ICT Lab 1

Mark200

That's the prefab thing opposite the Hamilton isn't it?

Is it the ground-level one or the one above it?

Just wanna avoid the embarrassment of walking into the wrong one tomorrow

snappieT

Yep, the ground floor one AFAIK.
Bring a laptop if you have one, the PCs in the ICT huts take upwards of 15 minutes to login.

Epic Tissue

What's the deal with those things anyway? How long have they been there?

Years. Horrible yokes altogether.

ICT II is the top one, I is the bottom one.

mathew

All the computers are wired to the Hamilton by one 100Mb line.
So loading profiles for all those computers at once takes ages... and ages... and ages...

cianclarke

mathew wrote: »

All the computers are wired to the Hamilton by one 100Mb line.
So loading profiles for all those computers at once takes ages... and ages... and ages...

When i was in first year, there was no problems with logging in - it's only the past few months i've noticed ridiculous login times on machines on the CS network, it's in LG12 too.
Also, anybody notice how the lovely high-res monitors are all running on ****-low res in LG12? Those PC's really need a fix up.

Crash

They're badly configured - if they're the dual core machines = they're also running on a single core due to bad setup.

Its not due to the low connection between there and elsewhere in college, the auth protocol is just ****e.

K!LL!@N

Epic Tissue wrote: »

What's the deal with those things anyway? How long have they been there?

ICT started in '97.
I started in ICT in '98, that's when the bottom floor prefab was added.
The second floor prefab came the next year, I think, in '99.
Wow, they've been around a long time.
I'm amazed that (a) they're still there (b) they're still being used.

Peslo

surely they could have put a decent building there with proper infrastructure by now! I mean the size of it even, it would take no time at all, (i.e. over the summer)

True but it would take €. And building new computer labs down in the Hamilton isn't a very sexay project for the Trinity foundation to get people to contribute towards.

Unless somehow these labs went to cure cancer.

Peslo

Maybe if they donate the computers that they have in there now to schools or africa. It would certainly generate some god publicity and might help the project along :rolleyes:

snappieT

Myth wrote: »

Unless somehow these labs went to cure cancer.

Using computers to cure cancer when they aren't being used.

Might run up the auld power bill though...

Peslo

I was reading about the ne Dell Studio Hybrid PCs. They're incredibly efficient and are good for the envirnment. Maybe they should be investing in these.

Jonathan

Peslo wrote: »

I was reading about the ne Dell Studio Hybrid PCs. They're incredibly efficient and are good for the envirnment. Maybe they should be investing in these.

You are falling for Michael Dell's marketing bullsh1t.

Peslo

jmccrohan wrote: »

You are falling for Michael Dell's marketing bullsh1t.

Eh what are you talking about?! They're either more efficient, or they're not.

Jonathan

Peslo wrote: »

Eh what are you talking about?! They're either more efficient, or they're not.

They are efficient but it is primarily due to Intel's work, not Dell's.

Their marketing leads people to believe that Dell are the ones making the big effort with the environment.

Peslo

Well, it really doesn't matter who makes them. The fact is that they're more energy efficient, and smaller thus reducing the amount of packaging as well as reducing the amount of physical resourses that the thing is made of.

Boston

More efficient then what? Based on what criteria and according to who? These are the question an engineer asks.

Peslo

They use less power than standard desktops.

Crash

Presumably they use low power cpu's, a lower wattage PSU, and have some internal power management crap thrown into them.

Odds on, generally making them poor for any actual use other than as abasic desktop/

Peslo

Going Forward wrote: »

Presumably they use low power cpu's, a lower wattage PSU, and have some internal power management crap thrown into them.

Odds on, generally making them poor for any actual use other than as abasic desktop/

Well no, they use the new Core2 CPU from intel.
Seems Obvious to me that they're using more effecient, "cutting edge" sorta components rather than simple "lower power, low performance" components.

They wouldn't be more expensive otherwise.

Jonathan

Peslo wrote: »

They use less power than standard desktops.

Not really.

When I said more efficient, I was referring to the previous generation of P4 Intel Processors.

Most of the ICT huts use C2D's anyway.

Peslo

jmccrohan wrote: »

Not really.

When I said more efficient, I was referring to the previous generation of P4 Intel Processors.

Most of the ICT huts use C2D's anyway.

But it does use less power, which is my point.
And performance-wise, they shoud be a fine replacement for the ICT hut PCs.

Boston

Peslo wrote: »

They use less power than standard desktops.

Whats a standard desktop. Define one for me please.

Going Forward wrote: »

Presumably they use low power cpu's, a lower wattage PSU, and have some internal power management crap thrown into them.

Odds on, generally making them poor for any actual use other than as abasic desktop/

Exactly, the technology is probably exactly the same, but rather operated under different conditions.

Peslo wrote: »

Well no, they use the new Core2 CPU from intel.
Seems Obvious to me that they're using more effecient, "cutting edge" sorta components rather than simple "lower power, low performance" components.

They wouldn't be more expensive otherwise.

You hurt my head the way you make assumptions. What something costs has little bearing on how efficient or cutting edge it is.

jmccrohan wrote: »

Not really.

When I said more efficient, I was referring to the previous generation of P4 Intel Processors.

Most of the ICT huts use C2D's anyway.

See Peslo, jmccrohan is expanding on his statement to say a C2D is more efficient then a P4. That is a statement which, depending on the criteria used, will be either true of false since you are comparing two known elements.

I'd further expands the statement to say "The C2D flops per watt is higher then the P4, hence it is a more efficient processor."

Thus ends the lesson. If I seem condescending peslo, its only because you annoy me.

Jonathan

Peslo wrote: »

But it does use less power, which is my point.

Most of the ICT hut computers are C2D's.

What is in your eco-friendly green machine?

Boston

jmccrohan wrote: »

Most of the ICT hut computers are C2D's.

What is in your eco-friendly green machine?

My green machine is powered by the tears of baby seals who have been clubbed to death.

Peslo

OMG!
All I was saying is that they use less power!! which they do!! If you want to find out for yourself, then do a bit of research! I have. But you're all being so dismissive!

Again, to summarise what I am saying, they use less power than other desktops produced by Dell, and other manufacturers. An I am merely using the Studio Hybrid as an example. My point is that they should look to more "eco-friendly" PC's, IF they were replacing them.

Boston

My P3 500 uses less power then the C2D. My P3 is more efficient then the C2D.

Peslo

Boston wrote: »

My P3 500 uses less power then the C2D. My P3 is more efficient then the C2D.

Yeah so what's your point.

Boston

Please tell me you're taking the piss.

Peslo

Boston wrote: »

Please tell me you're taking the piss.

I wasn't talking about one single processor using less power than another, so why did you mention it.

Jonathan

Peslo wrote: »

All I was saying is that they use less power!! which they do!!

Not much.

Yes they are more efficient, but they do not consume that much less power.

Works out at about €11 difference a year if they are both idling all the time.





Where the C2D shines is the performance per watt. This is what Dell are using to brain wash people like you.

Peslo wrote: »

If you want to find out for yourself, then do a bit of research! I have. But you're all being so dismissive!

Learn how to research.

Peslo

jmccrohan wrote: »

Not much.

Yes they are more efficient, but they do not consume that much less power.

Works out at about €11 difference a year if they are both idling all the time.




Where the C2D shines is the performance per watt. This is what Dell are using to brain wash people like you.


Learn how to research.

Hang on a sec, you were the one who brought up the issue about the CPU using less power. Which you show that they do. Well done.

Why do I have to keep repeatin myself! The new hybrids use less power! you know they do, so cut me a bit of slack here.

Boston

Peslo wrote: »

Why do I have to keep repeatin myself! The new hybrids use less power! you know they do, so cut me a bit of slack here.

Less power doesn't mean more efficient.

Jonathan

Peslo wrote: »

The new hybrids use less power! you know they do, so cut me a bit of slack here.

Than what? What exactly is contributing to the lower power consumption?

Peslo

jmccrohan wrote: »

Than what? What exactly is contributing to the lower power consumption?

Learn how to reasearch. Try a bit of unbiased-isms when ya do it.

Jonathan

Peslo wrote: »

Learn how to reasearch. Try a bit of unbiased-isms when ya do it.

I have the relevant dell page open right here in a tab.. I am trying to get you to do a bit of research.

Boston

Peslo wrote: »

Learn how to reasearch. Try a bit of unbiased-isms when ya do it.

Its your job to back up your claims not his.

Peslo

There are plenty of websites doing reviews of PCs.
What exactly do you want from me?
Are you saying that I am wrong?

Mark200

This is funny

Peslo

Mark200 wrote: »

This is funny

Tell me about it. It's an absolute joke. :pac:

snappieT

Jaysus, talk about off topic very quickly. I just said that if "cancer solving" was what investors wanted of a new lab, it would be possible, though expensive.
Regardless of the efficiency of a particular piece of hardware, running constant computations instead of leaving them idle is going to take more power, both for computation and cooling.

Peslo

Those guys took it waaay to seriously.

cianclarke

jmccrohan wrote: »

You are falling for Michael Dell's marketing bullsh1t.

Ahaha, I haven't even heard of the things and I'm gonna +1 that. Unless they're planting a small forest for every PC produced, they can't be *that* much more energy effecient...

Peslo

cianclarke wrote: »

Ahaha, I haven't even heard of the things and I'm gonna +1 that. Unless they're planting a small forest for every PC produced, they can't be *that* much more energy effecient...

Well that's the thing, either they use less power (under normal testing conditions, I assume) or the don't. And every article or review I've read on them has commented on this. And notably, their size alone cuts down on packaging.

rc28

cianclarke wrote: »

Also, anybody notice how the lovely high-res monitors are all running on ****-low res in LG12? Those PC's really need a fix up.

The brand new ones in the Ussher are all set to low-res too but that can easily be changed by clicking the nvidia icon in the bottom right. They're actually pretty well specced (quad core phenom with 4gigs of Ram) but the crappy hp's they replaced were certainly on their last legs.

Jonathan

rc28 wrote: »

The brand new ones in the Ussher are all set to low-res too but that can easily be changed by clicking the nvidia icon in the bottom right. They're actually pretty well specced (quad core phenom with 4gigs of Ram) but the crappy hp's they replaced were certainly on their last legs.

No. These are comp sci computers.

They have no graphics drivers installed and we dont have admin access to install them.

rc28

jmccrohan wrote: »

No. These are comp sci computers.

They have no graphics drivers installed and we dont have admin access to install them.

That sucks, one would think comp sci pc's would be the best in the college?

Jonathan

rc28 wrote: »

That sucks, one would think comp sci pc's would be the best in the college?

They are... We have linux installed

Boston

rc28 wrote: »

That sucks, one would think comp sci pc's would be the best in the college?

It stops people playing games. The LG labs are pretty much the oldest CS labs at this stage. Probably due an upgrade next year.

Brian

@jmcc= That reminds me, I need to create a persistent Ubuntu USB key with my 4gig. If you had something like that, could you then virtualise Windows on it and use that to install the drivers?