text:
Manufacturer: Elnova
Trade name: Ed Gel
Strength: 100 mg
Type: Tablet
Active ingredient: Sildenafil
Category: Phosphodiesterase type 5 (PDE5) inhibitor
Pregnancy category: Sildenafil belongs to US FDA pregnancy category B.
Uses: Ed Gel 100 mg tablet is used to treat high blood pressure in the lungs (pulmonary hypertension) and erectile dysfunction (ED).
How to use: Take Ed Gel 100 mg tablet orally with or with out food as directed by your doctor. Use this medicine in older people cautiously. It should not be used in children.
Side Effects: Dizziness, lightheadedness, headache, nausea and vomiting, upset stomach , muscle aches, trouble sleeping, nosebleed, sore throat, runny nose, edema, blurred vision
Sponsored Links
Dosage: Usual adult dose for erectile dysfunction: 50 mg orally once a day. (1 hour prior to sexual activity). Usual Adult Dose for Pulmonary Hypertension: 5 to 20 mg orally three times a day.
Written by: : www.healthplus24.com team
Date last updated: March 19th, 2015
Sponsored Links
Subscribe to our email newsletter.


text:
I'm ready to sell or buy a company. What should I seek in terms of legal representation, and how soon?Comments Email Print
When selling a business, adopting the right sales process and making sure that your business house is in order are key. Finding the right potential buyers and making the right first impression are critical in maximizing offers, terms and conditions and decreasing the likelihood of downward renegotiation when due diligence issues arise. Remember, as a seller, you will never have as much negotiating leverage as you do in the letter of intent stage.
On the buy-side, knowing what to look for in due diligence, having a preferred structure of transaction and financing in mind, and locking a seller in exclusive negotiations are all fundamental precursors to a successful acquisition.
Have a question for Northeast Ohio's M&A professionals? Email us and look for your question and an answer in an upcoming Dealmaker Alert.

subset: commoncrawl


text:
Intel Reveals New Haswell Details at ISSCC 2014by Anand Lal Shimpi on 2/9/2014 3:00 PM EST
- Posted in
- CPUs
- Intel
- Haswell
44 Comments
Back to Article
Braumin - Sunday, February 09, 2014 - linkIt's fascinating to see how they can just keep finding ways to do things better. I'm sure whomever figured out how to reduce leakage on the memory interface by 100x got a nice Christmas bonus!
Any word on how Broadwell is coming along? Do you think we'll see it this year or will it be moved to 2015? Reply
przemo_li - Sunday, February 09, 2014 - linkJudging by Linux enablement Broadwell is coming along nicely. 3.14/3.15 should do the job on the kernel side. Mesa is also progressing well. H2 2014 should see Broadwell Out-of-The-Box experience on decent level for stable Linux distros. Reply
TheinsanegamerN - Sunday, February 09, 2014 - linkso, it should be out H2 2014 then? Reply
Krysto - Monday, February 10, 2014 - linkIf they're still announcing "new" Haswell chips at this point, then at best we'll see a couple of Broadwell designs ship by Christmas, but definitely in no "mass market" capacity. Reply
toyotabedzrock - Monday, February 10, 2014 - linkRight before the Kernel for Linux reaches 3.15 or right after.
All the basics for broadwell have been added for 3.14 but are partly disabled on the gpu side by default. The pci ids where added already. Reply
masimilianzo - Sunday, February 09, 2014 - linkAny word on Broadwell? I heard it will have a new graphics architecture and DDR4 support.
I'd love to see integrated PCH on at least every mobile processor Reply
dragonsqrrl - Sunday, February 09, 2014 - linkI've only heard about DDR4 support for Haswell-E. Where did you hear that Broadwell would support DDR4? Reply
extide - Sunday, February 09, 2014 - linkBroadwell in the client world will NOT support DDR4. Reply
stmok - Sunday, February 09, 2014 - linkDDR4 isn't coming to mainstream Broadwell version. It still uses DDR3.
As mentioned, Haswell-E will use DDR4.
(More specifically LGA2011-3 spec uses DDR4...It is NOT compatible with existing LGA2011).
The main difference of Broadwell vs Haswell (that I know so far) are:
* Die shrink; 14nm process node.
* GT3e (Iris Pro IGP) will be available in more models compared to Haswell.
=> Expect it to be in the multiplier unlocked "K" versions of the Core i5 and i7 desktop processors.
=> Still use Gen8 architecture IGP from Haswell.
* Both Haswell-Refresh and Broadwell will use a different LGA1150 socket variant.
(Physically unchanged, but electrically different to current LGA1150...Intel has changed the electrical specifications! Effectively killing compatibility between current Haswell, and upcoming Haswell-Refresh/Broadwell processors!)
* The upcoming 9-series chipset will introduce SATA Express interface.
* Broadwell introduces a few new instructions involving:
=> Improving multiple precision arithmetic (integer) performance.
=> Meeting random number generation specifications like NIST SP 800-90B.
=> Hardware prefetch.
If you want DDR4 to be mainstream, wait for Skylake in 2015.
=> Dual-Channel DDR4.
=> PCIe 4.0 slots.
=> AVX 3.2 instructions.
=> Gen9 architecture IGP. Reply
qwerty109 - Monday, February 10, 2014 - linkstmok, minor correction,
> => Still use Gen8 architecture IGP from Haswell.
Haswell is GEN7.5, Broadwell is GEN8.0 Reply
TiGr1982 - Monday, February 10, 2014 - linkNo, Haswell refresh is expected to be just a minor clock speed bump with respect to current Haswell (and die stepping change at best), and, thus, compatible with the current LGA1150 socket for current Haswell line-up.
As an argument supporting this state of things, Gigabyte recently (two weeks ago) released a new F8 BIOS for my M/B (Z87X-UD3H) stating "Support New 4th Generation Intel Core Processors", while all existing current Haswell models were already supported by previous BIOSes (F7 and earlier). Reply
blanarahul - Sunday, February 09, 2014 - linkSo. How many more years will it take to create the perfect architecture?? We are pretty close but how many years (months?) till we reach the limit?? Reply
tipoo - Sunday, February 09, 2014 - linkPerfect is ill defined. Engineering is all about tradeoffs. One persons perfect processor is not anothers. That said, we've enjoyed gains in processor speeds in large part due to fabrication process shrinks and because of them more caches and transistors thrown at problems, and we should start hitting some weird issues after 14nm, so I'll be curious to see what the industry does after that, if they can keep shrinking, or if we'll be stuck there for a while with them only being able to focus on architecture to improve performance. Reply
YazX_ - Sunday, February 09, 2014 - link@tipoo, couldnt agree more. Reply
purerice - Sunday, February 09, 2014 - linkMaybe by "perfect" s/he meant either the point where further (noticeable) efficiency is (virtually) impossible ( shrinks aside) or the point where things are "fast enough" for (virtually) any user. Or maybe the point where further efficiency gains can no longer (economically) be made.
I'd really love to see AMD pull a rabbit out of a hat with their next CPU design. If they can't, I really hope ARM can. Haswell is an architectural masterpiece yet somehow at the desktop/workstation level fails to do much for performance/watt or OC over IB/SB. None of that makes much sense. If -Y and -U chips see major gains in graphics and general processing, why don't the -K chips too? Reply
DanNeely - Sunday, February 09, 2014 - linkBecause Intel's optimizing their CPU designs for increasingly low power levels. Instead of the sweet spot being between full power laptop CPUs and mid range desktops leaving a decent amount of head room above the top of the high end parts for additional OC the optimum is being centered on the low power laptop parts with the result that the equivalent of the OC gain from more power we used to get is being used up in the spread between full power laptop and desktop parts with very little left for those of us willing to crank the power up even higher. Reply
blanarahul - Monday, February 10, 2014 - linkThat's precisely what I meant. Sorry, I wasn't clear enough in my first post. Reply
BMNify - Sunday, February 09, 2014 - link"the perfect architecture" there's no such thing, even if you refer to something as simple as x264 encoding a UHD-1 video...
for instance "Cisco is predicting a nearly 11-fold increase in global mobile data traffic over the next four years to reach 190 exabytes in 2018, with Asia Pacific leading the way ..."
the fact that by estimating the new haswell details numbers above its clear that you can't real time encode x264 UHD-1 3840×2160 video with high quality settings ,never mind do the real HEVC Main 10 profile UHD-2 7680×4320 digital broadcast expected in 3-6 years from now,
if you're asking what comes next to accommodate this massive data throughput for real time encoding for the masses then its probably going to be wideIO 2.5D then 3D High Bandwidth Memory , and then Si photonics in combination with these options....
although you just know that the antiquated server providers will try and keep that away from the masses as long as possible to keep their margins high Reply
MrDiSante - Sunday, February 09, 2014 - linkThe last two images in the article aren't showing up - if I try to open them directly I get a 404. Reply
dragonsqrrl - Sunday, February 09, 2014 - link"I suspect the ULT 2+2 configuration is similar in size to the quad-core + GT2 configuration."
Do you mean ULT 2+3? Reply
dragonsqrrl - Sunday, February 09, 2014 - linkDisregard, sorry for some reason I thought you meant transistor count and not die area. I'm actually a little curious why the transistor counts don't seem to correlate much with die area, despite the fact that they're all the same architecture. Are ULT processors manufactured on a different power-optimized 22nm process? Reply
stickmansam - Sunday, February 09, 2014 - linkI'm assuming the GPU and CPU have differing densities Reply
dragonsqrrl - Sunday, February 09, 2014 - linkThat might make sense if ULT 2+2 had a larger GPU than quad-core GT2, but it doesn't. It has the same GPU configuration and half the CPU cores, yet its approximately the same die area of quad-core GT2. Reply
stickmansam - Monday, February 10, 2014 - linkWell it is an estimate, it may very well be the ULT 2+2 is a harvested chip? Reply
dragonsqrrl - Monday, February 10, 2014 - link... then why give an estimate? Reply
IntelUser2000 - Monday, February 10, 2014 - linkThat doesn't make sense. Looking at the 2+3 config above, the extra 20 EUs is an exact mirror. Therefore, they can simply cut it off and make a 2+2 part.
The Gallery is showing 5 different parts with 2+3 and 2+2 being seperate, so why would the die be same? Reply
p1esk - Sunday, February 09, 2014 - linkIf the embedded RAM frequency is 1600 MHz, how could its interface produce 6.4 GT/s?
Shouldn't it be 3.2 GT/s? Reply
Stahn Aileron - Sunday, February 09, 2014 - linkYou are assuming it is double-pumped (DDR). There is such a thing as quad-pumping (Quad Data Rate - QDR) relative to operating frequency. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quad_data_rate)
With the eDRAM that physically close to the CPU, quad-pumping 1.6GHz wouldn't be much of a problem given the short interconnects. Reply
Devfarce - Sunday, February 09, 2014 - linkI think it's interesting that they used the same circuitry for the eDRAM and the onboard PCH for the ULT models. I was wondering why there wasn't also an onboard PCH with the GT3e models but I'm now really impressed with the answer. I was also under the impression that the eDRAM was built on the 32nm SOC process so a lot of good info is presented here. Reply
extide - Sunday, February 09, 2014 - linkKind of surprising that the OPIO is single-ended, and not differential. I guess with such a short distance, you can get away with that and just have the wider bus. Cool! Reply
iwod - Sunday, February 09, 2014 - linkAre the any news in regards as to why Xeon and all Server chips are always one node behind? And soon the desktop Haswell-Refresh as well? Will Intel simply relegate all Desktop and Server to older nodes while focusing new node development on Ultra Low Power for Laptop and Mobile Devices? Reply
fluxtatic - Sunday, February 09, 2014 - linkThe Xeon variants remain one node behind due to obligations for extended validation and support of the platforms. Intel can develop a new architecture and get it ready for consumer-level release, making back the R&D money they're putting into it, while they're simultaneously developing, testing, and validating the Xeon variants. It just makes sense to release Xeon on a mature arch (eg, one generation behind), as there is a significant amount of time and money involved getting the current generation behind adapted into the Xeon platform requirements.
Lately, Intel is moving in the direction you describe - targeting mobile (well, laptop) processors first, followed by desktop, and then server/workstation. That makes sense, as well, as laptop processor sales are outstripping desktop. As a bit of speculation, it may be easier to target the lowest-power targets first, and scale up, rather than trying to do the reverse. Reply
BMNify - Sunday, February 09, 2014 - link"The 128MB eDRAM is divided among eight 16MB macros. The eDRAM operates at 1.6GHz and connects to the outside world via a 4 x 16-bit wide on-package IO (OPIO) interface capable of up to 6.4GT/s. The OPIO is highly scalable and very area/power efficient.
The Haswell ULT variants use Intel's on-package IO to connect the CPU/GPU island to an on-package PCH. In this configuration the OPIO delivers 4GB/s of bandwidth at 1pJ/bit. When used as an interface to Crystalwell, the interface delivers up to 102GB/s at 1.22pJ/bit. That amounts to a little under 1.07W of power consumed to transmit/receive data at 102GB/s.
By keeping the eDRAM (or PCH) very close to the CPU island (1.5mm), Intel can make the OPIO extremely simple."
hmm anand, care to explain please how and why you state "a 4 x 16-bit wide on-package IO (OPIO) interface capable of up to 6.4GT/s." that's a total of 25.6GB/s (at 4.8GT/s it would provide 19.2GB/s total bandwidth to the processor) and yet you say "the interface delivers up to 102GB/s at 1.22pJ/bit. That amounts to a little under 1.07W of power consumed to transmit/receive data at 102GB/s." implying that it has 4 times the bandwidth in real terms ?
so is the 4 x 16-bit wide being used here to obfuscate the fact its really a max data throughput of 6.4 GBps per link x 4 and so matching the generic Quickpath Interconnect speeds Reply
Stahn Aileron - Monday, February 10, 2014 - linkSome rough math:
4 x 16 bit = 8 bytes/transfer.
8 bytes/transfer x 6.4 GT/s = 51.2 GB/s.
So 51.2 GB/s raw bandwidth (no overhead accounted for.) 102 GB/s total throughput as Anand states sounds like the bus is bi-directional with 51.2 GB/s possible in each direction. So 51.2 GB/s x2 (both directions at the same time) give you "up to 102 GB/s" throughput overall.
How did you arrive at the 25.6 GB/s value originally? Reply
DanNeely - Monday, February 10, 2014 - linkThe 102.5 number appears to come from Intel slide #16 (AT gallery #6). That slide says there are 8 data clusters operating at 6.4GB/s each, with the final x2 apparently being from the bus supporting simultaneous transfer in each direction. Reply
twotwotwo - Sunday, February 09, 2014 - linkI'm sorta curious about the potential for CRW, or some future version of it, for CPU performance.
More-dynamic programming languages tend to have largish working sets and lots of indirection. In general,the processor still stalls waiting on RAM a lot across lots of workloads. Maybe an "L4" could be a nontrivial win for server-y workloads if the latency/size were right and they shipped it for servers. It's hard to tell; the fact that they're not talking about CRW as a CPU boost does say something. Reply
zodiacfml - Monday, February 10, 2014 - linkI still haven't seen benchmarks whether or not the eDRAM contributes on improving some application performance...or did I missed it? Reply
twotwotwo - Monday, February 10, 2014 - linkI'd love info on this, too. I just poked around in the big list at http://www.cpubenchmark.net/high_end_cpus.html and did see this:
Intel Core i7-4960HQ @ 2.60GHz (6M L3, CRW) 10,325
Intel Core i7-4900MQ @ 2.80GHz (8M L3) 9,123
If I'm reading it right, the part with CRW (the eDRAM package) did tennish percent better despite lower nominal clock and less L3, on something presented as a pure CPU benchmark. So it did something.
But someone who knows what they're doing could dig into whether that impression is right, and what sort of app sees the biggest gains. Reply
toyotabedzrock - Monday, February 10, 2014 - linkYour die size for the ult 2+2 is way higher than it should be. There is no reason it would be much bigger than the 2+2. Reply
TiGr1982 - Monday, February 10, 2014 - linkIndeed, 140-160 mm^2 should be the case for ULT 2+2, not 180 mm^2. Reply
Akaz1976 - Monday, February 10, 2014 - linkDoes any of this mean that we can get a core i5 processor in an ipad like form factor (with 10+ battery life & full win8)? Reply
jimjamjamie - Monday, February 10, 2014 - linkSurface Pro 2? Reply
azazel1024 - Monday, February 10, 2014 - linkWell, Akaz, you can get a Bay Trail-T based processor in an iPad like format that gets 10+hrs of battery life and runs full Windows 8.1.
Its not an i5, but is pretty nice.
Come Airmont/Cherry Trail-T this coming fall, and that should be a rather impressive thing too (though Bay Trail-T is actually pretty decent).
My T100 can easily push 10hrs of battery life in lightweight use and more than 12 just watching movies (about 5-6hrs in some pretty heavy gaming). Its still a bit of a lightweight compared to my i5 3317u based laptop, but it ain't shabby either. Not very noticable in basic tooling around the OS and web based stuff. Just noticable in things like photoshop and lightroom (and gaming), but even there, it can get the job done, so long as you aren't expecting full laptop/desktop levels of performance. Reply
mikk - Tuesday, February 11, 2014 - link~180mm² for 2+2 ULT is nonsense, this is as big as 4+2 Haswell. 130mm² is more accurate. Reply


text:
DX10 for the Masses: NVIDIA 8600 and 8500 Series Launchby Derek Wilson on 4/17/2007 9:00 AM EST
- Posted in
- GPUs
60 Comments
Back to Article
deathwalker - Wednesday, April 18, 2007 - linkSo, whats the word on the Ultra version of the 8600? Has that fallen to the wayside? Reply
crystal clear - Wednesday, April 18, 2007 - linkInterview: NVIDIA's Keita Iida
The future of Direct X, Crysis and PS3 under the spotlight.
Keita Iida, Director of Content Management at NVIDIA sat down with IGN AU to discuss all things Direct X 10 and the evolution of their Geforce graphics cards. Iida goes into detail on the differences between developing for the PS3's RSX graphics processor, and the latest development tools to hit the scene.
Selected portions of the interview-
IGN AU: What are your thoughts on Microsoft effectively forcing gamers to upgrade to Vista in order to run Direct X 10 - when there's no real reason why it can't run on Windows XP?
Keita Iida: It's a business and marketing decision.
IGN AU: Can you comment on what happened with NVIDIA's Vista drivers? You guys have had access to Vista for years to build drivers and at the launch of Vista there were no drivers. The ones that are out now are still basically crippled. Why did this happen?
Keita Iida: On a high level, we had to prioritise. In our case, we have DX9, DX10, multiple APIs, Vista and XP - the driver models are completely different, and the DX9 and 10 drivers are completely different. Then you have single- and multi-card SLI - there are many variables to consider. Given that we were so far ahead with DX10 hardware, we've had to make sure that the drivers, although not necessarily available to a wide degree, or not stable, were good enough from a development standpoint.
If you compare our situation to our competitor's, we have double the variables to consider when we write the drivers; they have much more time to optimise and make sure their drivers work well on their DX10 hardware when it comes out. We've had to balance our priorities between making sure we have proper DX10 feature-supported drivers to facilitate development of DX10 content, but also make sure that the end user will have a good experience on Vista. To some degree, I think that we may have underestimated how many resources were necessary to have a stable Vista driver off the bat. I can assure you and your readers that our first priority right now is not performance, not anything else; it's stability and all the features supported on Vista.
IGN AU: So what kind of timeline are we looking at until the end user can be comfortable with Vista drivers? With DX9 drivers that work as stably and quickly as they do with XP?
Keita Iida: We're ramping up the frequency of our Vista driver releases. Users will probably understand that we release a number of beta drivers on our site, so we're making incremental progress. We believe that, in a very short time we will have addressed the vast majority, if not all of the issues. We've had teams who were working on other projects who have mobilised to make sure that as quickly as possible we have the drivers fixed. I'm not going to give you an exact timeframe, but it's going to be very soon. We're disappointed that we couldn't do it right off the bat, but we hear what everyone is saying and we're willing to fix it.
xpose - Tuesday, April 17, 2007 - linkThis next gen purevideo stuff sounds amazing. I thought I was gonna have to get a new motherboard and dual core cpu to play some HD-DVD content smoothly. Please, do try and rush testing the purevideo stuff ASAP. Blu-ray and hd-dvd is growing. . . Reply
shabby - Tuesday, April 17, 2007 - link128bit/256meg for $200 bucks? Gimme a break. Reply
Sunrise089 - Tuesday, April 17, 2007 - linkUnless these cards are majically fast under DX10 (and we all know they won't be, they will play Crysis, but not quickly) they offer less performance than even midrange parts from the last get.
Anyone remember how a 6600GT offreed 9800pro beating performance, and how nVidia sold millions of them. I don't see that happening here. What I do see is a wait-and-see attitude. Does anyone else think it's VERY suspicious that there are no 64 shader cards? Here is what may happen: nVidia waits for the midrange AMD cards to emerge. If they offer better performance, nVidia slashes prices of these and releases a 8800GS with 64 shaders for $200. I won't be surprised at all if that's what we have in 3 months. Reply
JarredWalton - Tuesday, April 17, 2007 - linkWe've got 128 SP on the GTX, 96 on the GTS... and then 32 on the G84. I'd say there's definitely room for 64 SP from NVIDIA, and possibly 48 SP as well. Will they go that route, though? Unless they've already been working on it, doing a new chip will cost quite a bit of time and effort. I was expecting 8600 to be 64 SP and 8300 to be 32 SP before we had any details, but then the 8600 probably would have been too close to the 8800. Reply
kilkennycat - Tuesday, April 17, 2007 - linkEr, wait (not too long) for nVidia's re-roll of the 8xxx-series on 65nm... You might just get your wish. I believe that nV is copying Intel's 'tic-toc' process strategy - architecture and go to production on a mature process (80nm half-node), then transfer and refine the implementation on the new process. Note the interesting and important tweaks in the implementation of the 8600 vs 8800... which gives a glimpse of the future 65nm 9xxx(??)-family architecture but with higher numbers of stream-processors and high-precision math processing for the expected GPGPU applications.
nVidia has already hinted that the successor to the 8800 will be available before the end of 2007, and no doubt will be on 65nm for the obvious cost and yield reasons. If the R600 turns out to be a true contender for the 8800 "crown" in the same price-range, then I fully expect nV to accelerate the appearance of the 8800 successor. No doubt the design was started long before the 8800 itself was production-available. Reply
Toebot - Tuesday, April 17, 2007 - linkNo, nothing to sneeze at, just something to blow my nose on! Utter wretch. This card is NVidia's attempt to milk the Vista market, nothing more. Reply
DerekWilson - Tuesday, April 17, 2007 - linkWe should at least wait and see what DX10 performance looks like first. Reply
AdamK47 - Tuesday, April 17, 2007 - linkWith what software? Reply
shabby - Tuesday, April 17, 2007 - link3dmark vista edition of course! Reply
munky - Tuesday, April 17, 2007 - linkWhy did you not include the x1950xt in the test lineup? It can also be had for about $200 now, like the 7950gt. You didn't want to make the 8600 series look worse than they already do, or what? Reply
DerekWilson - Tuesday, April 17, 2007 - linkWow, sorry for the ommission -- I was trying to include specific comparison points -- 3 from AMD and 3 from NVIDIA, but this one just slipped through the cracks. Sorry. It will be included in my performance update. Reply
Elwe - Tuesday, April 17, 2007 - linkNow, now guys. True that these cards are not going to be what many of you want (there are some good reasons to stay with what you have considering the performance differential of several of the last generation cards). And it is clear that these cards will not touch the 8800 cards (from what I can tell, the only these these do better are are 100% Pure HD on the card, which I guess is because these might be paired with not-so-great cpus.
But for some of us, they might work. I recently bought a Dell 390 workstation. I packed it with fast drives, QX6700 cpu, and 4gb ram. There were very few BTO graphics choices, and most centered around the Pro market (this is a "workstation" after all). These is a new machine, and quite powerful! I want to work and play on this box. Because of the relatively week power supply (rated at 375 watts or something like that) and because I need both available non-graphics PCIe slots (if you put it an 8800 GTS, even if you changed the power supply, this type of dual slot card will cover one of those slots), I have been waiting for something reasonably powerful to come along (again, I am not going to just work on this box; I would like to play UT2k7, too:). Since I run Linux, I was trying to stick with the Nvidia line (my experience is that they have better drivers for this platform, but perhaps ATI has stepped up in the last half year or so). I could have gone with the 79xx line (single slot), but I wanted to see what the new generation would bring. Depending on what you need/want, I think either a slightly-used 7950GT OC or a 8600 GTS would work just fine for me. It does not seem unreasonable to me that in some things the older higher end card is faster than the newer mid range card, and vice versa. But I did not see any benchmark where the 79xx line whooped the 8600 GTS thoroughly (like what happend with several benchmarks comparing the 8800 and 8600).
I would say that the only immediate problem I might have with using the 8600 GTS is for gaming at high resolutions. I have a Dell 2407, and Anandtech's benchmarks make it clear I should not be gaming at that high a resolution. Bummer. The 7950 GT OC might very well be the better option here.
In an ideal world, I really would like the power of an 8800 (and, fortunately, I can pay for it). But I really need the PCIe slot more, and changing out the power supply would add even more cost. I could have gotten another Dell model (like the XPS 710 or the Precision 490)--and I am thinking about just that. But I got the 390 for what I considered good reasons (a damned sight cheaper than the 490, and I have no need of another cpu socket when I can have 4 cores in one socket), and the XPS 710 did not have BTO storage options that I wanted (not sure why they could not design that thing to have more than two internal drives--the thing is big enough; maybe most games do not need it, as that is what the machine was designed for). I bet I am not the only one. Reply
GhandiInstinct - Tuesday, April 17, 2007 - linkMasses would include AGP cards...
I see no AGP DX10 cards... Reply
aka1nas - Tuesday, April 17, 2007 - linkThe "masses" don't build their own computers, and thus have long since stopped purchasing machines with AGP slots. Reply
GhandiInstinct - Tuesday, April 17, 2007 - linkThe "masses" also don't go hunting for DX10 cards to add FPS to their hardcore Dell and Gateway gaming rigs.
Be honest with yourself, the people going for these cards are custom riggers.
AGP DX10 please, theres hundreds of thousands with Pentium 3.4 Northwoods that know their processors will run BioShock well, but they need DX10 without paying for a new motherboard, DDR2, and everything else, including Vista!!! Reply
JarredWalton - Tuesday, April 17, 2007 - linkActually, I don't think anyone "knows" whether or not any current system will run BioShock well or not. Let's wait for the game to appear at least. We're still at least four months away (assuming they hit the current release date).
While I can understand people complaining about the lack of AGP cards, let's be honest: why should either company invest a lot of money in an old platform? It takes time to make the AGP cards and more time to make sure the drivers all work right. At some point, the old tech has to be left behind. The cost to transition from an AGP setup to a PCIe setup is often under $100, so if the AGP cards had a $50 price premium you'd only save yourself $50 and still be stuck with the older platform.
I figure AMD/ATI and NVIDIA basically ignored the complaints with X1900/7900 class hardware (the best was several notches below what was available on PCIe), and at this point I think they're done. I'd even go so far as to say we're probably now at the point where an AGP platform would start to be a bottleneck with current hardware - maybe not midrange stuff, but certainly the high-end offerings.
Let's put it another way: why can't I get something faster than a single core 2.4GHz 1MB cache Athlon 64 3700+ for socket 754? Why can't I get Pentium D or Core 2 Duo for socket 478? Why do we need new motherboards for Core 2 Duo when socket 775 is used sing 915/925? Intel and AMD have forced transitions on users for years, and after a long run it's tough to say that AGP hasn't fulfilled its purpose. Such is the life of PC hardware. Reply
GhandiInstinct - Tuesday, April 17, 2007 - linkGood points, I agree with them all.
Basically, I feel that my 3.2 northwood, 2GB ram is worth salvaging for BioShock and Hellgate, obviously not Crysis, but it's convenient that it will be released in 08.
I figure I can hold out 8 more months, save up during this time, and switch to quad and DDR3.
I service hundreds of clients a week in tech support that have AGP setups, and I don't think Nvidia and ATi will abandon AGP with DX10, especially since there is speculation to believe they will be releasing this cards in the future: http://www.theinquirer.net/default.aspx?article=37...">http://www.theinquirer.net/default.aspx?article=37...
:) Reply
LoneWolf15 - Tuesday, April 17, 2007 - linkWhile it would be nice to have this hardware in NVIDIA's higher end offerings, this technology arguably makes more sense in mainstream parts. High end, expensive graphics cards are usually paired with high end expensive CPUs and lots of RAM. The decode assistance that these higher end cards offer is more than enough to enable a high end CPU to handle the hardest hitting HD videos. With mainstream graphics hardware providing a huge amount of decode assistance, the lower end CPUs that people pair with this hardware will benefit greatly.
IMO, this is absolute bollocks.
If I'm paying for nVidia's high-end stuff, I expect high-end everything. And this is at least the second time nVidia has only improved video on their second-round or midrange parts (anybody remember NV40/45?).
I game some, and I want good performance for that. But, I also have a 1920x1200 display, and I want the best video playback experience I can get on it. I also want the lower CPU-usage so I can playback video while my system is left to do other processor-intensive tasks in the background.
Once again, nVidia has really disappointed me in this area. In comparison, ATI seems to be much better at making sure their full range of cards supports their best video technologies. This (along with nVidia's driver development) continues to make the G80 seem like a "rushed-out-the-door" product. Reply
kilkennycat - Tuesday, April 17, 2007 - link(As of 8AM Pacific Time, April 17)
http://www.zipzoomfly.com/jsp/ProductDetail.jsp?Pr...">http://www.zipzoomfly.com/jsp/ProductDetail.jsp?Pr... Reply
Chadder007 - Tuesday, April 17, 2007 - linkThats really not too bad for a DX10 part. I just wish we actually had some DX10 games to see how it performs though.... Reply
bob4432 - Tuesday, April 17, 2007 - linkthat performance is horrible. everyone here is pretty dead on - this is strictly for marketing to the non-educated gamer. too bad they will be disappointed and probably return such a piece of sh!t item. what a joke.
come on ati, this kind of performance should be in the low end cards, this is not a mid-range card. maybe if nvidia sold them for $100-$140 they may end up in somebody htpc but that is about all they are good for.
glad i have a 360 to ride out this phase of cards while my x1800xt still works fine for my duties.
if i were the upper management at nvidia, people would be fired over this horrible performance, but sadly the upper management is more than likely the cause of this joke of a release. Reply
AdamK47 - Tuesday, April 17, 2007 - linknVidia needs to have people with actual product knowledge dictate what the specifications of future products will be. This disappointing lineup has marketing written all over it. They need to wise up or they will end up like Intel and their failed marketing derived netburst architecture. Reply
wingless - Tuesday, April 17, 2007 - linkIn the article they talk about the Pure Video features as if they are brand new. Does this mean they ARE NOT implemented in the 8800 series? The article talked about how 100% of the video decoding process is on the GPU but it did not mention the 8800 core which worries the heck outta me. Also does the G84 have CUDA capabilities? Reply
DerekWilson - Tuesday, April 17, 2007 - linkCUDA is supported Reply
DerekWilson - Tuesday, April 17, 2007 - linkThe 8800 series support PureVideo HD the same way GeForce 7 sereis does -- through VP1 hardware.
The 8600 and below support PureVideo HD through VP2 hardware, the BSP, and other enhancements which allow 100% offload of decode.
While the 8800 is able to offload much of the process, it's not 100% like the 8600/8500. Both support PureVideo HD, but G84 does it with lower CPU usage. Reply
wingless - Tuesday, April 17, 2007 - linkI just checked NVIDIA's website and it appears only the 8600 and 8500 series support Pure Video HD which sucks balls. I want 8800GTS performance with Pure Video HD support. Guess I'll have to wait a few more months, or go ATI but ATI's future isn't stable these days. Reply
defter - Tuesday, April 17, 2007 - linkWhy you want 8800GTS performance with improved Purevideo HD support? Are you going to pair 8800GTS with $40 Celeron? 8800GTS has more than enough power to decode H.264 at HD resolutions as long as you pair with modern CPU: http://www.anandtech.com/printarticle.aspx?i=2886">http://www.anandtech.com/printarticle.aspx?i=2886
This improved Purevide HD is aimed for low-end systems that are using a low end-CPU. That's why this feature is important for low/mid-range GPUs.
wingless - Tuesday, April 17, 2007 - linkIf I'm going to spend this kind of money for an 8800 series card then I want VP2 100% hardware decoding? Is that too much to ask? I want all the extra bells and whistles. Damn, I may have to go ATI for the first time since 1987 when I had that EGA Wonder. Reply
JarredWalton - Tuesday, April 17, 2007 - linkIt's not surprising that G84 has some enhancements relative to G80. I mean, G80 was done six months ago. I'd expect VP2 is one of the areas they worked on improving a lot after comments post-8800 launch. Now, should they kill the current G80 and make a new G80 v1.1 with VP2? That's up for debate, but you can't whine that older hardware doesn't have newer features. "Why doesn't my Core 2 Duo support SSE4?" It's almost the same thing. I wouldn't be at all surprised to see a new high-end card from NVIDIA in the future with VP2, but when that will be... dunno. Reply
harshw - Tuesday, April 17, 2007 - link
It is important to emphasize the fact that HDCP is supported over dual-link DVI, allowing 8600 and 8500 hardware to play HDCP protected content at its full resolution on any monitor capable of displaying 1920x1080
So ... to confirm, the card *does* let you watch HDCP content on a Dell 3007WFP at 2560x1600 ? Of course, the card would probably scale the stream to the panel resolution ... Reply
DerekWilson - Tuesday, April 17, 2007 - linkThe card will let you watch HDCP protected content at the content's native resolution -- 1920x1080 progressive at max ...
Currently if you want to watch HDCP protected content on a Dell 30", you need to drop your screen resolution to 1280x800 and watch at that res -- the video is downscaled from 1920x1080. Higher resolutions on the panel require dual-link DVI, and now HDCP protected content over a dual-link connection is here. Reply
AnnonymousCoward - Tuesday, April 17, 2007 - linkMaybe I'm in the minority, but I don't care about this HDCP business. The players are still ultra expensive, and the resolution benefit doesn't really change how much I enjoy a movie. Also, a 30" screen is pretty small to be able to notice a difference between HD and DVD, if you're sitting at any typical movie-watching distance from the screen. Well, I would guess so at least. Reply
Spoelie - Wednesday, April 18, 2007 - linkWe're talking about 30" lcd monitors with humongous resolutions, not old 30" lcd tvs with 1386x768 something.
Or do your really don't see any difference between
http://www.imagehosting.com/out.php/i433150_BasicR...">http://www.imagehosting.com/out.php/i433150_BasicR... and http://www.imagehosting.com/out.php/i433192_HDDVD....">http://www.imagehosting.com/out.php/i433192_HDDVD....
http://www.imagehosting.com/out.php/i433157_BasicR...">http://www.imagehosting.com/out.php/i433157_BasicR... and http://www.imagehosting.com/out.php/i433198_HDDVD....">http://www.imagehosting.com/out.php/i433198_HDDVD.... Reply
Myrandex - Tuesday, April 17, 2007 - linkI loved it how the two 8600 cards listed 256MB memoy only however the 8500 card showed 256MB / 512MB. Gotta love marketing in attempting to grab the masses attention by throwing more ram into a situation where it doesn't really help...
Jason Reply
KhoiFather - Tuesday, April 17, 2007 - linkHorrible, horrible performance. I'm so disappointed its not even funny! I'm so waiting for ATI to release their mid-range cards and blow Nvidia out the water to space. Reply
jay401 - Tuesday, April 17, 2007 - link
We haven't done any Windows Vista testing this time around, as we still care about maximum performance and testing in the environment most people will be using their hardware. This is not to say that we are ignoring Vista: we will be looking into DX10 benchmarks in the very near future. Right now, there is just no reason to move our testing to a new platform.
Very true, and not only because the vast majority of gamers are still running XP, but also because no games out to this point gain anything from DX10/Vista (aside from one or two that add a few graphical tweaks here and there in DX10).
When there are enough popular, well-reviewed DX10/Vista focused games available that demonstrate appreciable performance improvement when running in that environment, such that you can create a test suite around those games, then it would be time to transition to that sort of test setup for GPUs. Reply
Griswold - Tuesday, April 17, 2007 - linkThe real reason would that nobody wants to go through the nightmare of dealing with nvidia drivers under vista. ;) Reply
jay401 - Tuesday, April 17, 2007 - linkDerek you should add the specs of the 8800GTS 320MB to the spec chart on page 2, unless of course NVidia forbids you to do that because it would make it too obvious how they've cut too many stream processors and too much bus size from these new cards.
Now what they'll do is end the production of the 7950GTs to ensure folks can't continue to pick them up cheaper and will be forced to move to the 8600GTS that doesn't yet offer superior performance.
gg neutering these cards so much that they lose to your own previous generation hardware, NVidia. Reply
poohbear - Tuesday, April 17, 2007 - linksweet review on new tech! thanks for the bar graphs this time! good to know my 512mb x1900xtx still kicks mainstream butt.:) Reply
tuteja1986 - Tuesday, April 17, 2007 - linkTotal disapointment :( ... Could even beat up a X1950pro. They really need to sell at $150 otherwise you would be better off buying a X1950GT or 7900GS for $150 to $160. At the current $200 to $230 price you could get a X1950XT 256MB which could destroy it but that GPU needs a good powersupply. Only thing going for a 7600GT is the DX10 support and Full H.264 , VLC , Mepg 4 support but that can be found on even other cards. Reply
Staples - Tuesday, April 17, 2007 - linkI have been waiting several months for these cards and boy and I disappointed. I figured this month I would get a new PC since April 22 the prices of C2D also drop. My idea was to get a C2D600 and an 8600GTS but after their lack luster performance, my only option is an 8800GTS which is $50+ more. Not a huge difference but I am very compelled to wait until the refresh comes out and then maybe I can get a better deal. I really hate this senario where ATI is down, AMD is down and no competition is leading to high prices and crappy performance.
Hopefully in another 6 months, AMD will be up to par on both their processors and CPUs. I will be holding on to my current system until then. I found it disappointing that these cards do not come with 512MB of memory but their performance is actually even more disappointing. Reply
JarredWalton - Tuesday, April 17, 2007 - linkWell, the R6xx stuff from AMD should be out soon, so that's going to be the real determining factor. Hopefully the drivers do well (in Vista as well as XP), and as the conclusion states NVIDIA has certainly left the door open for AMD to take the lead. Preliminary reports surfacing around the 'net show that R600 looks very promising on the high end, and features and specs on the midrange parts look promising as well. GDDR4 could offer more bandwidth making the 128-bit bus feasible on the upper midrange parts as well. Should be interesting, so let's see if AMD can capitalize on NVIDIA's current shortcomings.... Reply
PrinceGaz - Tuesday, April 17, 2007 - linkIt might be a good idea to read more reviews before writing off the 8600 range.
Over at , they found the 8600GTS easily beats the X1950Pro and even though the models they tested were factory overclocked, one of them had only a 5% core overclock and no memory overclock and was still well ahead of the X1950Pro. At worst the two cards were roughly even but in many tests the 8600GTS (with just 5% core o/c) was considerably faster. As say in the article link
New GeForce 8600 GTS Shines
If you have been waiting for a DX10 video card capable of playing today's games, your wait is over. The GeForce 8600 GTS series GPU destroys ATI's current X1950 series for right around $220.
So who do you believe? I guess I'll need to read several more reviews to see what's really going on. Reply
Spanki - Tuesday, April 17, 2007 - linkI agree that that review it paints a different picture, but I have no reason to disbelieve it. I mean, they do their testing differently (try to find the best playable settings for each card), but it is what it is... I mean, the tables show the differences in the cards, at those (varrying settings) and so they therefore draw the conclusions they draw, based on that (with card X, I can enable option Y at these frame rates, but not on card Z - at least at the same resolutions). It's not like they tried to hide the settings they used or the frame-rates they got with each set-up. I found it an interesting perspective. ~shrug~
Anyway, my personal opinion is that they neutered this chipset too much. There looks to be a substantial gap between 7900/8600 and 8800 level performance and the sweet-spot for this price-point would have been right in the middle of that gap... maybe they're planning a 8700 series chipset? Reply
Griswold - Tuesday, April 17, 2007 - linkThats a funny review. I'll stick to the other 90% that say this fish smells. Reply
GoatMonkey - Tuesday, April 17, 2007 - linkReply
yacoub - Tuesday, April 17, 2007 - linkHardOCP's review disagrees with almost everyone else's results and also reads like a marketing advertisement for the product. I wouldn't give their review the time of day. Reply
PrinceGaz - Wednesday, April 18, 2007 - linkThey're normally very good which after reading HardOCP's review immediately after AT (whose I read first), I thought I should mention that not everyone found the 8600GTS to be slower than the X1950Pro.
However, after reading several more reviews on other usually reliable websites, the consensus seems to be that the 8600GTS is well behind the X1950Pro, which does make HardOCP's finding seem very odd.
I get the feeling that we're going to have to wait until nVidia get their drivers for this card sorted out as I suspect they are not all they could be, which they will hopefully have done by the time the HD2xxx series are launched, then the 8600/8500 cards can be retested and compared with their true competition. Reply
erwos - Tuesday, April 17, 2007 - link</font>
I'm wondering if I can fix the disappearing text problem. Reply
PrinceGaz - Tuesday, April 17, 2007 - linkPlease remove or edit my above post to remove the (H) bit which caused a problem, I'd do it myself but we have no edit facility. Reply
JarredWalton - Tuesday, April 17, 2007 - link
That should hopefully fix it - you just need to turn off highlighting using {/h} (with brackets instead of braces). Reply
defter - Tuesday, April 17, 2007 - linkYou need to take into account that 7900GS will be soon discontinued and X1900 series will face same fate as soon as ATI releases RV630 cards.
Cards based on previous high-end products like 7900 and X1900 based cards are great for consumers, but bad for ATI/NVidia since they have large die sizes and 256bit memory bus (= high board manufacturing costs). Reply
hubajube - Tuesday, April 17, 2007 - linkI wouldn't replace my 7800GT with these but it would be fantastic for a HTPC. Reply
PICBoy - Tuesday, April 17, 2007 - linkI think a lot of people is waiting to see some DX10 bechmarks really bad because that's what makes G80 and G84 special.
If the 8600 GTS can't run Crysis at AT LEAST 45 FPS with 1280x1024 with full details and a moderate 4xAA then it's not worth it in my own humble opinion.
Same for the 8800 GTS 320MB, if it can't run Crysis at 60 FPS with 1280x1024 with full details and full 16xCSAA then it sucks...
BTW 8800 GTS 320MB gets near double the performance at 50% higher price and when 4xAA is enabled a little over double. Think about that everyone ;-) Reply
Staples - Tuesday, April 17, 2007 - linkMy reaction to. Do you play PC games? Very few games can be run at 60fps with full detail even with top of the line hardware. I expect the 8600GTS to get about 20fps in Crysis. Reply
PICBoy - Tuesday, April 17, 2007 - linkThe only games that I don't see get that amount of fps at 1280x1024 with current mainstream hardware (7900GS) are Black & White 2, Oblivion and of course Rainbow Six Vegas. The rest of the games get 60 or more, excepto for Splinter Cell which gets 52 but that's almost 60 to me. Only 3 games gentlemen and I'm taking this info from Anandtech. If 200$ can get me descent performance at good quality at DX10 then I don't think it's worth it and XFX 7900GS XXX would rock! Reply
DerekWilson - Wednesday, April 18, 2007 - linkThe issues is still one of the direction the industry is going. Games are going to get more graphically intense in the future, and different techniques will scale better on different hardware.
Rainbow Six: Vegas is very important, as it is an Unreal Engine 3 game -- and Epic usually does very well with licensing their engine ... It's possible many games could be based on this same code in the future, though we can't say for certain.
It's not only a question of DX10, but future DX9 games as well -- how will they be implemented, and whether more shader intensive DX9 code lend it self better to the G8x architecture of not. Reply
gramboh - Tuesday, April 17, 2007 - linkAre you joking? 8800GTS 320 in Crysis with max details and 16x AA at 60+FPS?
I'm not expecting more than 40fps on my system at 1920x1200 less-than-max-details no aa/af (E6600 3.4GHz, 2GB ram, 8800GTS 640MB at 600/1900) Reply


text:
This is without a doubt Kate Upton's most successful year as a model — so we've compiled her sexiest Instagram shots that celebrate her curves.
Upton, 21, was recently crowned Model of the Year at the 10th Style Awards in New York. Models.com ranks her the 3rd sexiest model in the world and Maxim places her No. 8 on its Hot 100 list.
This year, Upton landed the covers of Vanity Fair, Elle, Vogue Brazil, American Vogue, British Vogue, Harpers Bazaar (Korea, Vietnam, Greece and Brazil) and the Sports Illustrated Swimsuit Edition— for the second consecutive year.
Entertainment News
Delivered to your inbox
You'll also receive Yardbarker's daily Top 10, featuring the best sports stories from around the web. Customize your newsletter to get articles on your favorite sports and teams. And the best part? It's free!
|Best of Yardbarker
|NFL News
|MLB News
Today's Best Stuff
For Bloggers
Join the Yardbarker Network for more promotion, traffic, and money.
Company Info
What is Yardbarker?
Yardbarker is the largest network of sports blogs and pro athlete blogs on the web. This site is the hub of the Yardbarker Network, where our editors and algorithms curate the best sports content from our network and beyond.
|© 2015 Yardbarker, Inc. All rights reserved. Use of this website (including any and all parts and components) constitutes your acceptance of these Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. (What's New?)


text:
Intel Atom D510: Pine Trail Boosts Performance, Cuts Powerby Anand Lal Shimpi on 12/21/2009 12:01 AM EST
- Posted in
- CPUs
40 Comments
Back to Article
yuhong - Wednesday, December 30, 2009 - link"Granted the board only costs $75 new, but would it have killed Intel to include DVI or HDMI out?"
That is a limitation of the on-die GPU, it only support VGA and LVDS for the display. Reply
lucaiuli - Saturday, January 02, 2010 - linkFound this board at http://www.mini-box.com/D510MO-mini-ITX-Intel">http://www.mini-box.com/D510MO-mini-ITX-Intel, it will be available this week, price is not bad. I am considering buying one and with a Broadcom Crystal HD miniPCI Express card and proper miniITX enclosure it would be a nice fanless and siled HD HTPC for my living room. Reply
geok1ng - Tuesday, December 22, 2009 - link"It's not a problem in areas where AMD is competitive, but what about areas in which they're not?"
AMD chose not to be competitive on the Netbook and lower power notebook market. There was a time when ATIs IGPs were very good, and today an overclocked 3200 can dish out enough fps to compete with NVIDIAs offerings. AMD had a lower power CPU months before the CLUVs, but it never become an integrated platform like Ion, even on the micro HTPC market.
If a company has a super IGP, and there was a time when AMD had one, and the market has a new wave of low power low costs Netbooks, and this company decides not to join the wave, well, dont blame Intel when things go the way of the Dodo.
I am only seeing Intel paying AMD so that Intel remains dominating the market, even on produtcs were Intel's offerings are so crappy as the IGP market. Reply
Penti - Tuesday, December 22, 2009 - linkAMD still offers the AMD Neo X2 with AMD 785G or HD4200 graphics or with embedded AMD 780E + SB710 chipset. But that's not a netbook offering but a consumer or ultra-portable low-power notebook offer. I don't really like it that it's K8 based but it's still not totally bad. I don't think AMD is interested in the MID/smartphone market Intel is going after slowly any way.
There's reason the AMD Neo platform didn't become a HTPC platform, first it was only released with 690E, secondly it wasn't supported in XBMC on linux. Then there's cost. Now CULV makes a lot more sense. GMA4500 is good enough. And it's first now supports really is coming through with Flash acceleration etc. It was a very limited usability with such a platform before. So soon Atom (with Broadcom accelerator), CULV etc really becomes useful and functional in the consumer space. AMD don't have any advantages even if they have support for the same things. I think it's wise that they are designing wholly new mobile products. Then there's gonna be a fair fight. Products will have a lower power envelope and be cheaper and on newer node. More will be released into the market. Reply
killerclick - Monday, December 21, 2009 - linkThis could be a chance for VIA Nano to get in on the netbook market. I fear however that most people buying netbooks won't know or care about the difference between the platforms. If it's cheap and can at least play 720p they won't go out of their way to get something non-Intel. Reply
Penti - Tuesday, December 22, 2009 - linkI won't consider the Nano until they have shrunk it, made it less power hungry, made it dual core and released a good graphics chip with truly open source drivers. I'd rather have Pineview + Broadcom BCM70015 if not.
It's impressive what Centaur can do with ~100 employees, but I'm not impressed with the S3 Graphics or VIA chipset team. Reply
killerclick - Tuesday, December 22, 2009 - linkI meant Nano + ATI/NVIDIA IGP Reply
Penti - Tuesday, December 22, 2009 - linkYeah I know you wrote that. But..
That will never happen. It's Nano + Mobile ATI/NVIDIA GPU tops. But I don't see the point. Via's own gpus are fine for DXVA in Windows etc. Nano aren't that power efficient to begin with. It's not like such platforms will be fast enough to game on either way.
This is what they have coming out (chipset with IGP) http://via.com.tw/en/products/chipsets/v-series/vn...">http://via.com.tw/en/products/chipsets/v-series/vn... It's not that bad. It has modern integrated graphics but it can be used with a discrete graphics solution too. Reply
strikeback03 - Monday, December 21, 2009 - linkIf I remember correctly, you used a standard ATX power supply for testing the LF/LF2 Atom boards, which you speculated was part of the reason for such high power consumption. Did you restest with the same PSU as from the Pine Trail system? Reply
Griswold - Monday, December 21, 2009 - linkAlmost no performance gains - the opposite is actually true with the demise of useful chipset graphics for the atom platform.
Buh bye, atom! Hello VIA Nano + ION! Reply
Jeffk464 - Monday, December 21, 2009 - linkThis might be a decent solution with the broadcom media chip making it capable of playing HD content and hopefully flash media. Reply
dealcorn - Monday, December 21, 2009 - linkIf I am reading correctly the Intel platform with Broadcom media accelerator (about $25) is cheaper than the Ion platform and will consume less energy. Some relevant perfortmance testing may help determine whether the Intel platform is positioned to dominate the frugal HTPC market.
It is a bummer that you will need to spend chump change for a SATA port card to enable software raid 5 for a frugal media server.
Likely, the incremental performance improvements are adequate for Intel to maintain its cachet in the dissed, real world netbook market with its surprisingly large volumes.
Its kinda a nothing platform, but in context may be a home run. Reply
Jeffk464 - Monday, December 21, 2009 - linkFor it to be a solution for me it needs to be on a mobo that has a pcie slot and hdmi through the broadcom chip. I'm not to hopeful though, will probably end up with a i3 solution. Too bad, I like the idea of going super low wattage. Reply
psychobriggsy - Monday, December 21, 2009 - linkThe platform is standing still apart from getting more integrated. Hopefully that will mean cheaper. Maybe some netbooks will get cheaper, but otherwise the platform is a complete waste of time because of the lack of HD video capability (for Intel to call the graphics "HD Graphics" is verging on consumer misrepresentation, it can't even do 1080p output via HDMI/DVI, what is this, 2005?).
Why did the review concentrate on benchmarks of applications nobody would run on such a system?
These chips are a solution for nothing apart from the unwealthy Office user who needs 8 hours of battery instead of 6. Reply
Jeffk464 - Monday, December 21, 2009 - linkIt can be used for a low power/cost network storage device. Reply
Zool - Monday, December 21, 2009 - linkThere could be a test with underclocked and undervolted E5300 against the Atom D510. Maybe Power vs performance would be quite close if not better for the E5300. I think that everyone could take another 10W for a performance thats not crapy (even netbooks). Reply
Calin - Monday, December 21, 2009 - link10 more watts would mean going from 8-9 hours of socket-free operation down to 6 (or maybe less). Not acceptable for the people that want 8 hours of socket-free operation. As for higher performance CPU, you have the low voltage processors (CULV), which will better fit the bill. Reply
Zool - Monday, December 21, 2009 - linkThing is that 10+ more wats in CPU doesnt mean that u use it all the time. For internet browsing and so (not like u can use it efectivly for something more) the cpu isnt working 100% all the time just sporadicly.
Majority of the power usage in those scenarios is in the rest of the hardware like display ,gpu, mainboard which runs all the time.
And i dont even say that with faster cpu the task are faster done so u use the cpu on 100% state less time in total.
Atom is the only one of its kind now and without competition it will stay this crapy for long time.
cjs150 - Monday, December 21, 2009 - linkThere are 3 markets for this type of product: notebooks, HTPC and cheap file servers:
HTPC market: complete failure because the graphics are not up to scratch
Cheap file server: only SATA ports but I could add my raid card to this but the given the cost it would be cheaper to buy a NAS box
Notebooks: barely adequate - word processing and simple internet browsing only.
So for 2 out of 3 markets it is a waste of space and the 3rd market it is merely sub-par what is already out there Reply
Jeffk464 - Monday, December 21, 2009 - linkDon't give up yet, mobo manufacturers have the option to put a broadcom media chip on their boards. I don't know if this will come with HDMI though. Have to wait and see. Reply
Ghandalf - Monday, December 21, 2009 - linkHi,
good article!
What power-supply did you use for your tests? The idle consumption of the new d510 looks too high for me! Reply
blackbrrd - Monday, December 21, 2009 - linkThis really doesn't look very impressive, looks like we have to wait for 32nm to make the GPU usable as noted in the article... Reply
Ghandalf - Monday, December 21, 2009 - linkHi,
good article!
What power-supply did you use for your tests? The idle consumption of the new d510 looks too high for me! Reply
dgz - Monday, December 21, 2009 - linkI am tired of Intel forcing crap products on consumers, while touting the great benefits. Clearly there is no benefit for the consumers. Not to a single one as the IGP is barely enough for Minesweeper.
Although I am very disappointed with nVidia these days, their offerings are much better on the mobile segments - both phones and nettops. Reply
zdzichu - Monday, December 21, 2009 - linkBest feature of this platform is getting back to known, supported GPU. Intel damaged its reputation with Paulsbo, now there a chance to get back to supported graphics chipset, with proper Open Source drivers. Reply
ET - Monday, December 21, 2009 - linkThe difference in numbers (950 vs. 3100) made me hope there'd be some improvement in the graphics, but it was my fault for not having done enough research. Turns out they're basically the same. I forgot it was the X3100 that had DX10 graphics, not the 3100 (how nice of Intel to use such clear naming convention).
Still, in other respects this seems like an okay upgrade. A little better performance and lower power. I wonder if it will make the GMA 500 solutions go away. Reply
AmdInside - Monday, December 21, 2009 - linkI'm a bit disappointed myself in Pinetrail platform. To me, it seems more or less a way to bring costs down for Intel while masking it as a performance bump to consumers. Unfortunately, my perfect netbook is an Atom dual core with an ION chipset on a 10" screen but it does not exist. There are 12" versions but then, it somewhat defeats the purpose of the netbook (portability and battery life). I wish a 10" version would come out. It would be the perfect companion video player. I could watch Hulu in bed, take to the gym and watch movies while on the treadmill, have it beside my main PC to stream sports programs while working, play hidef movies on my hard drive to a large HDTV, etc.. Hopefully someone will create a 10" Ion notebook in the near future. Reply
bnolsen - Saturday, December 26, 2009 - linkI don't know about playing movies to hidef but I watch hulu all the time with my current netbook, on linux even. I also watch 720p encoded content, but scaled to fullscreen.
Go buy the lenevo for $194 and try it. Reply
AznBoi36 - Monday, December 21, 2009 - linkI agree with all your points, which is why I have not yet jumped on the Atom bandwagon. Reply
dagamer34 - Monday, December 21, 2009 - linkIt's pretty sad to see that Intel is muscling nVidia out of this market, when it's clear that a better product exists, and now we're getting a "new" product with worse performance across the board. Because if Flash isn't being hardware-accelerated, then that means that they CPU is doing more work, and whatever gains Pine Trail might have (i'm not convinced they're even worth writing an article over), it's negated by the exponential improvement in which Ion brings to the table.
At first, I thought nVidia's CEO was blowing a bunch of hot air about Intel playing hardball, but it's pretty obvious that something is wrong with this picture here. If Microsoft got smacked down for bundling in 1998, I don't see how bundling the CPU and GPU into one chip and then locking other hardware vendors out with expensive contracts is any different. And what's worse, apparently the laws this time around allow the Federal government to not just look at Intel's past actions, but their effect on the future as well. Reply
Shadowmaster625 - Monday, December 21, 2009 - linkWhy doesnt AMD just take one of their upcoming mobile 880 series northbridges and add a memory controller and a single Athlon core? It would be faster than atom, more efficient than Ion, and could be binned for low power. Instead they just stand there with their thumbs up their butts while Intel shovels this garbage onto millions of unsuspecting consumers at even higher profit margins. Reply
JarredWalton - Monday, December 21, 2009 - linkThe problem is that even single core Athlons are not particularly power friendly. I'm sure they could get 5-6 hours of battery life if they tried hard, but Atom can get twice that. Reply
Hector1 - Monday, December 21, 2009 - linkDo you want some whine with that ? Where were you when chipsets were created by taking a bunch of smaller ICs on the motherboard and putting them altogether into one IC ? PCs became cheaper and faster. We thought it was great. Do you know anything about L2 Cache ? It used to be separate on the motherboards as well until it was integrated into the CPU. PCs became cheaper and faster and we thought it was great. Remember when CPUs were solo ? They became Duo & Quad making the PCs faster and dropping price/performance. AMD & Intel integrated the memory controller and, whoa!, guess what ? Faster & lower price/performance and, yes, we thought it was great. It's called Moore's Law and it's all been part of the semiconductor revolution that's still going on since the '60s. GPUs are no different. They're still logic gates made out of transistors and with new 32nm technology, then 22nm and 16nm, the graphics logic will be integrated as well. Seriously, what did you think would happen ? Reply
TETRONG - Monday, December 21, 2009 - linkDo you understand that Moore's Law is not a force of nature?
Intel has artificially handicapped the low-voltage sector in order to force consumers to purchase Pentiums. Right where they wanted you all along.
Since when is it ok for Intel to dictate what type of systems are created with processors?
First it was the 1GB of Ram limitation, now you can't have a dual-core. When does it end?
"We have a mediocre CPU, combined with a below average GPU-according to our amortization schedule you could very well have it in the year 2013(after the holidays of course), by which time we should have our paws all over the video encoding and browsing standards, which we'll be sure to make as taxing as possible. Official release of USB 3.0 will be right up in a jiff! Reply
Voldenuit - Monday, December 21, 2009 - linkThe historical examples you cite are not analagous, because intel bundling their anemic GPUs onto the package makes performance *worse*, and bundling the two dies onto a single package (they're not on the same chip, either, so there is no hard physical limitation) makes competing IGPs more expensive, since you now have to pay for a useless intel IGP as well as a 3rd party one if you were going to buy an IGP system.
And just because a past course of action was embraced by the market does not mean it was not anti-competitive. Reply
bnolsen - Saturday, December 26, 2009 - linkPerformance is worse?? As far as I can see the bridge requires no heat sink and the cpu can be cooled passively. Power use went way down. For this plaform that is improved performance.
My current atom netbooks do fine playing flash on their screens and just fine playing 720p h264 mkv files.
If you want a bunch of power use and heat, just skip the ion platform and go with a core2 based system. Reply
Hector1 - Monday, December 21, 2009 - linkYou need to re-read the tech articles. Pineview does integrate both the graphics and memory controller into the CPU. It's the ICH that remains separate. Even if it didn't, what do you think will happen when this goes to 32nm, 22nm and 16nm ? As for performance, Anand says in the title "Pine Trail Boosts Performance, Cuts Power" so that's good enough for me.
Intel obviously created the Atom for a low cost, low power platform and they're delivering. It'll continue to be fine-tuned with more integration to lower costs. The market obviously wants it. SOC is coming too (System On a Chip) for even lower costs. Not the place for high performance graphics, I think.
This is really about Moore's Law marching on. It's driven down prices, increased performances and lowered power more than anything else on the planet. Without it, we'd still be paying the $5000 I paid for my 1st PC in 1980 -- an Apple II Plus. What you're saying, whether you know it or not, is that we should stop advancing processes and stop Moore's Law. Personally, I'd like to see us not stop at 45nm and keep going. Reply
kaoken - Monday, December 21, 2009 - linkI agree that progress should be made, but bundling an intel cpu and IGP into a chip is anti-competitive. I wouldn't mind though if there were an intel cpu and ati/nvidia on a chip. Reply
JonnyDough - Tuesday, December 22, 2009 - linkHector is right in one respect, and that is that if Intel is going to be dumb, we don't have to purchase their products. I especially like the sarcastic cynicism in the article when mentioning all the things that Intel's chip CAN'T do. They just don't know how to make a GPU without patent infringement. If they can't compete, they'll try using their big market share to hurt competition. Classic Intel move. They never did care about innovation, only about market share and money. But I guess that's what happens when you're a mega corp with lots of stockholder expectations and pressure. I'll give my three cheers to the underdogs! Reply
overvolting - Monday, December 21, 2009 - linkHear Hear Reply


text:
Should You Lower Or Rap Through Anchors?
Does lowering through rap rings or chains cause significant wear? I live in an area with established crags, but not many locals. When anchors need replacing, there's a small group of folks around who have the knowledge, equipment and desire to do so. It seems to me that encouraging folks to lower would cause the anchors to wear out sooner. Is it best to double rope rappel if you are the last climber and cleaning the climb?
When I was a child, such a long, long, long time ago, two to four times a year at grade school they'd blast the siren and all us kids would hop under our desks and put our heads between our knees. Supposedly the exercise was to prep us for the imminent launch of Russian nukes (or were they Chinese?), but really it was to instill a deep groinal fear of what could happen to us if we didn't all go along with the doctrine of the day (DOD). As the French philosopher Denis Diderot said, Man will never be free until the last king is strangled with the entrails of the last priest.
The DOD that's got everybody by the grapes today is this absurd fear of wearing out the anchors. Where did this come from? Of course lowering through a station will wear it out. Soooo? When the links or biners or hooks or whatever it is that's up there get worn replace them! This little chore doesn't take any skillful skills or cost much. The problem arises when people are too lazy, too cheap or too ignorant to do the work. In that case, they should quit climbing and take up bass fishing, where you can just sit on your tub and excel.
Since you asked about lowering versus rappelling, I assume you are sport climbing, and using the anchors to lower to the ground. Typically, sport anchors are rigged with either steel, threadable chain, steel hooks or fixed carabiners, which are probably aluminum but should be steel because steel lasts just about forever. I also imagine that you are talking about lowering after working a route, since everyone knows that you don't work a route with the rope threaded through the anchor, which does cause unnecessary wear and tear. (To work or TR a route, clip the anchor with your draws, and let them take the abuse. Replace your quickdraws when they become grooved.)
On a steep climb, lower, rather than rap, because it frees both of your hands for cleaning the draws on the way down, and lets you tram into the rope.
You do need to recognize the rare stations that are rigged for rappelling only. These you'll mostly find at trad areas or atop sport routes put up by Luddites who insist on weaving web tat through the gear and capping it with a flimsy aluminum descending ring, or using a tiny chain through which the rope will barely fit. In those situations, lowering just isn't prudent. Next!
Read Climb Safe: Dangers of Worn Lowering Anchors
GOT A QUESTION? E-mail Gear Guy! firstname.lastname@example.com


text:
List of best Neurosurgeon Doctors from trusted hospitals in Barasat, Kolkata. Get detailed info on educational qualification, experience and other credentials of Neurosurgeon Doctors in Barasat, Kolkata. Check OPD schedule and book appointment online with best Neurosurgeon from top hospitals in Barasat, Kolkata. Call 8010- 994- 994 to talk to in-house Credihealth experts for FREE medical assistance to choose the right Neurosurgeon, get options for Second Opinion or other other medical assistance.
A neurosurgeon is a surgeon who specializes in the surgery of brain and other parts of the nervous system. Many neurosurgeons complete a fellowship or undergo additional training to specialize in performing a particular surgery like brain aneursym surgery, deep brain stimulation, spine surgery, skull base surgery, neurovascular surgery, cerebrovascular surgery, extra cranial - intracranial bypass surgery, pediatric neurosurgery and epilepsy surgery.


text:
Replacement for Model 10656932600
EDR3RXD1 Fridge Filter Replacement by AquaFresh
The AquaFresh WF710 Water Filter is the compatible replacement refrigerator ice and water filter for the Whirlpool EDR3RXD1, Whirlpool 4396841, the Whirlpool PUR 4396710 and the Thermador 750673. It is also the compatible replacement for the Kenmore 9030 and the Kenmore. 46-9030. The WF710 fits Whirlpool, MAYTAG, KitchenAid, JENN-AIR and Amana refrigerators to deliver cleaner water. The WF710 either reduces and/or removes contaminants such as pharmaceuticals, waterborne parasites, cysts, lead and mercury, pesticides. Additionally, chlorine taste and odor are reduced and/or removed for more appealing water. Replace every 6 months or 200 gallons for optimal performance and efficiency.
Filter Specifications:
- Part Number: WF710
- Replaces Part Number: EDR3RXD1, 4396841, 4396710, Thermador 750673
- Dimensions: 12"x2-3/4"
- Filter Media: Carbon Block
- Capacity: 200 gallons; 6 months
- Operating Pressure: 30-120 psi
- Operating Temperature: 33-100 °F
- Flow rate: 0.5 gpm
- Retains fluoride in water
- Quick and easy filter change
- For best performance replace filter as recommended by manufacturer
The AquaFresh WF710 is compatible with select side-by-side refrigerators from Amana, Jenn-Air, Kenmore, KitchenAid, Maytag, and Whirlpool. Check with your manufacturer to guarantee the filter is compatible with your fridge.
Note: To install filter push until you hear the receiver click into place. Improper installation may cause leaks, damage to flooring and appliances.
Whirlpool EDR3RXD1 EveryDrop Fridge Water Filter 3 Product Reviews :Write a review
- Not reviewed yet
Auto Delivery from Filtersfast.com
Never forget to change your filters. Save 5% today and on all your future orders & we'll deliver them automatically!
Here's how it works:
- Save 5% today and on all your future orders
- Enjoy the convenience of not having to reorder
- Cancel or modify your orders anytime
- Select a delivery schedule that works for you
- Pay as you go


text:
Google Reboots The Chromebook: ARM Meets Notebook For $249by Jason Inofuentes on 10/18/2012 10:11 PM EST
- Posted in
- Samsung
- Chrome OS
- Exynos
- Chromebook
- Laptops
- Exynos 5 Dual
50 Comments
Back to Article
frostyfiredude - Thursday, October 18, 2012 - linkI've read that it's a 30Wh battery on G+ and Engadget. That 6.5 hour runtime doesn't sound very good to me for a 11.6" ARM device with that size battery. My 11.6" MBA with a SB i5 gets 5 hours off a 35Wh battery while browsing the web for comparison, and that's with a heavier OS at that. Reply
coder543 - Thursday, October 18, 2012 - linkIf anything, I'd say they're being safe rather than sorry by quoting such a low number. My bet is that this device averages 8 hours minimum...
however, if we set my assumptions aside and consider your argument, I will point out that the MBA has four times the budget to put into each component, allowing them to fine tune each component to use as little power as possible, and the battery is LiPo instead of Li-Ion, plus a better quality display panel can draw significantly less power. The same could be said to a lesser extent of WiFi and Bluetooth.
Apple is a master at their craft.
I can't wait for full reviews of this device, and I so wish that I could run Ubuntu for ARM or some other ARM distro on here. We'll see. Reply
Kisper - Friday, October 19, 2012 - linkJust to clear things up:
lithium polymer batteries ARE lithium-ion.
The major difference is that in a traditional Li-ion battery, the electrolyte (a lithium salt) is held within an organic solvent, whereas with a Lithium-ion polymer battery, the electrolyte is held by a polymer.
I agree in principal with your statements. Hopefully you don't construe this to be an attack on you. Reply
teldar - Saturday, October 20, 2012 - linkAccording to modern convention, while a lithium polymer battery may indeed be a lithium ion battery, people refer to advanced polymer batteries as polymer and more generic lithium batteries as ion.
I appreciate specificity, as it's the only way to preclude misinterpretations, but I would say he used typically accepted wordage. Reply
Leonick - Saturday, October 20, 2012 - linkPossible. Can't say I know the last time I saw a product where the battery estimates undercut the actual time you get. Apple usually got fairly spot on with their, most other companies exaggerate a lot (or simply don't test under reasonable conditions).
Heck if Samsungs phone battery life specs are anything to go by you should be happy if it comes anywhere near those six hours even :p Reply
UpSpin - Friday, October 19, 2012 - link30Wh/6hours = 5W for the Chromebook
35Wh/5hours = 7W for the MacBook Air
The display backlight consumes most of the power. Both have the same display resolution, thus equal display backlight, thus their display should consume about the same power. Most of the other internals consume similar power, too. The SSD in the Macbook air idles while web browsing so no real difference here either, the Air has more RAM, but the difference is maybe 0.2W in the end. So 2W more for the SB i5 while idling, sounds reasonable for me.
We also don't know how Google measured the battery life. While idling, web browsing, movie playback, what display brightness?
So better wait for reviews to see make a real comparison. Reply
lowlymarine - Friday, October 19, 2012 - linkIt's called "race to idle." While the SB i5 in your MacBook Air uses a lot more power under load than a Cortex-A15, it's also leaps and bounds more powerful. Therefore, it gets its work done faster and returns to the all-important idle state sooner, allowing for better battery life in a simple workload like web browsing.
Put both machines under continuous load until the batteries died, and I'm sure the ARM notebook would last a fair bit longer. Then again, it would also get less done. Reply
Microsapper - Thursday, October 25, 2012 - linkChromium Browser is being fully optimized for online use on ARM A15. The mainboard design, bandwidth, i/o, power usage, SSD are being optimized for this purpose as well. The SSD powers down and A15 throttles down for online use to save on Mali 605 GPU power usage. While doing general web browsing, we can expect to get much longer power usage and that's what they've been shooting for with this first ARM powered Ultrabook!
Charbax goes into additional details on his ARM page, in explaining just how Cloud Computing is set to change our Online Connected World in the Future with Chrome OS:
Charbax has been on the cutting edge of ARM computing for years. He was the first to get a look at Samsung's F700 in August September and is mostly the one who leaked photos in early October. He described SGH-Z610 (FCC in August 2006) as the precursor to the Apple iPhone, when it was first shown in January 2006. A whole year before iPhone came out. No doubt he has direct connections inside Samsung. Even Apple was aware of this Multi-media Touchscreen Gesture Based Smartphone w/ it's single round physical Play/Home button on front. In fact they used the processor in iPhone. Anyone smart should pay attention to what he says and there is absolutely no doubt about that! (even though he has toned down his leaks in recent years, he still gets inside info)
Consider this; at $249 the Samsung ARM Chromebook is an excellent deal and no doubt, at this early stage has lots of room to be optimized and you may find some of his claims a little too outrageous. But he's made them before and been right the majority of the time. Right now that future 20 hour usage on this ARM A15 Ultrabook may sound ridiculous, but we haven't seen even half of what ARM and Samsung have put into the Exynos Processor.
Remember too..... that had Samsung a8 Inte gone with ARM's recommendation and dropped Intrinsity inside of deciding to o partner with Apple on Hummingbird share the costs when Intrinsity was in dire financial straits and over the due date, they would have been better off. ARM would be too, because they wanted SAMSUNG to be first to build an all ARM Chip with Mali GPU, Artisan, etc. But wanted energy efficient CPU to go with Imagination GPU for power to run iPad. ARM was having trouble getting any fab or device maker to take a shot on Mali. Low n behold SAMSUNG should have dropped Apple and Intrinsity...... eaten their losses and Gone all ARM then! .......ARM Logic Energy Efficient design Optimizations were every bit as good as Intrinsity's
nerd1 - Friday, October 19, 2012 - linkI own a MBA 13" with (claimed) 7-hr battery time and I usually get 4.5hrs. What I do is mostly browsing, yes with flash enabled. Reply
amdwilliam1985 - Monday, October 22, 2012 - linkPretty much the same here with my 2011 13" base MBA.
I get about 5 hours of browsing with pretty much everything turn off and/or lower. Reply
kenour - Thursday, October 18, 2012 - linkBooks are so 20th century, we want boxes! :P
This would be my 'old family member's' computer of choice. Simple, easy, cheap. Reply
coder543 - Thursday, October 18, 2012 - linkwhy chromebox instead of chromebook for the aforementioned family members? a laptop is all-in-one, so to them it is even simpler, in most cases. Reply
kenour - Friday, October 19, 2012 - linkBecause 24" screens are cheap, and old peoples eyes are crap. Reply
aryonoco - Thursday, October 18, 2012 - linkThis would be the perfect computer for my parents. They literally don't use anything other than the browser, and are already hooked into the Google ecosystem thanks to Android and Gmail, so this would suit them well.
Would be great if you could get your hands on it and do a proper review, especially as this is the first A15 device in the wild! Reply
amdwilliam1985 - Monday, October 22, 2012 - linkgreat idea, I'm also interest in the capability of that A15.
Heard it's much more powerful but also more power hungry. Reply
ken.c - Thursday, October 18, 2012 - link" the first PC to feature neither Intel nor AMD."
Puh-leeze. This fails on all measures. If you mean first PC without x86 overall, well, it's patently NOT (see half the stuff at http://oldcomputers.net). If you mean first Windows PC, oops, it's not a Windows PC. If you mean first… oh hell, you get the idea.
Darn kids, get off my lawn. Reply
Aenean144 - Friday, October 19, 2012 - linkYeah. Maybe the author just totally forgot? It's not even the first ARM laptop within the last 3 years, let alone 10 years ago. Reply
Zoomer - Friday, October 19, 2012 - linkYou should have said Ultrabook form factor computing device.
Well, except it's not. See transformer. Reply
JasonInofuentes - Friday, October 19, 2012 - linkYeah, my fault, I meant in quite some time. Reply
Kevin G - Friday, October 19, 2012 - linkIndeed. Go back 15 years and you can find non-x86 hardware running Windows. I wouldn't classify them as PC's as they were more workstations or servers but they existed. In a similar vein, until recently MS supported a command line version of Windows on Itanium systems.
Also around that time Apple has moved to PowerPC from the Motorola 68k line, both radically different architectures than x86. Then again, one could go about calling them Macs instead of PC's.
There is also the Crusoe chip which was non-x86 but ran x86 software by merit of binary translation software and ran Windows. Reply
Flunk - Friday, October 19, 2012 - linkYou don't even have to look that far back. Anyone recall Apple Powerbooks or iBooks? Reply
Aenean144 - Friday, October 19, 2012 - linkI guess no one remembers the ARMH promoted "smartbook" category: an ARM powered laptop. I predict doom as long as you can't play games on it. At least we'll have knowledge of how good Exynos 5250 is. Not that good of a sign that its first appearance is in a low volume cloud client.
Sounds like it needs another 6 months to get it into phones. Reply
coolhardware - Friday, October 19, 2012 - linkI believe they didn't actually forgo 3G this generation, it's just a different model number and costs $329.99 instead of $249...
Looks pretty sweet!
:-) Reply
Zoomer - Friday, October 19, 2012 - linkWow, what is this, DT? Reply
pixelstuff - Friday, October 19, 2012 - linkI would like to know if it will run AirMech or similar high end games from the Chrome store.
https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/airmech/... Reply
Mugur - Friday, October 19, 2012 - linkWhat options do we have to install another OS? Reply
bupkus - Friday, October 19, 2012 - linkDOS? Reply
Mugur - Saturday, October 20, 2012 - linkI would prefer Windows 8 RT, but it's obviously impossible... :-) Reply
jjj - Friday, October 19, 2012 - linkThis news went somewhat under the radar but it's a big one.First chromebook at a reasonable price,first ARM based laptop that will sell more than a few units (if we exclude the convertible tablets) and first A15 product.
Btw GigaOm mentiones 660ms in Sunspider,we don't know anything about clocks,RAM and storage speeds but that's quite a number for ARM. Reply
Calin - Friday, October 19, 2012 - linkThere were the Z-80 personal computers (Sinclair Spectrums), there were Commodores and plenty of others.
Not to mention that I've seen Android nettops with physical keyboard but without touchscreen this year in a superstore (I'm not sure about specifications, though, but they had solid-state storage). Reply
bupkus - Friday, October 19, 2012 - link"There were the Z-80 personal computers (Sinclair Spectrums), there were Commodores and plenty of others."
But could they play Angry Birds? Reply
boblabola - Friday, October 19, 2012 - linkhttp://acorn.chriswhy.co.uk/docs/Mags/PCW/PCW_Sep9...
It could have been much better. A colour screen would have been nice.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RISC_OS Reply
bupkus - Friday, October 19, 2012 - linkWow, did I ever get a temporal flashback to undergrad days looking at that pdf. Reply
bupkus - Friday, October 19, 2012 - linkDependence on wi-fi. Reply
Penti - Friday, October 19, 2012 - linkIt would be half decent if you could actually run Android apps on the platform. Would allow some productivity, entertainment, more games and better offline / poor connection use. Configuration as a thin client (Citrix/RDP/VNC/PCoIP) should be easy and straight forward for corporate use. At this hardware price, with full feature GNU/Linux browser with Flash player it could be a halfway-decent as a light machine for consumers. You miss a lot of entertainment and features by not allowing Android apps though. Why wouldn't I want to sync some of my Spotify playlist to this device and why wouldn't I want to use the Android streaming apps from all the services around which does much more than their Flash Player sites (if they even allow you in with a Chromebook). It's for running web-apps but just connection issues and DRM makes that not such much of a proposition. When already running a Linux kernel it's not even that hard to merge it with Android. It's not enough to just be different to Android here, some wider software support is needed. I would love to have webapps for most stuff so I just log in and continue from where I was but that won't happen in full.
Adding X11 to Android to run Chromium etc and call it Chrome OS would be possible. Could be a great platform for the web, web apps, consuming multimedia etc. Reply
Mugur - Saturday, October 20, 2012 - linkCorrect. Reply
Penti - Monday, October 22, 2012 - linkSensible comment. Reply
HisDivineOrder - Friday, October 19, 2012 - linkAfter the two years, you have to pay $60 per year to keep that 100gb you'll need since the thing is lacking in capacity.
Yeah, thanks, but no thanks. Reply
Zink - Friday, October 19, 2012 - link1. Adding a 32GB SD card is $20
2. The other way to look at is you're getting 100GB of cloud storage included in the price. $250 is a great price for just the hardware.
$250 - $120 = $130 for A15, USB 3.0 etc.
3. After 2 years just use whatever cloud storage you already have. Skydrive, dropbox etc. will all work on it just like they do on Windows 8 and iOS devices. Reply
zappb - Friday, October 19, 2012 - linknone of the images show up for me, could be just me (in the gallery) Reply
CeriseCogburn - Friday, October 26, 2012 - linkYes it's just you.
Look at their target consumer - a little girl, with hearts on her bottom in her schoolgirl outfit.
There it is - the chit chat teeny bopper, where mommie and daddy can drop $249 so kiddie can be cool in school.
Then Google of course has all the snoop and sniff and sell data stuff at the ready, and the 100G online storage can help the authorities and any "invesigations" should anything occur, like sharing the wrong camera pics or views.
It's whatever - they're too cheap and greedy to allow you to store your own stuff, they want it all, on their data center, and you "deal with it" at CRAP wifi speeds.
They take your speed, they take your time, they take your data, they take your security, they take anything and everything personal.
It's perfect for the - I don't know what person. Reply
tayb - Friday, October 19, 2012 - linkI think the only thing that could stop this thing from being able to run Windows RT is the size of the SSD. Of course, Microsoft isn't selling Windows RT but that doesn't mean it won't be available via "other means." I'm not really interested in Chrome OS but a $250 Windows RT ultrabook sounds pretty nice in my opinion. Reply
Arksine - Friday, October 19, 2012 - linkLack of touch would severely limit the usability of Windows RT on this device. Reply
Zink - Friday, October 19, 2012 - linkWindows 8 is being forced onto every PC anyways. With Windows RT on a device like this it would be the same UI as any other low end laptop. The only difference with Windows RT from the users perspective is requiring all applications to come through the Windows Store. Reply
nofumble62 - Friday, October 19, 2012 - linkMost people already owns a PC laptop. Why would one opt for another laptop just for playing? I bet 99% of people will pick a tablet instead. Then later, they will upgrade their laptop to a convertible laptop. Reply
versesuvius - Saturday, October 20, 2012 - linkI keep missing the point of this device and others like it. What is wrong with Windows or Linux. Just because a laptop is half a pound lighter or 3 millimeter thinner does not make it any more useful. Every program in the world is written either for Windows OS or a variant of the Linux OS. Why waste all that and just keep your fingers crossed for something similar to show up on Android or Google something? A 10 year old laptop can do more than this device can do. Provided of course that the user is actually doing something useful and not flattering himself for making Google or Samsung of ARM happier than they already are. I would personally just purchase the cheapest laptop available and install the latest Linux OS on it and get done with it. The mileage one gets on that is easily ten time what one gets on this silly piece of hardware. Reply
andrewaggb - Monday, October 22, 2012 - linkYep. I guess this device isn't for me either. I just don't understand why you'd want it. At some point they need to understand that price isn't the only motivator. Reply
c4v3man - Tuesday, October 23, 2012 - linkIf all you do is surf the web, why do you care what else you can do. Having a lightweight machine is great, thinness helps but isn't as important. Also, I'd assume it's pretty responsive considering it's a lightweight OS, running off a SSD...
My wife may actually want one of these... I do too much on my computer to be able to use one (need apps), but alot of people just want web access. Reply
Obsoleet - Wednesday, October 24, 2012 - linkIt has apps? http://www.google.com/intl/en/chrome/webstore/apps... Reply
zappb - Tuesday, October 23, 2012 - linkThat keyboard looks awesome...and normally the samsung screens are great - nice product Reply


text:
Valentines Day
Can you feel the love? With the huge selection of CandyDirect.com's Valentine's Day candy, you won't be able to miss it! From red, to white, to shimmering beautiful candies, this category of sweets will make your heart skip a beat and fall in love with every bite. If you have a sweetheart you'd like to treat to an alternative treat, say "I love you" with a gift of some of our Valentine's Day candies! If your loved one has a soft spot for chocolate, you'll find that here. We also have heart shaped candies, lollipops and more to make your heart melt. Start your search today and feel the love as you browse through this loveable selection.
2 Item(s)
2 Item(s)


text:
Ask A Librarian
Use this form to submit your questions to the library.
Use this online form to submit questions to the library. We try to answer questions within 24 hours. You will receive a status update to your inquiry if we are not able to answer it within 24 hours.
The red dots indicate required information.
The red dots indicate required information.


text:
Shawn Boykins graduated from Tufts University in 2007 with a Bachelor of Science degree in Electrical Engineering and a minor in Spanish. Shawn completed his Master's in Electrical Engineering at Arizona State. He currently is an engineer in telecommunications with Commscope.
Providing the Educational Opportunities that Change Lives
Success Stories
We are exceedingly proud of the remarkable accomplishments of our thriving Wave-Makers! Below are just a few of our many success stories from our college graduates:
Tammy Foster graduated from the University of California, Santa Barbara, in 2002 with a Bachelor of Arts degree in Psychology. She went on to California State University, Sacramento, and received her Master's in Counseling (2004). Tammy works for the Foster Care Agency of Sacramento and has her own consulting firm, providing counseling to adolescents and their families.
Guillermo Gallardo graduated from Santa Clara University in 2013 with a Bachelor of Science degree in Mechanical Engineering. Currently he is a mechanical engineer I at Fujifilm Dimatix.
Corina Garcia graduated from California State University, Hayward (now East Bay), in 2002 with a Bachelor of Arts in Sociology. In 2005, she received her Master's in Public Administration. Corina currently works at Making Waves Foundation as Operations Manager.
Ajani Jackson graduated from Xavier University of Louisiana in 2002 with a bachelors of science in Chemistry and a minor in Biology. Ajani completed a Masters of Science in Public Health from Tulane University School of Public Health in 2003 and received his Medical Degree from Morehouse School of Medicine in 2009. He finished his Psychiatry residency from Baylor School of Medicine in Houston, Texas in 2009 and is currently finishing his last year in fellowship at Emory University with a focus in Child and Adolescent Psychiatry.
Hernan Orozco graduated from Occidental College in 2007 with a Bachelor of Arts degree in Sociology. Most recently, he is pursuing his graduate degree in Speech Therapy. He is currently a Graduate Tutor at West Contra Costa Unified School District.
Rebeca Rangel graduated from Stanford University in 2001 with a Bachelor of Arts degree with Honors in Urban Studies. In 2005, she received her Master's in Public Policy from Harvard University's Kennedy School of Government. Rebeca is currently on leave from Bank of the West, where she serves as Senior Vice President/Community Affairs, in order to attend law school at Northwestern. She also serves on the board of both MWF and MWA.
Daniel E. Shaw entered Making Waves in 1991 as a student at Richmond's Adams Middle School, where standards were low and peer pressure discouraged academic achievement. With the help of Making Waves, he accelerated his learning and received unwavering support from high school through graduate school. A graduate of St. Mary's College High School, Morehouse College, and the UCLA Anderson School of Management, Daniel is now an associate marketing manager at General Mills.
Evan Wade graduated from Morehouse College in 2007 with a Bachelor of Arts in African American Studies. He completed a Master's Degree in History at the University of Connecticut. He is currently an Associate Professor of History at San Joaquin Delta College in Stockton, CA.