Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

new 970 mobo info ( macbidouille )

Re: not using 20 GiB of VM today on a Mac....

Originally posted by AidenShaw
Maybe "rare" in the $399 PC world, but 512MiB to a couple Gig is pretty common in the rest of the world.
Click to expand...

Pedantic note: If you are going to be pedantic about using "GiB" instead of "GB", the correct chort name for "Gibibyte" would be "Gib", not "Gig".

:)
 
Re: Re: not using 20 GiB of VM today on a Mac....

Originally posted by jettredmont
Pedantic note: If you are going to be pedantic about using "GiB" instead of "GB", the correct chort name for "Gibibyte" would be "Gib", not "Gig".
Click to expand...


Ooops - got me. I'll practice.

Gib. Gib. Gib. Gib. Gib. Gib.

Oooh, that's hard! ;)
 
Re: Re: Re: not using 20 GiB of VM today on a Mac....

Originally posted by AidenShaw
Ooops - got me. I'll practice.

Gib. Gib. Gib. Gib. Gib. Gib.

Oooh, that's hard! ;)
Click to expand...
make it GiB not Bib.
B has always represented the Byte ; b the bit...
 
Re: Re: Re: Re: not using 20 GiB of VM today on a Mac....

Originally posted by maradong
make it GiB not Bib.
B has always represented the Byte ; b the bit...
Click to expand...
But "Gib" the diminuitive for "GibiByte", not the abbreviation "GiB".
 
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: not using 20 GiB of VM today on a Mac....

Originally posted by AidenShaw
But "Gib" the diminuitive for "GibiByte", not the abbreviation "GiB".
Click to expand...

Heh... looks like things are getting confused again :D! Better come up with more abbreviations!
 
Originally posted by Chobit
<SNIP> Before the prefixes were changed (1998) there could be either 1024 bytes in a kilobyte, or 1,000 and you rarely would know which one. Now you only know for sure what someone's talking about if they use the new base two prefixes as so many use the base 10 prefixes either way. <SNIP>
Click to expand...

Maybe this is another SI thing, but abbreviations, titles, or informational indicators which come after the item they are describing fit the category of suffix. A prefix comes before the item it is describing, defining or modifying.

There is something to be said for precision in language as well as in measurement.:D
 
Re: Re: what's "truth"

Originally posted by Rincewind42
The Pentium will be at an advantage (though unlikely used one) of being able to completely focus it's bus on either reading or writing, but will have a lower actual throughput. The 970 will have the (likely rarely used) advantage of being able to read and write to memory at the same time.
Click to expand...

Actually, anything that involves chucking large amounts of data in and out of main memory (video work springs to mind) the dual memory channels might well end up saturated, depending on just how capable the Altivec hardware on the 970 turns out to be.
 
To jettredmont, AidenShaw and maradong.

Hey, that stuff you guys are on looks good... Can I have some too? :p

You're totally bored out of your skulls, aren't you? lol

Geez, if I'd known I would have started an international incident by using the correct SI prefixes, I would have shut my trap!

Ah, the life of the pioneer is a tough one... :rolleyes:
 
Re: Disk drives are accurately sold...

Originally posted by groovebuster
You should be careful to open that door... ;) Innovative... maybe, but not more than other industrialized countries. Maybe also because in science they use the metric system anyway? ... world-wide! ;)

When it comes down to productivity especially the US is not #1... Get your facts straight.
Click to expand...

In the stats I've seen, US workers are the most productive per worker. Per hour, the French are actually the most productive, but considering that they spend a third of the year on strike, a third of the year on vacation, and the other third working 20 hours per week, they don't really produce much in a year.

Originally posted by groovebuster
In my opinion all this has more to do with the need of feeling special. In the given situation the US has the economical power to reject the metrical system. Like they rejected almost any standard in the past 50 years to "protect the local market"... It's like: "Hey, we do our own stuff, who cares about the rest of the world!"

But nothing lasts forever and you'll see how fast the US will join the party of the "metric countries"! ;)
Click to expand...

Actually, the reason we haven't switched to the metric system is that out government doesn't impose stupid regulations on industry like the metric system that, while they may be an improvement, aren't enough of an improvement to warrant the effort of changing the country over.

Originally posted by AidenShaw
In the "real world" K=1000, M=1,000,000, G=1,000,000,000 long before some computer types started to misuse the terms.

Not even "all" computer types, the storage and networking people still use the original base 10 meaning.

The "stupidity" is to continue the current ambiguous use of the long-standing SI prefixes. Learn to type the little "i" when using a binary prefix - you'll fit into the mainstream better!
Click to expand...

I'm drowning in the mainstream already. The difference between 1000 and 1024 is trivial. If anything, storage and networking should change to the binary system because computers access data in binary chunks, not decimal.
 
Re: Re: Re: what's "truth"

Originally posted by Chryx
Actually, anything that involves chucking large amounts of data in and out of main memory (video work springs to mind) the dual memory channels might well end up saturated, depending on just how capable the Altivec hardware on the 970 turns out to be.
Click to expand...

Actually, this has relatively little to do with Altivec in the end. You could saturate the busses relatively easily - but you wouldn't be doing any real work, just shuffling memory from one place to the other. But it also depends on what the memory system is capable of handling. If the memory system can actually read and write the full 3.2GB/s each way then this could do it. Otherwise you would get less.

The Pentium has a similar problem - if it wants to fully saturate the bus it would have to do some combination of complete read/write. It may be able to get some work done in between (if only due to having a higher cpu/bus clock ratio and double pumped ALUs) but the difference would be trivial. And I suspect that switching the bus from read to write mode has it's own penalties involved (since it must communicate this fact to the north bridge).

All in all, I think that both CPUs will show what a much faster bus can do, that neither of them will commonly show the maximum performance possible, and that the 970 will have a higher combined read/write transfer rate than the P4, but that neither pure reading nor pure writing will be as fast.
 
is there anybody who thinks there could become some 4 cpu configurations aviable in the near future? more and more x86 workstations are ready for 4 cpu s.. it s rare, but the share of those mobos is raising.
 
Re: Re: Disk drives are accurately sold...

Originally posted by Phil Of Mac
If anything, storage and networking should change to the binary system because computers access data in binary chunks, not decimal.
Click to expand...

Not sure about networking, but storage is measured more naturally using base-10 units ... well, not really so much "more" naturally, but there's no reason to use base-2 as there is with memory and bandwidth. So, they could use base-10 and way their drive is 2GB large, or use base-2 and say it is 1.5GB ... wonder why they chose base-10?

There really are very (very very) few places where "1K" should mean 1024 of something relative to the places where it should mean 1000 of something. As such, the binary-based worlds should be treated as the exception, not the model upon which others should rely.
 
Re: Re: Re: Disk drives are accurately sold...

Originally posted by jettredmont
Not sure about networking, but storage is measured more naturally using base-10 units ... well, not really so much "more" naturally, but there's no reason to use base-2 as there is with memory and bandwidth. So, they could use base-10 and way their drive is 2GB large, or use base-2 and say it is 1.5GB ... wonder why they chose base-10?

There really are very (very very) few places where "1K" should mean 1024 of something relative to the places where it should mean 1000 of something. As such, the binary-based worlds should be treated as the exception, not the model upon which others should rely.
Click to expand...

Hard disks were at one point sold in base-2 size. Unfortunately, this was when hard disk sizes were predominatly measured in the MB range. Somewhere around the early 90s (when HDs were starting to approach half a GB) someone switched over to base-10 to make their HDs look larger. Since consumers choose the 'larger' drives everyone else started doing it. By the time HDs reached half a gig everyone was doing it - this is why an old old limit on HD size was 540MB - it was about 536 thousand bytes of storage which equals 512MB (this issue was either in DOS or in the IDE controllers of the time).

So in the end, this evil was a marketing decision :D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back