Skiddywinks - Thursday, May 03, 2012 - linkI'm pretty sure I read there is an RGB LED, and I can only imagine it's for notifications. Reply
Brian Klug - Thursday, May 03, 2012 - linkThere's a three color notification LED (RGB) up top. See our hardware overview in a little bit.
-Brian Reply
Lucian Armasu - Thursday, May 03, 2012 - linkIs the Sunspider test still relevant? I know Google has said since last year that it has become pretty irrelevant for them and they will stop testing so much against it for Chrome. To show how irrelevant it became, they even did a test made of 50xSunspider tests, just to get a little more complexity in there and act more like a real world scenario.
But it shows the dual core 1.2 Ghz Galaxy S2 is only 10% slower than Galaxy S3. That can't be right. Is the difference in performance that small? I think in Sunspider software optimizations have a larger impact than the hardware as well, so that also makes it pretty irrelevant when comparing hardware performance. Reply
tipoo - Thursday, May 03, 2012 - linkWell, they said it's irrelevant for Chrome and desktop browsers once they hit a certain performance level, which these phones are still far from. But yeah, I'd much rather have page load times or something than it since everyone seems to optimize around it. Speaking of which, I'd also like to see how they handle background tab loading. Reply
A5 - Friday, May 04, 2012 - linkFor reference, I just ran it in Chrome on my desktop and got 253 ms, which is 5.6x faster than the S3. There is still plenty of room to get performance out of these mobile chips and browsers. Reply
shompa - Friday, May 04, 2012 - linkRemember that resolution is a factor. You probably have higher resolution on your desktop = its more then 5.6X faster. Reply
tipoo - Friday, May 04, 2012 - linkFor graphics it's a factor, Sunspider is a canned Javascript benchmark which has no resolution impact. Reply
Aenean144 - Thursday, May 03, 2012 - linkSunspider is single threaded. So, the scores are reflective of 1.2 and 1.4 GHz cores. This is the performance improvement you should be expecting as the vast majority of consumer software is single threaded or are only computationally intensive on one thread.
It will take specialist applications like video rendering to really make use of 4 cores. Reply
shompa - Friday, May 04, 2012 - linkSingle threaded? Not really. Why would A5 at 800mhz be competitive if it only had to do with how many threads that SunSpider handles? Reply
tipoo - Friday, May 04, 2012 - linkBrowser/SoC optimization. For example, both using stock quad core A9 cores, the Galaxy S3 leads Tegra 3 phones in Sunspider and any other browser test, because they optimize the browser code around the SoC better since they make both the phone and the SoC. Reply
tipoo - Friday, May 04, 2012 - link*Which is not to say javascript doesn't see increases on multicore. It does, but it doesn't seem to go beyond two. Reply
Aenean144 - Friday, May 04, 2012 - linkThere's little evidence that the benchmark even goes beyond one thread. If it does, it's not much of a gain at all going from one to two cores. Reply
Aenean144 - Friday, May 04, 2012 - linkiOS has an excellent javascript JIT. Reply
Skiddywinks - Thursday, May 03, 2012 - linkWell, that's settled it; I'll be phoning Orange tomorrow and making sure I get one of these day one, since my contract is already up and I am on a rolling month-to-month contract atm.
Glad I waited, and didn't go for the One X (EU). Reply
steven75 - Sunday, May 06, 2012 - linkNot sure why... One X performance is similar, looks WAY better, has by far a superior display, and has less junky software added which theoretically means faster updates compared to Samsung who already has a history for poor update support. Reply
staticx57 - Thursday, May 03, 2012 - linkMy Galaxy Nexus with a mild overclock and custom Rom/Kernal gets a browsermark score of 120k versus the GS3 score of 160k. I can only imagine what the GS3 will manage to accomplish once the phone is truly unleashed. Reply
RussianSensation - Thursday, May 03, 2012 - linkYou seriously overclocked your cell phone? hehhe. Dang, you want some LN2 with that? Reply
tipoo - Thursday, May 03, 2012 - linkSo did I, and lots of other people...In most custom ROMs its just a few button clicks away, not that big a deal. Reply
tipoo - Thursday, May 03, 2012 - linkJust thinking here, the only other quad A9 (Tegra 3) has a single channel memory controller feeding it, maybe there's more that could have been done with the A9s which is what we're seeing here. Reply
Braumin - Thursday, May 03, 2012 - linkOK, so Browsermark looks good, but is Samsung tuning thier browser to do these types of benchmarks faster? It is not unheard of - nVidia and AMD both have done it for certain benchmarks. On a phone, the cross platform benchmarks are pretty limited so it wouldn't take much to code for the few that are out there.
What does a good browsermark score equate into page load times? Hopefully you guys can cover this in the review. Reply
aparangement - Thursday, May 03, 2012 - link"Apple's iPad 2,4 (review forthcoming)", a review on ipad 4 is coming? Reply
Aenean144 - Thursday, May 03, 2012 - linkNo. He's talking about the 16 GB iPad 2 at $400. The "new" model (code name: iPad 2,4) actually has a 32 nm A5 SoC in it. The old iPad 2 models (code named: iPad 2,1; iPad 2,2; iPad 2,3) use a 45 nm A5 SoC.
The new iPad 2 and new AppleTV are likely the first products to have 32 nm ARM SoCs from Samsung's 32 nm fab. Undoubtedly, Apple wanted it for the new iPad and the A5X too, but they probably couldn't guarantee the requested volumes. Maybe Samsung prioritized the Exynos 4 Quad over Apple's A5X? Who knows. Reply
deputc26 - Friday, May 04, 2012 - linkDon't know why everyone's complaining about the design, I think samsung nailed it with the big screen and small bezel. Plus they dropped the apple-copying and useless design feature that is leaving equally thick bezels above and below the screen.
A fast phone shrink-wrapped around an awesome screen... is just what I want... Reply
shompa - Friday, May 04, 2012 - linkThe next rumored iPhone also have larger, border to border screen. It will look much like S3 then. Wonder if all will praise the iPhone's design? :)
Beside the material, I don't know how Samsung could have designed S3 better. Reply
SamsungAppleFan - Friday, May 04, 2012 - linkEven the material is perfect. I mean do we really want glass that shatters or ceramic that chips? I guess Sammy coulda incorporated those self healing plastic layers lol. Reply
steven75 - Sunday, May 06, 2012 - linkThe Lumia 900 and One X look way better than this. It looks like a generic phone from 4 years ago. Reply
windozer - Friday, May 04, 2012 - linkI'm glad this phone is roundish at the corners which is so much better than the rectangular Galaxy S2. Only if the back of the phone had that soft touch like HTC phones..or maybe kevlar finish of Razr. The back finish looks plasticky. Reply
ThomasBastiani - Friday, May 04, 2012 - linkCan we have Linpack scores? Because all the rest is very software or GPU dependent.
Also the score on engadget seems off...
http://www.engadget.com/2012/05/03/gsiii-benchmark... Reply
damianrobertjones - Friday, May 04, 2012 - linkis it as fast as WP7 at basic daily tasks?
At times we do get caught up in the speed thing Reply
damianrobertjones - Friday, May 04, 2012 - linkP.s. Now that we're at the 'quad' stage... what other option will they use to keep the train moving? Reply
tipoo - Friday, May 04, 2012 - linkIntroducing the Nebula Nexus with a hexacore processor... Reply
shompa - Friday, May 04, 2012 - linkSo you think its an advantage that Microsoft can't deliver a multithreaded OS? They haven't managed to deliver a good multithreaded OS for X86 in over 30 years. A feature that have worked on Unix since late 1960 :)
But you point is valid. Microsoft shows how much better integrated design is then fragmented. Since they dictate the hardware, they can optimize everything with GPU/SIMD.
Windows8 will be interesting. The fragmented X86 version Vs the integrated ARM version. The fragmented version needs 5-10 times the CPU power to active the same user experience as ARM for Windows.
Nerds love horse power. A quad 1.4ghz Vs single core 1 ghz have to be better. Just like a 400 hp car would be slower then a good designed 100HP car. Reply
barefeats - Friday, May 04, 2012 - linkI'm a fan of the Apple iPhone 4S but I'm always looking "over the fence" to see how Android smartphones compare in raw performance. Until yesterday, the iPhone 4S was the fastest smartphone running GLBenchmark 2's Egypt Offscreen and "T-Rex" Pro Offscreen benchmarks -- fair tests since they force all devices to run at 1280x720 on a virtual screen. As you have shown with this article, the Samsung Galaxy S III is now the "King of Egypt."
On another note, I'm wondering why the Galaxy S III does relatively poorly on the Linpack benchmark with a 102 Mflops rating (Multithreading). The HTC One X (AT&T) blows it away with a 215 Mflops rating. Even the iPhone 4S beats it with a 131 Mflops rating. Thoughts? Reply
HotBBQ - Friday, May 04, 2012 - linkMy guess in that the HTC One X has a Snapdragon S4 which is Cortex A15 based while the S3 is still Cortex A9. Reply
yjwong - Saturday, May 05, 2012 - linkActually, Snapdragon S4 isn't based on Cortex A15. They do their own designs based on the ARMv7 instruction set. But yes, Krait shares most of the performance features with Cortex A15. Reply
Rowlf - Friday, May 04, 2012 - linkI believe it's all about the display. Does it really matter has fast it is if you can't see the screen. I can't be the only one using their phone outside.
For me it's a basic interface issue. Apple and now it appears HTC gets it. The problem I see with pentile is lack of brightness and contrast. I don't spend all my time in a cave
Why can't someone beat apple when it comes to the display? Reply
Rowlf - Friday, May 04, 2012 - linkSorry for the typo. It should read "What about the display". Reply
ssddaydream - Saturday, May 05, 2012 - linkLack of contrast?
Any AMOLED has a insanely high contrast ratio. FAR above any LCD.
The reason LCD is easier to see outdoors is partially because of the reflection of the outdoor lighting off the display.
If you kill the back-light on an LCD panel, then put the display under direct sunlight, you can see the image, including some color.
I agree that any AMOLED display is difficult to see outdoors. It is just the nature of the tech. For outdoor use, LCD will likely reign king for some time. Reply
Zoomer - Friday, May 04, 2012 - linkQuestion is, is it pentaband UMTS? Reply
1ceTr0n - Friday, May 04, 2012 - linkCan go back or buy a 4S then, Apple loves to have haters and trolls as customers Reply
steven75 - Sunday, May 06, 2012 - linkIf you've seen any commercials lately you'd realize the company you are referring to is Samsung, not Apple. Reply
Gunbuster - Friday, May 04, 2012 - linkI hope they have a Windows Phone 8 handset in development with this same hardware Reply
tytung - Friday, May 04, 2012 - linkWHY ANANDTECH HAS NO REVIEW OF GALAXY NOTE? IT'S AN AMAZING PRODUCT! Reply
tytung - Friday, May 04, 2012 - linkMAYBE YOU GUYS CAN'T AFFORD ONE? Reply
Viview - Saturday, May 05, 2012 - linkI think Samsung cell phone is very good,so I use Samsung. Reply
SamsungAppleFan - Saturday, May 05, 2012 - linkYes, and I agree with you! lol And millions of others will as well. And I'm sure this phone will win the phone of the year award again. I also believe it is one of the most beautiful phones ever produced. Perfect design/hardware evolution to the Galaxy Series. Seriously you... kids lol, what did you want some robot looking device that shoots phasers? Kudos to Samsung! Reply
csu333 - Saturday, May 05, 2012 - linkWow, looks like Galaxy S III is blazing fast. But ... wait a minute ... it looks like the GS II is not that far away!
Only problem is: if I look at Sunspider and BrowserMark in the HTC One review (http://www.anandtech.com/show/5584/htcs-new-strate... the Galaxy S II is almost twice slower than announced here.
And SunSpider in the original GS II review (http://www.anandtech.com/show/4686/samsung-galaxy-... also gives way different figures. I know that there are 2 versions of the GS II but this just looks like a biiiiiiiig mistake in this review.
Could you please correct it and explain me how you made it so I can trust you again ? Reply
JeffDM - Saturday, May 05, 2012 - linkWhat is with the disco purple lighting? What was the venue operator thinking? Reply
Chip_Molly - Saturday, May 05, 2012 - linkThe Samsung Galaxy S3 has an utterly disappointing design for a top range android smartphone. Perhaps HTC will come up with a well deserved challenger. Reply
bigboxes - Monday, May 07, 2012 - linkMy browsermark score is 7588. LOL Reply
PiRat - Saturday, May 12, 2012 - linkNot very impressive when you compare the 3D benchmarks, S to S2, S2 to S3. Reply
lancedal - Monday, May 14, 2012 - linkMy friend has this phone (he is testing it for Samsung). I love the device. Light, fast, big screen.
Then I played some youTube videos, again, smooth, fast... But then I noticed that there is not much depth in the video. I grabbed my daughter's ipod and played the same video. Guess what, even with a much smaller screen, her ipod video quality was much better. Note that both are with high brightness. The S3 is much worse at lower brightness.
Anyhow, may be I'm over analyzing this, but I think the display quality is much more important than the speed of the processor (as long as the processor can keep up with much of the apps). It's much more pleasant to read or watch on the iPhone 4s than any device out there. This makes me thinking: why Apple puts so much effort on the display? Well, I think they are about selling online contents. So if the display is good, you, as a user, end up spend hour and hour playing with it. Then you more likely to buy more apps, video, ebook etc. All Apple's competitors are about selling hardware. So if they can cut a corner on the display to make more profit, they would. There is no incentive for them to put on the best of the best. Apple, on the other hand, have a big margin on the contends to offset the cost of the hardware. As such, they can afford to put on the best display they can get.
I'm not an Apple fan, but I think their strategy is brilliant. At the end, they may end up winning both the device sale and the contents wars. Reply