FX4568
Apr 19, 04:27 PM
I had to finally register to comment on the hypocrisy in this and many other threads like it. Because some people want frame rates for gaming on an MBA, then your needs for GPU performance are valid, and others who don't game but could use CPU performance have invalid needs? Rubbish.
A perfect example is the above. So the C2D rates as a 100/100 for CPU performance and thus any improvement is useless? Really?! Nice to see that you framed the argument such that any improvement you don't see as needed is useless.
On Sunday I combined 6 or 8 short 720p video clips into a 7 minute video for YouTube with a simple title screen and transitions. It took the C2D ~40 minutes to process the video and save in a new format. So you're really going to argue that there is nothing to be gained from a significant bump in processor speed?
For me and many other potential MBA purchasers, a CPU bump from the media processing abilities of the Core i processors would be welcome, and GPU performance over and above the ability to play real-time HD video is useless. We shouldn't be saddled with an out-of-date processor or forced to subsidize "unnecessary" frame rate performance just to appease game-players. And that perspective is as valid as yours.
Well, I shall say first of all, welcome to the MacRumors forum :) I believe CPU is important to the computer as the GPU is. As current computers are, CPU have set a milestone where most users are not even able to use 100% of the capabilities hidden in such a powerful processor.
Now, you were complaining I used 100/100 in the CPU analogy? fine, I will change it. CPU will be 90/100 and GPU is 80/100 as the 30% increase in cpu and 30% decrease in gpu, we will see a difference of 117/100 and 56/100. Am I arguing that there will be nothing to be gained from a bump in processor speed? Definitely not! Who doesnt love the little extra power when we need it? Who doesnt want the latest in tech? What im saying is that the downgrading of the GPU outweights the upgrading of the CPU in terms of OVERALL performance.
Futhermore HT and Turbo dont work 100% of the times.
For you and many other potential MBA purchasers, a CPU bump will be indeed welcomed. But as of me and the I believe majority of MBA owners and will be owners, the difference of processor speed is negligible to a certain extent, but the performance lack of GPU will be noticed the moment we start using the Macbook Air.
+1, besides, the 13" MBP + 128GB SSD provide far better value-for-money than any present 13" MBA.
The cheaper solution, the 11", tells another story but even then anything past the base model comes so close to the price of a 13" MBP+SSD that it's impractical to get a 11" from a performance point of view, especially when it's equipped with the slow 1.4 C2D. The 1.4 i5 will provide far better performance (certainly far more than 40% of speed boost). We will still be able to watch FullHD movies despite the less capable IGP. Games. Don't tell me you want to play WoW on a 11" monitor.
FX4568 said "We have enough to accomplish our tasks, and any more would be an overkill in the things we need our computer to process.". Overkill means the increased processor speed will not be of any use, or, in other words, useless.
You are comparing a cheaper price point by bringing a 128 SSD into the game. You must understand that even though many people have to choose between the 13 MBA and 13 MBP, both of them are made for a different purpose. You can play WoW on a 11" monitor. Why do you chain your MBA to tasks that you only think it will be able to accomplish.
Okay, sorry about my lack of further explanation, but I dont want this to sound personal, but what you are doing is taking my statement to a whole different level. I would like to infer that your intelligence would be above the mark where I dont have to expand on every single statement that I say. When I say that the C2D is enough to accomplish tasks, I am saying that it is good enough for the higher than average person. Handbrakers of course will face a time difference on the processor speed, but as many of us know, not everyone uses Handbrake, and if we do, it is not something we do daily. Processor speed is always welcome, but at the sacrifice of GPU from 320m to the Intel GPU is the difference between the ability to play Crysis on 19.3 FPS at Medium settings and not be able to playing it at all while the performance increase in CPU is the difference between 10-30 minutes in Handbrake.
A perfect example is the above. So the C2D rates as a 100/100 for CPU performance and thus any improvement is useless? Really?! Nice to see that you framed the argument such that any improvement you don't see as needed is useless.
On Sunday I combined 6 or 8 short 720p video clips into a 7 minute video for YouTube with a simple title screen and transitions. It took the C2D ~40 minutes to process the video and save in a new format. So you're really going to argue that there is nothing to be gained from a significant bump in processor speed?
For me and many other potential MBA purchasers, a CPU bump from the media processing abilities of the Core i processors would be welcome, and GPU performance over and above the ability to play real-time HD video is useless. We shouldn't be saddled with an out-of-date processor or forced to subsidize "unnecessary" frame rate performance just to appease game-players. And that perspective is as valid as yours.
Well, I shall say first of all, welcome to the MacRumors forum :) I believe CPU is important to the computer as the GPU is. As current computers are, CPU have set a milestone where most users are not even able to use 100% of the capabilities hidden in such a powerful processor.
Now, you were complaining I used 100/100 in the CPU analogy? fine, I will change it. CPU will be 90/100 and GPU is 80/100 as the 30% increase in cpu and 30% decrease in gpu, we will see a difference of 117/100 and 56/100. Am I arguing that there will be nothing to be gained from a bump in processor speed? Definitely not! Who doesnt love the little extra power when we need it? Who doesnt want the latest in tech? What im saying is that the downgrading of the GPU outweights the upgrading of the CPU in terms of OVERALL performance.
Futhermore HT and Turbo dont work 100% of the times.
For you and many other potential MBA purchasers, a CPU bump will be indeed welcomed. But as of me and the I believe majority of MBA owners and will be owners, the difference of processor speed is negligible to a certain extent, but the performance lack of GPU will be noticed the moment we start using the Macbook Air.
+1, besides, the 13" MBP + 128GB SSD provide far better value-for-money than any present 13" MBA.
The cheaper solution, the 11", tells another story but even then anything past the base model comes so close to the price of a 13" MBP+SSD that it's impractical to get a 11" from a performance point of view, especially when it's equipped with the slow 1.4 C2D. The 1.4 i5 will provide far better performance (certainly far more than 40% of speed boost). We will still be able to watch FullHD movies despite the less capable IGP. Games. Don't tell me you want to play WoW on a 11" monitor.
FX4568 said "We have enough to accomplish our tasks, and any more would be an overkill in the things we need our computer to process.". Overkill means the increased processor speed will not be of any use, or, in other words, useless.
You are comparing a cheaper price point by bringing a 128 SSD into the game. You must understand that even though many people have to choose between the 13 MBA and 13 MBP, both of them are made for a different purpose. You can play WoW on a 11" monitor. Why do you chain your MBA to tasks that you only think it will be able to accomplish.
Okay, sorry about my lack of further explanation, but I dont want this to sound personal, but what you are doing is taking my statement to a whole different level. I would like to infer that your intelligence would be above the mark where I dont have to expand on every single statement that I say. When I say that the C2D is enough to accomplish tasks, I am saying that it is good enough for the higher than average person. Handbrakers of course will face a time difference on the processor speed, but as many of us know, not everyone uses Handbrake, and if we do, it is not something we do daily. Processor speed is always welcome, but at the sacrifice of GPU from 320m to the Intel GPU is the difference between the ability to play Crysis on 19.3 FPS at Medium settings and not be able to playing it at all while the performance increase in CPU is the difference between 10-30 minutes in Handbrake.
rexrobinson
Aug 25, 05:48 AM
Amazing how an 11 year old guy got to know about passing bar test??
chrono1081
Dec 5, 06:51 PM
I fell for you, I was sidelined last season due to injury. It just stinks lol. Which mountain did you go to?
Ugh that sucks! I worked in a desert so no snowboarding seasons for me either : /
I go to Blue Knob and Seven Springs. Both are in Pennsylvania but I plan on taking a trip out to Winter Park Colorado this winter :D Where do you go?
Ugh that sucks! I worked in a desert so no snowboarding seasons for me either : /
I go to Blue Knob and Seven Springs. Both are in Pennsylvania but I plan on taking a trip out to Winter Park Colorado this winter :D Where do you go?
NT1440
May 1, 11:53 PM
People's perception of reality matters more in these situations than actual reality. The fact that the average guy in the street probably still thinks/thought of him as the head of al-Qaeda is the important part.
This acceptance of perception being more important than reality is exactly why everyone hates politics, its how this kind of thing works. It's a huge part of the problem when reality doesn't matter any more. It's an immense danger.
This acceptance of perception being more important than reality is exactly why everyone hates politics, its how this kind of thing works. It's a huge part of the problem when reality doesn't matter any more. It's an immense danger.
more...
SmileyBlast!
Apr 13, 02:10 PM
I'm not sure Apple would be able to add real value to a TV here.
They always seem to choose less than stellar hardware and then add great Software for the Value Add and high profit margins.
So I'm happy with my 2nd Gen Apple. TV as is.
A TV is big commitment. I don't want to be flipping that every year.
Besides its heavy and awkward.
They always seem to choose less than stellar hardware and then add great Software for the Value Add and high profit margins.
So I'm happy with my 2nd Gen Apple. TV as is.
A TV is big commitment. I don't want to be flipping that every year.
Besides its heavy and awkward.
SkyeHack
Jan 30, 12:55 PM
You're also part of the insanely big spender family if that entire group is your last purchase.
lol, not really.
I couldn't afford the 27 inch Apple Cinema Display.... :'(
I'm envious of those who have it...
lol, not really.
I couldn't afford the 27 inch Apple Cinema Display.... :'(
I'm envious of those who have it...
more...
Gatesbasher
Apr 14, 07:44 PM
If Lion does give you the ability to emulate iOS apps on your Mac....
How do you control them? A touch-screen iMac is a non-starter because of the "Frankenstein Posture", not to mention the smudges on the screen. A touch-screen laptop wouldn't be much better. I don't like the lying-down-iMac like in that recent patent, but maybe that's just me.
The Magic Trackpad is already a touchscreen, just with no display behind it. What if a new one came out with a display and some kind of ARM processor? (It could be an old, really cheap one�the Mac would be doing the heavy lifting.) You could pretend it was an iDevice, download apps for it, interact with them on the trackpad while the main display mirrored what you were doing.
Building the same functionality into laptop trackpads would be a later step, if this caught on, but wouldn't such a Magic Trackpad be an iDevice: "iX", associated with a "Mac", that they just haven't thought up a name for yet? It would debut this summer with Lion, to take advantage of the fusion between iOS and OS X.
How do you control them? A touch-screen iMac is a non-starter because of the "Frankenstein Posture", not to mention the smudges on the screen. A touch-screen laptop wouldn't be much better. I don't like the lying-down-iMac like in that recent patent, but maybe that's just me.
The Magic Trackpad is already a touchscreen, just with no display behind it. What if a new one came out with a display and some kind of ARM processor? (It could be an old, really cheap one�the Mac would be doing the heavy lifting.) You could pretend it was an iDevice, download apps for it, interact with them on the trackpad while the main display mirrored what you were doing.
Building the same functionality into laptop trackpads would be a later step, if this caught on, but wouldn't such a Magic Trackpad be an iDevice: "iX", associated with a "Mac", that they just haven't thought up a name for yet? It would debut this summer with Lion, to take advantage of the fusion between iOS and OS X.
mahonmeister
Oct 23, 01:36 PM
What's that other program that lets you run windows without an actual copy? Maybe I'll use that. Wait, are they even supporting Vista or just XP?
Oh I found it: CrossOver Mac. Not sure if it will support Vista though.
Oh I found it: CrossOver Mac. Not sure if it will support Vista though.
more...
SBlue1
Apr 26, 12:06 PM
HAHA! best rumor for weeks! :D
AlphaBob
Jan 30, 05:31 PM
I can only suggest you look at the history of other nations, it happens quite often that complete economic systems collapse. Try Mexico, Argentina, Germany or any war torn nation. In these nations those with gold maintained their wealth, those without had to start from scratch.
None of those examples had any impact on the larger global community and had no long-term impact on the price of gold.
Thinking that gold is some sort of hedge against a collapse of the US economy is ignoring the larger reality. When the US catches an economic cold (like we have now), the rest of the globe catches the flu. Just read the statements made by all the European leaders who tried to explain why their stock markets were down so much this month. They blamed it on the US housing market. Where will you go to sell your gold? The answer is nobody will be buying because the global economy will be devastated.
But the bottom line is whatever gives you comfort in uncertain times has a value in itself. If spending your money buying gold gives you peace of mind, then it might be worth it. As you say, when the eventual collapse in the price of gold happens, at least it will have some value ($350 an ounce), which is more than you can say for Enron.
None of those examples had any impact on the larger global community and had no long-term impact on the price of gold.
Thinking that gold is some sort of hedge against a collapse of the US economy is ignoring the larger reality. When the US catches an economic cold (like we have now), the rest of the globe catches the flu. Just read the statements made by all the European leaders who tried to explain why their stock markets were down so much this month. They blamed it on the US housing market. Where will you go to sell your gold? The answer is nobody will be buying because the global economy will be devastated.
But the bottom line is whatever gives you comfort in uncertain times has a value in itself. If spending your money buying gold gives you peace of mind, then it might be worth it. As you say, when the eventual collapse in the price of gold happens, at least it will have some value ($350 an ounce), which is more than you can say for Enron.
more...
danny_w
Dec 4, 06:29 PM
i just don't get the fascination with guns :confused:
I don't either. :confused:
I don't either. :confused:
zorinlynx
Apr 11, 02:17 PM
I want to see a Thunderbolt dock.
Thunderbolt in on one side.
On the other side, USB, eSATA, Firewire 800, Displayport out (for monitors), audio in/out, gigabit ethernet. Maybe even have space inside for an internal hard drive or two.
This way, when you get home and want to use your laptop at your desk with external monitor, keyboard, etc.. just plug in two cables. Thunderbolt and power.
This would be so awesome, and would pretty much eliminate the need for many of us to have a desktop machine.
Thunderbolt in on one side.
On the other side, USB, eSATA, Firewire 800, Displayport out (for monitors), audio in/out, gigabit ethernet. Maybe even have space inside for an internal hard drive or two.
This way, when you get home and want to use your laptop at your desk with external monitor, keyboard, etc.. just plug in two cables. Thunderbolt and power.
This would be so awesome, and would pretty much eliminate the need for many of us to have a desktop machine.
more...
syhr
Apr 15, 02:48 AM
I echo the people who aren't happy with the size of these updates. Some of us can't get very decent internet where we live and it ties up our connection for an hour or more trying to update. Fingers crossed this changes with IOS 5 :)
simX
Oct 18, 06:22 PM
Yes, thank you. At least someone else out there is emotionally distanced enough from the iPod and the Apple entertainment sector to be a bit objective.
Innovation: just what happened to Apple's innovative spirit when it comes to computers? The latest Mac Pro was fitted into the existing (and way oversized) G5 case. The MacBook was disappointing in that - proportionally - Apple did not shrink it at all or make it lighter than its predecessor (a design which had been in existence for about four years). There are more things, but I really don't want to sound like a troll here...
Apple needs to come out with new computer models that are unlike anything else out there. What about a tiny, thin ultraportable? What about a smaller tower, so those of us that want a pro computer don't have to invest in an oversized monster (which is larger than any PCs in the market that I am aware of). Aren't computers supposed to get SMALLER as the technology advances? Why is Apple obsessed with making the iPod smaller and smaller, but does not care as much about its laptops and desktops?
The answer: profit, or course. The iPod is Apple's cash cow. And this, my friends, is what I mean when I say that Apple needs to be partitioning off a little of its innovative energy that it is putting into its entertainment sector and bring it back to the computer line.
Understood now?
OK, now fire away :)
*sigh* How many times do we have to refute your assertions with facts before you stop repeating them?
To wit, the iPod is not Apple's "cash cow". By definition, if there is something that gains more revenue/profit than the iPod, then the iPod cannot be the cash cow. 58% of Apple's revenue still came from sales of Macs. Gross margins for both Macs and iPods has always been similar (hovering a bit below 30%), so the Mac also generates the majority of the profit for Apple.
As for Apple's innovative spirit lacking when it comes to the Macs, let's just point out that it Apple updated the iPod in October 2005 to the 5th generation, and we JUST got the 5.5th generation last month. Apple took a year to add slightly brighter screens, better battery life (only for video), and games. The nano just gained the anodized aluminum exterior -- wow, Apple's reaching back to the past for it's innovation now! And the shuffle got slimmed down and consolidated into one product. All this doesn't sound exactly like innovation to me. (Of course, Apple doesn't really need to innovate, since they're already selling iPods by the boatload.)
In contrast, Apple brought all of its Macs over to the Intel processor. The Mac Pro was dramatically higher value, what with double-wide graphics card slot, dual optical drives, 4 internal hard drive bays, etc., etc. All Macs (except for the Mac Pro) now have Front Row and a remote, which is a great feature. Built-in iSights have also migrated across the entire product line. The MacBook and MacBook Pro now have MagSafe -- a great innovation. Boot Camp is now supported on all new Macs. The Xserve has new features like lights-out management, redundant power supplies, etc. And we've seen some great things coming for Leopard, what with Time Machine and Spaces and iChat Theater and Core Animation and iCal Server, etc., etc., etc.
It seems to me that Apple is innovating more on the Macintosh side of things than they are with the iPod. What are they going to add next on the iPod -- wireless? *gasp*, so innovative!
Seriously, can we stop with this myth already? It's the same thing with all of Apple's "woes" with quality control (which was busted by the recent consumer reports articles where Apple has actually brought DOWN the number of new computers needing repair in their first year). It's something that's repeated ad nauseum by a few vocal people, when it's really not a problem at all. Same here: everybody gawks and writes about the iPod precisely because more people can afford it and more people can use it with whatever computer they have. So, obviously, you will hear more about the iPod.
Let's see if repeating myself again has any effect: the iPod is not Apple's cash cow!
Understood now?
OK, now fire away :rolleyes:
Innovation: just what happened to Apple's innovative spirit when it comes to computers? The latest Mac Pro was fitted into the existing (and way oversized) G5 case. The MacBook was disappointing in that - proportionally - Apple did not shrink it at all or make it lighter than its predecessor (a design which had been in existence for about four years). There are more things, but I really don't want to sound like a troll here...
Apple needs to come out with new computer models that are unlike anything else out there. What about a tiny, thin ultraportable? What about a smaller tower, so those of us that want a pro computer don't have to invest in an oversized monster (which is larger than any PCs in the market that I am aware of). Aren't computers supposed to get SMALLER as the technology advances? Why is Apple obsessed with making the iPod smaller and smaller, but does not care as much about its laptops and desktops?
The answer: profit, or course. The iPod is Apple's cash cow. And this, my friends, is what I mean when I say that Apple needs to be partitioning off a little of its innovative energy that it is putting into its entertainment sector and bring it back to the computer line.
Understood now?
OK, now fire away :)
*sigh* How many times do we have to refute your assertions with facts before you stop repeating them?
To wit, the iPod is not Apple's "cash cow". By definition, if there is something that gains more revenue/profit than the iPod, then the iPod cannot be the cash cow. 58% of Apple's revenue still came from sales of Macs. Gross margins for both Macs and iPods has always been similar (hovering a bit below 30%), so the Mac also generates the majority of the profit for Apple.
As for Apple's innovative spirit lacking when it comes to the Macs, let's just point out that it Apple updated the iPod in October 2005 to the 5th generation, and we JUST got the 5.5th generation last month. Apple took a year to add slightly brighter screens, better battery life (only for video), and games. The nano just gained the anodized aluminum exterior -- wow, Apple's reaching back to the past for it's innovation now! And the shuffle got slimmed down and consolidated into one product. All this doesn't sound exactly like innovation to me. (Of course, Apple doesn't really need to innovate, since they're already selling iPods by the boatload.)
In contrast, Apple brought all of its Macs over to the Intel processor. The Mac Pro was dramatically higher value, what with double-wide graphics card slot, dual optical drives, 4 internal hard drive bays, etc., etc. All Macs (except for the Mac Pro) now have Front Row and a remote, which is a great feature. Built-in iSights have also migrated across the entire product line. The MacBook and MacBook Pro now have MagSafe -- a great innovation. Boot Camp is now supported on all new Macs. The Xserve has new features like lights-out management, redundant power supplies, etc. And we've seen some great things coming for Leopard, what with Time Machine and Spaces and iChat Theater and Core Animation and iCal Server, etc., etc., etc.
It seems to me that Apple is innovating more on the Macintosh side of things than they are with the iPod. What are they going to add next on the iPod -- wireless? *gasp*, so innovative!
Seriously, can we stop with this myth already? It's the same thing with all of Apple's "woes" with quality control (which was busted by the recent consumer reports articles where Apple has actually brought DOWN the number of new computers needing repair in their first year). It's something that's repeated ad nauseum by a few vocal people, when it's really not a problem at all. Same here: everybody gawks and writes about the iPod precisely because more people can afford it and more people can use it with whatever computer they have. So, obviously, you will hear more about the iPod.
Let's see if repeating myself again has any effect: the iPod is not Apple's cash cow!
Understood now?
OK, now fire away :rolleyes:
more...
mrblah
Jul 24, 11:27 PM
No freakin thanks. Its already hard enough to control the touch sensitive orange ipod because its so "touchy." It would literally be impossible to use the ipod without looking with an interface like that, driving with an ipod would go from dangerous to suicidal. Its not the least bit practical and would just be a gimmick.
Its just an all around NO for me. One hand control would be a pain, no-look control would be impossible, the learning curve would take awhile to get used to because it would be the first thing with controls like that, no cases, pretty much no everything. Bad idea.
Its just an all around NO for me. One hand control would be a pain, no-look control would be impossible, the learning curve would take awhile to get used to because it would be the first thing with controls like that, no cases, pretty much no everything. Bad idea.
louis Fashion
Apr 13, 08:14 PM
one call makes you taller
one call makes you small
But the phone that mother gives you
won't do anything at all
just go ask ATT when it drops your calllll
one call makes you small
But the phone that mother gives you
won't do anything at all
just go ask ATT when it drops your calllll
more...
sporadicMotion
Nov 24, 03:26 PM
A pair of these
http://t1.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQt4n6Q9MU4-IkNnwAJ_lWLpNuOGWKJvLOTzCw3pH3ByqeyG1hb
and one of these
http://www.podcastalley.com/forum/geek/gars/images/1/5/0/0/4/3/vRNC.jpg
http://t1.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQt4n6Q9MU4-IkNnwAJ_lWLpNuOGWKJvLOTzCw3pH3ByqeyG1hb
and one of these
http://www.podcastalley.com/forum/geek/gars/images/1/5/0/0/4/3/vRNC.jpg
Winnychan213
Apr 14, 02:30 AM
I hope there will be dual-core processor and 1Gb ram on the white phone, that's all i am asking for. Otherwise i am going to use my cheap cell phone until iphone 5 comes out.
Mr. Retrofire
Apr 15, 03:11 PM
Goes against Steve Jobs saying Lion was shipping this summer. What is your source ?
Until Apple says it's delayed, I'll believe Apple when they say it ships this summer.
OK, here is a historic example:
"Apple missed Leopard's release time frame as originally announced by Apple�s CEO Steve Jobs. When first discussed in June Jobs had stated that Apple intended to release Leopard at the end of 2006 or early 2007. A year later, this was amended to Spring 2007; however on 12 April Apple issued a statement that its release would be delayed until October 2007 because of the development of the iPhone."
(from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mac_OS_X_Leopard)
I do not believe that Adobe, Microsoft and other big companies need just a few months to make their apps Lion-compatible. Will Apple release Lion, if major companies do not support it? Unlikely. Q1 2012 is more likely.
Until Apple says it's delayed, I'll believe Apple when they say it ships this summer.
OK, here is a historic example:
"Apple missed Leopard's release time frame as originally announced by Apple�s CEO Steve Jobs. When first discussed in June Jobs had stated that Apple intended to release Leopard at the end of 2006 or early 2007. A year later, this was amended to Spring 2007; however on 12 April Apple issued a statement that its release would be delayed until October 2007 because of the development of the iPhone."
(from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mac_OS_X_Leopard)
I do not believe that Adobe, Microsoft and other big companies need just a few months to make their apps Lion-compatible. Will Apple release Lion, if major companies do not support it? Unlikely. Q1 2012 is more likely.
lordonuthin
Nov 30, 09:40 PM
thanks! yeah the bigadv units are nice, but i'm starting to think the gpus is where it's at. i'm already thinking of putting another gpu in my i7 machine (the one i've been running bigadv units on).
which 2 gpus are you thinking about adding?
yeah that 12 core mac pro will be tempting, but i bet the price won't be though
It's amazing how much the the price has increased for "pro" macs over the years, though if you look at comparable dell's or hp's they are often more expensive than a high end mac pro (without the add on's, Apple want's too much for memory and hdd's).
I was thinking of maybe 2 more gtx 275's, that would make 4 275's and 2 260's. 3 would go on the i7 machine and 3 on the amd 965 and since I didn't have much luck with windows 7 running normal units well on the amd I may not get the normal cpu units running on the i7 either, all of those gpu's will make up for any difference though. That will probably be it for new horse power for a while, I may have to live with the idea that I will never catch up to mc68k :rolleyes: or even atlasfolding :D
which 2 gpus are you thinking about adding?
yeah that 12 core mac pro will be tempting, but i bet the price won't be though
It's amazing how much the the price has increased for "pro" macs over the years, though if you look at comparable dell's or hp's they are often more expensive than a high end mac pro (without the add on's, Apple want's too much for memory and hdd's).
I was thinking of maybe 2 more gtx 275's, that would make 4 275's and 2 260's. 3 would go on the i7 machine and 3 on the amd 965 and since I didn't have much luck with windows 7 running normal units well on the amd I may not get the normal cpu units running on the i7 either, all of those gpu's will make up for any difference though. That will probably be it for new horse power for a while, I may have to live with the idea that I will never catch up to mc68k :rolleyes: or even atlasfolding :D
twoodcc
Sep 18, 06:34 PM
We should try to pump up the team with these new bigadv units.
This team slowed down huge when the GPU client came out, which is Windows only.
we do need to pump up the team, and get more involved on this forum.
yes the GPU client is windows only, but i've heard that you can run a GPU client in linux. and i don't mean in wine either. but i've heard it's very tricky to get working
This team slowed down huge when the GPU client came out, which is Windows only.
we do need to pump up the team, and get more involved on this forum.
yes the GPU client is windows only, but i've heard that you can run a GPU client in linux. and i don't mean in wine either. but i've heard it's very tricky to get working
PR.
May 3, 08:00 AM
It was possible to use the previous 27" as an external display for a MacBook. Can't see any mention of that after a brief scan, and it's a deal-breaker for me. Anyone spot such a feature?
PCClone
Apr 26, 12:37 PM
Damn you Apple. You charged me for my iPad and iMac. I should get them for FREE!!!!!!
Chwisch87
Apr 21, 11:36 PM
I really have no idea why apple opened this can of worms.
No comments:
Post a Comment