If Bodycasting = 4xRSN, I'm all for it 
Jammrock
Jammrock
-
“Inside every sane person there’s a madman struggling to get outâ€
–The Light Fantastic, Terry Pratchett -
Haig said "1 item in particular is not true", so this basically means the rest is true - so I think it is NOT true that the card will be introduced when the site claims, BUT the preview, review, whatever will indeed appear in that magazine at that time
AZComment
-
Yes, and as we all know Ant has been doing this as well not so long ago....Originally posted by Greebe
Haig is 100% correct... it's just a move to have more page hits/whatnot ($$)
(...taking cover... no, please don't beat me, it's a joke....
)
Comment
-
It's all one big conspiracy to get more ads displayed... right...Someday, we'll look back on this, laugh nervously and change the subject.Comment
-
Originally posted by mmp121
First came DualHead
Second came HeadCasting
Put em together and what have you got?
DualHeadCasting
Gotta Love Matrox for it!Comment
-
Hmm, why is this a "confirmation"?
It seems to be an exact translation of a news item posted here at www.murc.ws ...Comment
-
Arrrghh... I guess I waited too long to post the answer...
In response to the previous quote I stated...
The logical answer is not Dual-Headcasting but... DUAL-CORE
What have all Parheliae in common...
Yes, Left and right from the Sun (Bright Shader) there will be two Pixelmeister...
Or in other words: As Rampage would have been, only 3 times more powerful.. or what Spectre would be now....
Be patient... I always told you so
Comment
-
Why would you <I>start</I> with a dual core? If you need 2 processors to start with, then your design is in trouble.Gigabyte P35-DS3L with a Q6600, 2GB Kingston HyperX (after *3* bad pairs of Crucial Ballistix 1066), Galaxy 8800GT 512MB, SB X-Fi, some drives, and a Dell 2005fpw. Running WinXP.Comment
-
Why do you think the design i flawed...
Why not share the grunt work?...
Some advantages:
Easier to design
Easier to handle
Modular architecture (1, 2, 4 chips...)
The same what two CPU's (in SMP) will do or what dual-channel DDR or RDRAM buses do or what dual heads are do or two humans are doing err.... ähmm, wrong thread....Comment
-
... expensive to implement and a foolish design strategy.
Besides we already know what Parhelia is (a few of us here like Wombat
"Be who you are and say what you feel, because those who mind don't matter, and those who matter don't mind." -- Dr. Seuss
"Always do good. It will gratify some and astonish the rest." ~Mark TwainComment
-
Speaking from personal experience, having two processors work together is much, much, harder to design.
It's more costly to manufacture, more costly to test, lowers yield, makes drivers much more difficult to write....
Besides, if you're going to go dual-core, you design fast single-core with dual capabilities designed inside. That way you can ship the first design (it had better be fast), and you have the time to get the multi-chip solution out later, as a market boost. Of course, it's usually better to just port & shrink the single-chip design instead.
Also, graphics is one of those things that doesn't parallelize very well.
Also, comparing a dual-<B>processor</B> to dual-channel <B>memory</B> is ludicrous.Gigabyte P35-DS3L with a Q6600, 2GB Kingston HyperX (after *3* bad pairs of Crucial Ballistix 1066), Galaxy 8800GT 512MB, SB X-Fi, some drives, and a Dell 2005fpw. Running WinXP.Comment
-
It maybe a bit more expensive at start... it will pay in the end.
BTW. If you know that Wombat knows that who knows it anyway...
He didn't denied it. He just said that it maybe not wise to start with...Comment
-
No, listen, it WON'T pay in the end. It's just the wrong way to do this kind of thing. It's not more expensive "to start," it's more expensive all-around, and performance would suck.
jwb, both Greebe and I are under NDAs.Gigabyte P35-DS3L with a Q6600, 2GB Kingston HyperX (after *3* bad pairs of Crucial Ballistix 1066), Galaxy 8800GT 512MB, SB X-Fi, some drives, and a Dell 2005fpw. Running WinXP.Comment
-
Perfect gift for the Betelgeuseian member of the family that's always hard to please!
Originally posted by mmp121
First came DualHead
Second came HeadCasting
Put em together and what have you got?
DualHeadCasting
Gotta Love Matrox for it!Comment
-
Originally posted by Wombat
No, listen, it WON'T pay in the end. It's just the wrong way to do this kind of thing. It's not more expensive "to start," it's more expensive all-around, and performance would suck.
jwb, both Greebe and I are under NDAs.
While i agree with you that it's always more difficult to implement multichip solutions on a single board,the fact is that sooner or later there won't be any other choice really...
it's taking longer than ever to introduce new fab processes that allow chip makers to keep on adding new features to their chips while keeping it's size reasonable...note to self...
Assumption is the mother of all f***ups...
.
Primary system :
P4 2.8 ghz,1 gig DDR pc 2700(kingston),Radeon 9700(stock clock),audigy platinum and scsi all the way...
Comment
)
Comment