Erm, have you looked at their site recently, and is it actually true?!. IB, for one, is significantly faster and more capable that TB...
yes i have and seriously- who cares..
Erm, have you looked at their site recently, and is it actually true?!. IB, for one, is significantly faster and more capable that TB...
The reason that I mentioned surrounding details regarding intel's work in silicon photonics was to show that it has many additional benefits apart from cost (such as speed and size), but cost is an important factor even for enterprise customers.
What if you have several InfiniBand cards, which is not uncommon.
yes i have and seriously- who cares..
that particular saying has been pulled by Apple from the MP website as it's patently a lie (at least it's not on the MP website that I'm looking at right now)...
lol.. where do you come up with this stuff?
You obviously do!
First, we were talking about Corning, not Intel, maybe the former has a licensing agreement with the latter, I don't know... Secondly, re. the 100GbE- not likely to happen any time soon- put two 10GbE controllers into you machine and watch the CPU usage go up just trying to keep those controllers busy
That's exactly what I said in the post- you call it a card, I call it a controller, no matter the name, when they span multiple slots, the aggregate bandwidth comes from "talking" IB, not "talking" PCIe- the lanes in different slots don't magically add up to pretend to be lanes on the same slot- it's the IB that's doing the aggregation and not PCIe, just like the ethernet controllers in the case of 802.1ax.
i meant- who cares if IB is faster than TB.. they're entirely different markets/uses/applications.
i'm sure we'll eventually see a slew of PC peripheral components which TB2 is incapable of handling.. but for now, thunderbolt2 is more than adequate for what people are going to be plugging in..
maybe you can find 2-3 oddball scenarios in which someone may actually need more throughput but so what.. it doesn't matter for the vast majority of people this new computer is aimed at.
Thunderbolt is the fastest, most versatile I/O technology there is.
Why do you care what brand the cable is? Your claim was that there is no need for newer optical solutions, what we got is enough.
The 100GbE was mentioned by the Sun Microsystems co-founder, it was at the Open Compute Summit you know, so, large deployments..
The controllers can be on a single card if it's a dual socket model. That's not necessarily the same as two individual cards, there the aggregation must happen after the card since they are physically separate.
You quoted Apple as saying:
I said it was a patent lie... Neither Apple not you added adjectives nor qualifiers to that statement. The statement was and is a lie as it stood. End of story- stop trying to wriggle out of it!
Meanwhile, Thunderbolt is looking more and more like my G4's DVD-RAM drive, once touted as the future:Dude, are you kidding? You think there is NO difference between plugging an internal hard drive directly to a mobo vs having to buy an external thunderbolt chassis and cable? Have you looked at prices? It costs about 25 cents to hook up an internal hard drive via a SATA cable and the included power supply hookup.
How much is JUST a thunderbolt cable?
Because we were talking about a specific cable from a specific manufacturer! End of!
I don't see how you're failing to understand such a trivial proposition: it is the InfiniBand protocol that is doing the aggregation regardless whether there are two IB chips on the same card in the same socket, or on different cards in different sockets.
what am i wriggling out of?
you said apple removed the saying from their website (which they did not).. then go on to give a reason why they removed it...
Tell me what "page" of the Mac Pro promo site it's on then...