Urban Terror Forums: Holes in yer P965 Chips... - Urban Terror Forums

Jump to content

 Login | Register 
Advertisement
  • (2 Pages)
  • +
  • 1
  • 2
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • This topic is locked

Holes in yer P965 Chips... Rate Topic: -----

#11 User is offline   Hybridesque (old) Icon

  • Joined: 08-February 04
  • Posts: 427
  • LocationBradford, UK

Posted 18 January 2007 - 11:34 PM

I don't think it's as much as who managed to exploit Dual-core that makes the money.  Look at EA, making all this tripe and raking in the money.  However, I do agree that Carmack does need to get with the times.. Have to adapt or die.

I agree with his sentiments about Vista though.  I just don't see the point of it.  There has to be a major paradigm shift for me to go over because Windows XP is pretty mature now.  As long as I can get buy on the current versions of the major software packages I use (mainly Office, 3ds max, Photoshop), I sure as heck will stay with them.

#12 User is offline   mitsubishi Icon

  • Account: mitsubishi
  • Country:
  • Joined: 28-February 10
  • Posts: 13,481

Posted 19 January 2007 - 08:15 AM

the multicoring hysteria gives the idea it is highly influenced by - mostly non public - fears that transistors can't be made smaller than easily nowadays. a computer from 1993 was many times slower than one from 1997, but one from 2003 to 2007 doesn't look that slow while the hardware programming wasn't that fundamentally different in each case. while the deceleration is obvious maybe there was exaggeration, there are various announcements for smaller ones.

multi-core concerns by top programmers like john carmack aren't unbased - he's not an old fool "needing to get on with the times",  he almost created the base of the technology of modern first person gaming -, in his key notes specifically talked about practical problems not some philosophy that made him sceptical, specific practical problems that take time or are futile to try to fix.

i suspect and may be wrong that much of it has to do with a simple philosophy of the type a computer is supposed to have a central processing unit, it can't have two because then it's two computers or a cluster, multi-coring should be a single processing unit of many cores, not many processing units and it's that that must be designed in a pure form, and if it's impossible then it's probably better to stick with smaller transistors and hardware design and leave multi coring for multi processing servers.

#13 User is offline   Woekele Icon

  •   former FS member   
    Public Relations
  • Account: woekele
  • Country:
  • Joined: 26-January 10
  • Posts: 11,575

Posted 19 January 2007 - 01:52 PM

Quote

Multi-cores are an aspect of programming that game developers are going to have to come to grips with... the sooner, the better.  Efforts to increase the speed of the chip has taken a backseat to the multi-core trend.  The gaming developers that really take full advantage of multi-core CPUs will make boatloads of money off of it.  Frankly, it surprises me to see Carmack's psuedo-whining about it. 

Suck it up, Carmack!  Time to take the lead in the gaming industry again!


Ye, I agree. Although I can really see the trouble with it (man, have you ever even tried to figure out multithreaded code, let alsone multi-cored code?), I certainly would expect big game-companies to be able to pick up on it, thats their job.

#14 User is offline   mitsubishi Icon

  • Account: mitsubishi
  • Country:
  • Joined: 28-February 10
  • Posts: 13,481

Posted 19 January 2007 - 04:01 PM

you're talking about the person that almost based modern first person shooting. on his key notes, he didn't say "i don't like it" out of emotional hold to the past, he talked of specific practical problems coders face with such environments. it's guys like that that fix such problems, if it's possible, because they can see them.

it'd be saner to suspect promotion of the xbox :roll:

#15 User is offline   NIKO-007 (old) Icon

  • Joined: 09-February 06
  • Posts: 187
  • LocationIreland

Posted 19 January 2007 - 04:07 PM

LOL always the same story here.. every time a thread is started it always goes astray and turns into a rant.. Oz can u do the decent thing pls  :evil:

bullet_loaderAdvertisement

#16 User is offline   Bobbelin Icon

  • Account: bobbelin
  • Main tag: ]Vz[
  • Joined: 28-February 10
  • Posts: 264

Posted 20 January 2007 - 12:31 AM

haha, gotta agree ;)

well didn't knew the e4300 came out, a lil outdated here :D
in that case I rather go for the 6600 then, more because it's large cache and the stock clockspeed is already on 2.4GHz o/

#17 User is offline   L3mMinG (old) Icon

  • Joined: 20-February 04
  • Posts: 862

Posted 09 March 2007 - 02:29 AM

Here's one experiment at making a game run on dual core machines... not for the faint hearted computer users... doom :)

http://www.devx.com/amd/Article/33390

Or maybe in a more human language, this nice interview with an unreal 3 developper on multi-core development problems...

http://www.anandtech...aspx?i=2377&p=1

#18 User is offline   Snoppis (old) Icon

  • Joined: 06-March 05
  • Posts: 404

Posted 09 March 2007 - 05:52 AM

i got the 6600 ...and i think its great

the only gay thing about the dual core is q3...

#19 User is offline   Juno Icon

  •   verified user   
  • Account: juno
  • Main tag: ~SG~
  • Country:
  • Joined: 28-February 10
  • Posts: 1,146

Posted 09 March 2007 - 11:01 AM

e4300 has high multiplifier (is it correct i.e. x9 CPU FSB?) and doesnt require speed and expensive RAM. e6300 and above to good OC require a much more expensive mobo (higher FSB) and RAM...

  • (2 Pages)
  • +
  • 1
  • 2
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • This topic is locked

1 User(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users

Advertisement


Copyright © 1999-2024 Frozensand Games Limited  |  All rights reserved  |  Urban Terror™ and FrozenSand™ are trademarks of Frozensand Games Limited

Frozensand Games is a Limited company registered in England and Wales. Company Reg No: 10343942