Computer Speeds on the up !

netwhizkid

If this is true computer speed growth is starting to increase to late nineties level when as soon as you took it out of the box it was out of date and virtually worthless.

Anyone care to elaborate?

the_syco

This has been doing the rounds on the net. If its true, cool, but no-one has verified it yet, other than their own propaganda, tbh.

WizZard

netwhizkid wrote:

If this is true computer speed growth is starting to increase to late nineties level when as soon as you took it out of the box it was out of date and virtually worthless.

It's a hoax you foolish boy...

You should see the solar chip video - haha!

zAbbo

Didn't we beat down this last month?

Not surprised too see wetpisskid has been roped in on the 6.8ghz dealio

Yook

bazH wrote:

Didn't we beat down this last month?

Not surprised too see wetpisskid has been roped in on the 6.8ghz dealio

Yea i remember a thread exactly like this a month ago. Yea, HOAX.

I think it's hilarious that, they show Windows XP addressing 1 Tb of Ram.

netwhizkid

bazH been wrote:

Didn't we beat down this last month?

Not surprised too see wetpisskid has been roped in on the 6.8ghz dealio

Ok so it's a hoax, i am getting quite tired of this bullying, because it is nothing short, Name calling is bullying and please stop it now.

the_syco

netwhizkid wrote:

Ok so it's a hoax, i am getting quite tired of this bullying, because it is nothing short, Name calling is bullying and please stop it now.

Its even more funny cos you posted in the thread last time.

Mutant_Fruit

Rule of thumb. If it sounds too good to be true, it IS too good to be true. Even looking at the atom chip website you can tell its a joke. They made a CPU "Quantum" by sticking a big fecking lense on it! C'mon lads! Wake up!

Also... 2GB chips of ram only JUST came mainstream. How the feck could they be offering 2TB's of ram?? Are they using 1000x2gb chips?

Ri_Nollaig

but netwhizzkid ur a millionare?!?! cant u afford 1TB of ram

Laguna

I remember seeing this thread a month ago too. Soon as I looked at the site I knew it was a hoax, its claim of 2TB RAM/6.8gHz was laughable. I think they said they were unleashing nanotechnology on the world. LOL, nanotechnology RESEARCH is still in its infancy

jesus_thats_gre

Chips will be running a a fair bit faster than 6.8GHz by the time 2TB of RAM are common place...

beller b

I remember that thread there was a picture of these guys in thier white suits & so false...
How can you have a name like NETWHIZKID & yet not have a clue about computers.?

aidan_walsh

beller b wrote:

I remember that thread there was a picture of these guys in thier white suits & so false...
How can you have a name like NETWHIZKID & yet not have a clue about computers.?

Because he's a NETwhizzkid. He can use a browser, and find ****.

joc_06

do ye know anything about computers? xp is 32 bit so it can only address 4gig of ram. so obviously a hoax. cant velieve ppl are stupid enough to buy it.

i dont think intel have released a 4ghz chip yet. they abandoned the quest and went for dual core instead. you could o'clock to that spped but not without loads a coolin and def not in a laptop.
the ps3 processor is sh!t hot but its mainly for graphics and physics calculations so not prob desktop orientated

Gurgle

Computer processing power doubles every 18 months.
Same now as anytime in the last 30 years.

Anything that indicates otherwise is resulting from the fact that every electronics company now has a bigger marketing department than their engineering department.

Cake Fiend

netwhizkid wrote:

Ok so it's a hoax, i am getting quite tired of this bullying, because it is nothing short, Name calling is bullying and please stop it now.

The way to stop people thinking you're a moron is to think before you post.

joc_06

Gurgle wrote:

Computer processing power doubles every 18 months.
Same now as anytime in the last 30 years.

Not true at all. A simplified version of moores law in lay person speak is :The number of transistors per ic doubles every 18 months.
Big differnece

Sleipnir

netwhizkid may have missed something but that could be because he's not unnervingly nerdy like the rest of you seem to be.
Remember when Homer had 3 geeks living with him? Many of you remind me of them.

"Uh, Mr. Siimpson, we all have nosebleeds"

MrVestek

Sleipnir wrote:

netwhizkid may have missed something but that could be because he's not unnervingly nerdy like the rest of you seem to be.
Remember when Homer had 3 geeks living with him? Many of you remind me of them.

"Uh, Mr. Siimpson, we all have nosebleeds"

Lol that's the funniest boards post in a good few weeks.

WizZard

Well, he sure attempts to sounds like he knows a lot about technology. Here

joc_06

WizZard wrote:

Well, he sure attempts to sounds like he knows a lot about technology. Here

Net PISS KID wrote:

Internet2 can transfer data at up to 512GBps or 100,000 times faster than dial up or 5,000 times faster than standard broadband

Ha Ha Ha, now thats the funniest post on boards recently. Internet 2??
What the fvck?
Is it IPV6 hes on about?



I think its best to change your name to something like StupidKID then anytime you post ppl will be amazed that you can even type not to mind know something about computers. You're just setting yourself up for a fall with NEt whizzKID

joc_06

Sleipnir wrote:

netwhizkid may have missed something but that could be because he's not unnervingly nerdy like the rest of you seem to be.
Remember when Homer had 3 geeks living with him? Many of you remind me of them.

"Uh, Mr. Siimpson, we all have nosebleeds"

Nerds eh? Dont think so but you prolly use that a lot. Its your only defense against all the masses of ppl that know more than you. simple maths is simple maths.
32 bit = 2 ^ 32 = 4 gigs address space. simple enough

1 TerraByte of ram? It doesnt even sound right.

Khannie

Jaysus lads....leave the guy alone. He doesn't have a degree, but he's interested. That's half the battle.

Oh, and as for this crap:

joc_06 wrote:

do ye know anything about computers? xp is 32 bit so it can only address 4gig of ram.

Don't be such a smart ass. There is a 64bit version of XP. Also, that limit is /not/ common knowledge (even in this forum I'd say).

Khannie

joc_06 wrote:

more flaming

Be nice. It was a joke. Quite funny too. We /are/ nerds around here. May as well accept that. Chicks love it anyway.

chern0byl

netwhizkid wrote:

i am getting quite tired of this bullying

People bullying you via a message board!? And nerds at that...dont take it to heart. You posted something that was utter bollox, but everyone has done it so take that to heart.

joc_06

ok sorry, but for a while i thought it was funny, then i got p!ssed off with the nerds remark.

Gurgle

joc_06 wrote:

Not true at all.
A simplified version of moores law in lay person speak is :The number of transistors per ic doubles every 18 months.
Big differnece

Really ? :rolleyes:
The number of transistors per square mm doubles every 18 months.

If you double the number of transistors per square mm, then you can utilize an existing design to make the same IC on half the area, and run at double the speed (because each signal path in each transistor is half the length).

Thats whats brought us all the way from 80x86 to pentium 4, along with a change from 16-bit SX processors to 32-bit DX around the time of the 386.

So the core of a pentium 4 PC is much the same design as a 386DX, but as the transistors are many times smaller, they could put extra stuff on the chip while retaining approximately the same total size - integrated maths co-processor, MMX, MMX2 and all that type of junk.

The current move is to 64-bit is the biggest step taken since SX to DX and again is possible due to the further reduced size of transistors.

So doubling the number of transistors doesn't increase speed but halving the size of them does.

OR to put it another way, processing power doubles every 18 months.

joc_06

Gurgle wrote:

Really ? :rolleyes:
The number of transistors per square mm doubles every 18 months.

If you double the number of transistors per square mm, then you can utilize an existing design to make the same IC on half the area, and run at double the speed (because each signal path in each transistor is half the length).

Thats whats brought us all the way from 80x86 to pentium 4, along with a change from 16-bit SX processors to 32-bit DX around the time of the 386.

So the core of a pentium 4 PC is much the same design as a 386DX, but as the transistors are many times smaller, they could put extra stuff on the chip while retaining approximately the same total size - integrated maths co-processor, MMX, MMX2 and all that type of junk.

The current move is to 64-bit is the biggest step taken since SX to DX and again is possible due to the further reduced size of transistors.

So doubling the number of transistors doesn't increase speed but halving the size of them does.

OR to put it another way, processing power doubles every 18 months.

I was trying to highlight the difference btw speed and power.
ie a 2ghz chip may not be as powerful as another 1ghz chip

stevenmu

Gurgle wrote:

If you double the number of transistors per square mm, then you can utilize an existing design to make the same IC on half the area, and run at double the speed (because each signal path in each transistor is half the length).

Aren't you forgetting the path lengths between transisters, latency within the transisters, interference between them and current leakage ?

stevenmu

Also in the real world, doubling the clock speed is going to increase the ratio of wasted clock cycles to usefull ones, meaning you won't get a true double speed increase.

joc_06

yeah fvckin crosstalk becomes a nightmare at 90nm level. I couldnt imagine what 60nm would be like. its been the bane of my life for the last month. That Primetime SI is a disaster...