Partial's Technology Buzz

[Scott Campbell]

Vista - why bother?

[Partial]

Now that the file system WinFS has been scrapped (significant speed increase, more advanced file system than anything else), I don't know that there is a huge reason to upgrade. I haven't followed it too closely to be honest. I think the Graphics User Interface is going to be an improvement, however most windows users aren't especially picky about that to begin with, and understand the current one well enough to get by.

It'll be pretty looking. It will also come at a price though. The system recommendations are especially high. My two year old gaming rig scores a poorly on their scale, however I am sure they are aiming that at systems over the next 5 years.

The biggest improvement will be meta-data and searching. You'll have a search option that will actually be faster than manually going through and finding the file. Say you wrote an essay about john deere, but saved it as essay 3 english class. In the search field, you type a J - immediately every file that contains the letter j pops up. You type the Jo. Then files that have JO in them and relevant(it will automatically determine if its relevant) and so on and so forth, where by typing John, you'll have the john deere article near the top of your results. It is very similair to the search field in iTunes as how it indexes everything and provides immediate results. That will be nice.

Other than that, I really don't think its anything to rush out and spend the cash on. It'll come on your next computer, so get it then and no earlier.

[Bretsky]

Partial,

Educated on NVIDIA ? I was considering an investment in the Graphic Chip maker many years ago and should have. The stock has come down enough where I'm considering it again.

B

[Fosco33]

The girlfriend just bought a new laptop. A few questions...

Norton or McAffee? She's got CDs for both. To whomever wanted a license number, I could give you the one she doesn't use. Just PM me.

Is there a way to transfer her Windows programs from the old laptop to the new one? Why pay all the license fees again for Microsoft Office, etc / ?

Any info would help.

Thx-

[Partial]

Give it a few days and remind me about that Bretsky. I will post an article about it if it happens. AMD, Intel's competitor has been in negoitation to buy ATI, Nvidia's competitor. If they do this, and ATI becomes AMD exclusive, then I would say it might be worth buying. I am a firm believer than Intel is going to pull significantly ahead of AMD in the next few years simply because downsizing is incredibly expensive and Intel just flat out has more money for R&D to get this done. That, and the fact Intel has changed their philosophy's on how to build an efficient processor will lead to Intel making a big-time comeback. If ATI is AMD exclusive, that means all the more Nvidia GPU's out there.

That is definitely something to keep an eye on.

[Partial]

The desktop version of Core 2 Duo was officially launched at midnight tonight. This is gonna be huge. Very huge. Intel's processors are beating AMD's best SERVER (highest end processor available) by a "conservative" 20% in applications, consumes significantly less power, and is HALF the price. Also, they took a 2.6 ghz processor up to 4.0 ghz on an overclock with the stock cooling. This thing is going to be HUGE with gamers. HUGE!!!

Here is an article on overclockers.com about it. It gets kind of techy, but they have graphs and stuff to show there points.

Read the conclusion at the very least. It summarizes it very well.

Thanks to its new micro-architecture, Core 2 Duo is performing far better than the previous generation dual core Pentium D. An X6800, for example, is between 30% ~ to 40% faster than a Pentium D 955XE. Core 2 Duo is achieving performance in applications and games that has not been seen before with a dual core desktop CPU. In addition Core 2 Duo consumes 40% less power and runs much cooler than Pentium D. An additional bonus for many enthusiasts is certainly the solid overclocking headroom we found with both Core 2 Duo test samples.

In February 2006 an Intel engineer was quoted with the claim that a certain new product with the codename Conroe would be at least 20% faster than the fastest AMD offering at the time when it would released in mid 2006. That claim was promptly dismissed by those “in the know” as frivolous marketing talk. Well, the Intel man was right. There is no doubt that Core 2 Duo is indeed, as claimed, substantially outperforming AMD's fastest desktop processor running with DDR2 on the just released AM2 platform. With the exception of memory bandwidth and latency, in none of our 26 tests did the FX-62 come close to the X6800 or E6700. A conservative estimate would be that on average an X6800 (2.93 GHz) is at least 20% faster than the FX-62 (2.80 GHz) and even an E6700 (2.67 GHz) is around 10% faster. We can estimate from our test results that the FX-62, currently AMD’s fastest desktop processor, is approximately performing like an E6600 clocked at 2.40 GHz.

We see Core Duo 2 reigning supreme for some time to come. At the end of 2006 AMD will breathe new air into the Athlon 64 by moving the production process to 65nm technology. This will probably allow them to scale the almost exhausted K8 architecture another 200 MHz or 300 MHz higher. We doubt though that this will be enough to regain the desktop performance crown. Intel will launch higher clocked Core 2 Duo versions as well. And the just launched Conroe core has certainly more headroom left than AMD’s 3-year old K8 design. In addition Intel will probably enable Hyperthreading and will in the first half of 2007 already move to 45nm production technology.

Another interesting question is how the quad-core products announced by both companies will compete against each other. But with the Core micro-architecture it seems Intel will have the better basis for quad-core products as well. A serious challenge to Core 2 Duo will probably not come before AMD introduces their revamped K8L micro-architecture later in 2007. In the meantime AMD will do what Intel has done over the last 2 years: undercutting competitor prices until their products become competitive at a given price point. That will certainly be another positive impact of the Core 2 Duo introduction from the consumer's point of view.

That leaves us with the question of Core 2 Duo prices. Wearing the performance crown is a matter of prestige and good for the brand image. But at the end what matters most for the consumer is value for performance. Intel has announced the following Core 2 Duo wholesale prices to distributors as of July 26.

*graph here, read article!!*

These wholesale prices are a good indication for the expected retail prices when adding around 15%. Although we have to marvel about the outstanding X6800 performance we think that a processor retailing for more than 1000 USD won't be a popular choice. We expect the E6600 to be the most sought-after Core 2 Duo processor, because it is the cheapest version with 4 MB L2 cache. At an expected price level of around 360 US$ or 480 AUS$ the E6600 would cost less than half of an FX-62, and would deliver the same performance. In addition an E6600 will allow overclocking far above 3 GHz.

To sum it up: Core 2 Duo has regained the performance crown for Intel in spectacular fashion. We have no doubt that Core 2 Duo will be the most popular product for desktop computing well into 2007.

I will be posting a ton more articles about this in the near future. If you're in the market for a new processor and don't buy new stuff, AMD is going to drop their prices on Sat up to 40% to fight with Intel for sales since they are getting CRUSHED as of today for the next year on performance.

[MJZiggy]

Is there a way to transfer her Windows programs from the old laptop to the new one? Why pay all the license fees again for Microsoft Office, etc / ?

Any info would help.

I ned to know that too. We wiped the old computer before we got rid of it and the new computer keeps saying we have an invalid key when we go to reinstall windows.

[Zool]

Wow so the x6800 will cost roughly $1150. I still think I'll stick with my AMD's. They havent done me wrong in the last 6 years. I started with a Duron 700 and havent looked back.

My system issues turned out to be a driver conflict. I put a TV tuner into my system a few months ago and updated my nVidia drivers a couple weeks ago. Well I pulled out that TV tuner and uninstalled the drivers and my system is happy again.

Weird.

[Partial]

Wow so the x6800 will cost roughly $1150. I still think I'll stick with my AMD's. They havent done me wrong in the last 6 years. I started with a Duron 700 and havent looked back.

My system issues turned out to be a driver conflict. I put a TV tuner into my system a few months ago and updated my nVidia drivers a couple weeks ago. Well I pulled out that TV tuner and uninstalled the drivers and my system is happy again.

Weird.

6600 costs 300. It will beat a top of the line opteron. They are not only beating AMD in performance, but on prices as well. It's foolish to buy a top of the line chip right away. Over the course of the next year they'll realize faster ones and bring the prices down significantly. Core Duo had a 35% price cut 3 months after it's release. The 6600 is also a steal in the sense that it is 20% more performance, 50% less electricity/heat generated, and more than 50% less expensive. That seems like a good chip to me. Plus, it overclocked from 2.6 ghz to 3.3 ghz on air cooling. Considering how much more efficient this chip is cycle for cycle, that is a HUGE gain. That's a 22% increase. Assuming at 2.6 it is beating the FX by 20%, do the overclock and its crushing it by 42%. 42% more performance, less heat generated, about the same electricity, and 40% of the cost. Generally, when a new processor comes out you can expect 10% more performance. This is the biggest gain seen by any processor in years.

Sticking with AMD will probably be a decision that hurts you more and more in the future when you see the power of money come into play with down sizing to avoid current leak.

[Partial]

Is there a way to transfer her Windows programs from the old laptop to the new one? Why pay all the license fees again for Microsoft Office, etc / ?

Any info would help.

I ned to know that too. We wiped the old computer before we got rid of it and the new computer keeps saying we have an invalid key when we go to reinstall windows.

You should just be able to install them on the laptop with the same license key. If this does not work, Microsoft has an upgrade from an old system program which lets you transfer your documents and programs from the old computer to the new one. This is worth looking into and is built into windows.

[Zool]

I only do a processor upgrade every 2 years so it shouldnt be a huge deal. I've been anti-Intel for a while now. I used to use them exclusively till I had 3 straight bad experiences with their quality. Dont get me started on their customer service department either.

[Partial]

I only do a processor upgrade every 2 years so it shouldnt be a huge deal. I've been anti-Intel for a while now. I used to use them exclusively till I had 3 straight bad experiences with their quality. Dont get me started on their customer service department either.

I used to buy AMD exclusively because they were cheaper by a landslide. Then Intel lost the performance crown temporarily and had to begin cutting their prices to compete. Ever since then, I am fine with them. It is without question that they have crushed AMD in this round of the processor battles. That, and my experience with core duo in my MacBook is quite awesome. It runs infinitely fast.

[Scott Campbell]

I only do a processor upgrade every 2 years so it shouldnt be a huge deal. I've been anti-Intel for a while now. I used to use them exclusively till I had 3 straight bad experiences with their quality. Dont get me started on their customer service department either.

I used to buy AMD exclusively because they were cheaper by a landslide. Then Intel lost the performance crown temporarily and had to begin cutting their prices to compete. Ever since then, I am fine with them. It is without question that they have crushed AMD in this round of the processor battles. That, and my experience with core duo in my MacBook is quite awesome. It runs infinitely fast.

Time to short AMD?? They trade at almost 30 times earnings while Intel trades at a paltry 14 times earnings.

[Scott Campbell]

Partial,

Educated on NVIDIA ? I was considering an investment in the Graphic Chip maker many years ago and should have. The stock has come down enough where I'm considering it again.

B

I owned NVDA last year, and am very bullish on the company. But it's always hard for me to say about how they are currently valued though.

They build more than graphics chipsets. Most AMD motherboards are shipping with NVIDIA northbridge chipsets on them, and they've introduced Intel compatible motherboard chipsets. I don't know what kind of market percentage they own over there on Intel motherboards though.

[Partial]

I only do a processor upgrade every 2 years so it shouldnt be a huge deal. I've been anti-Intel for a while now. I used to use them exclusively till I had 3 straight bad experiences with their quality. Dont get me started on their customer service department either.

I used to buy AMD exclusively because they were cheaper by a landslide. Then Intel lost the performance crown temporarily and had to begin cutting their prices to compete. Ever since then, I am fine with them. It is without question that they have crushed AMD in this round of the processor battles. That, and my experience with core duo in my MacBook is quite awesome. It runs infinitely fast.

Time to short AMD?? They trade at almost 30 times earnings while Intel trades at a paltry 14 times earnings.

I don't know what that means, but I do know they are going to lose the processor battle from atleast a year from today.