|
Doesn't matter anyway because on my desktop PC no matter what I try to do with the power settings in Windows, the system sleeps for about a split second and then immediately wakes up again. 
|
#
¿
Apr 29, 2013 09:42
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 19, 2024 03:12 |
|
|
DaNzA posted:You might need to go into your device manager, right click on any sort of external peripherals like mouse/keyboards etc and change their power setting to 'cant wake up computer with this' or something. Also do the same check with network adapter and any USB stuff. Thank you for the inspiration, I'll try this for the 15th time. Why can't they have a setting "ONLY wake up if..." instead? Or some kind of troubleshooting agent like "Hey, I noticed you had sent me to sleep just a minute ago and I woke up based on network traffic [or whatever applies]. Do you want to disable me waking up from this? Yes/No/Ignore in the future". But that would require actual thought about what users might want. Anyway, Haswell contributing to less wasting of power is certainly a good thing.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 29, 2013 10:48
|
|
|
Intel - 2012 revenue: $53 billion AMD - 2012 revenue: $5.4 billion ARM Holdings - 2012 revenue: $0.9 billion (Source: Wikipedia, 1 pound = 1.55 dollars) So yeah, Intel needs to totally buy ARM immediately lest they be obliterated in the next 3 months or something. This would not have any negative influence on the market. In other news, Coca Cola just got approval to buy PepsiCo in order to prevent being pushed out of the market by Virgin Cola. I'm not an economist, but if revenue is an indicator of scale, then I'd think Intel and AMD still have no excuse to merge. Maybe in a few years.
|
|
#
¿
May 3, 2013 12:24
|
|
|
JawnV6 posted:Great, once you go out and find the revenue numbers for the companies that actually design ARM SoC's, the companies that fab them, the companies that integrate devices around them, and the plethora of companies that provide third-party support for compiling, debugging, etc. and total all those up to get a reasonable estimate of the revenue the ARM ecosystem is chugging through you might have a comparison that isn't utterly ignorant of the market. Short list would be Qualcomm, Samsung, TSMC, Apple, Atmel... Same thing applies to x86 with the exception of the manufacturing of the actual CPUs. It looks to me like you are trying to compare everything but the kitchen sink on the ARM side to just the bare manufacturing of the CPUs on the x86 side. JawnV6 posted:iPhones alone have shipped >250M, iPads >100M. That's dwarfed by the number of Androids. Cell phones are a fraction of the raw count of ARM cores shipping. The margins are a different picture and a core-to-core count isn't great, but the basic picture is that ARM currently dominates mobile and mobile's on the way up. I'd just like to see the actual numbers with a good analysis and not just commonplace "mobile is on the way up" projections where somebody uses a ruler and draws a straight line to 2050 based on the 2007 and 2012 values or similar.
|
|
#
¿
May 3, 2013 23:25
|
|
|
JawnV6 posted:Oh, you're ignorant about x86 too? No prob. You know, even assuming you're in possession of the absolute truth here, it's not necessary to start every post that way. If you have facts that you want to bring up, just bring them up. I'm absolutely interested in them. If you ever taught in school or similar, did you preface every response to every question with a comment on how they were ignorant? JawnV6 posted:Just to take an example I'm quite familiar with: in terms of ICE debugging, there isn't a third party x86 solution. Debug tools are only shipped from Intel/AMD themselves. On the ARM side you've got device manufacturers like Atmel who provide an IDE with ICE support and pure tools vendors like IAR who sell alternatives. This is why I'm pretty comfortable asking your comparison to include those third parties and why there isn't a third party on the x86 side. If you really want to drill in on this and you don't, it's stupid, I hope you're going to go lop off the Intel revenue from Flash and other non-x86 sections. I don't know [ANOTHER CHANCE TO CALL ME IGNORANT RIGHT HERE] where exactly one would reasonably draw the line of where the ecosystem around a type of CPU ends and would should be considered its exact market size. I'm sure people have come up with ideas for that. It looks a little bit like you're trying to push some kind of narrow limit around x86 and a wide one around ARM, and everyone who brings this up meets with condescension. If you feel you have very convincing arguments, let them speak for themselves. JawnV6 posted:I could go on, but the short version is that ARM is a diverse ecosystem of several companies. x86 is the Big Two and hardly anybody else. If you're going to call my analysis specious it might help you to actually supply, you know, a fact or two? Oh, you're not able to read? I never doubted your numbers, I doubted what you included. To elaborate: There are many hardware and software companies that wouldn't exist if x86 CPUs wouldn't exist, therefore I'd at least address that instead of some hand-wavy comments. Also the numbers you gave may all be true, but they're not the whole picture because there are more products than those. JawnV6 posted:Intel openly acknowledges this in a lot of ways, so I can't imagine why you're holding this point in contention. At the 2011 investor meeting, then-CEO Paul Otellini asked "600 smartphones were sold. Who made the most money? Intel, because someone had to buy a Xeon to support the backend." There are a lot of industries where a high-end manufacturer ceded the low-end to cheap competitors, who ramped up on the huge volumes, got some experience, then beat the high-end player at their own game. Steel, manufacturing, etc. If you can learn to get the semantics out of what somebody says beyond "if $post != $my_brain_contents then call ignorant", then all I've really said is that if revenue is a measure, then it does not support a merger. I never said there can't be any others. I'm not seeing how a quote in which Intel said that they make more money per smartphone than the makers of the phones supports the idea that they're threatened by that, but I'm sure that's just me. In closing, I don't really doubt that the mobile space is important and growing, but I'd like to see the whole picture. Edit: I'm trying to say post what you would tell a court that's weighing whether or not to allow a merger between Intel and AMD, and leave out all the references to the judge being ignorant. Mr. Smile Face Hat fucked around with this message at 02:44 on May 4, 2013 |
|
#
¿
May 4, 2013 02:22
|
|
|
JawnV6 posted:This is literally the structure of how the two architectures are designed, fabbed, and pushed into the market by their respective makers. I'm not casting nets or anything, I am trying to describe reality against your continued objections. Intel is a highly integrated device manufacturer (IDM) that owns the architecture, the design teams, the fabs that produce the chips, marketing, sales, etc. ARM is a licensing corporation that does not own a single fab whose business model is to develop a general architecture, license it to companies with design teams who integrate the core into SoC's with differentiating components, those same companies may own fabs or contract that out to Yet Another Company in the ARM ecosystem. There's a difference between asking for facts and numbers and "continued objections". I'm not objecting to anything, I'm simply still waiting for the numbers that describe respective market sizes. I do understand the different business models, however if company X builds ARM CPUs with a license, that doesn't mean that all of company X including their fridge and stereo amplifier divisions is now fully part of the ARM ecosystem. So, what are the respective market volumes of x86 and ARM CPUs and what are reasonable (i.e. most likely nonlinear) projections?
|
|
#
¿
May 4, 2013 04:46
|
|
|
Okay, thank you for that. I'm still not seeing a compelling reason for how a merger/takeover between Intel and AMD would improve the market, and the numbers are based on examples but I won't insist any further. I guess one problem I'm having besides the numbers is that it's not possible to substitute x86 for ARM and vice-versa in all situations, and having only one maker of x86s left would suck a lot in situations where that type of CPU is the only reasonable solution.
|
|
#
¿
May 6, 2013 04:38
|
|
|
Shaocaholica posted:Does quicksync support video decode or is it just encode only? Right now I'm looking into solutions to decode/playback very large files without dropping frames. Stuff thats 3480x4320@24fps. I know display and transmission are another issue and for now we're going to scale the content back to 3480x2160 for 4K TVs over HDMI. The real question for me is whether it supports applications I actually have or can have easy access to (Premiere Pro or After Effects CS6, Final Cut Pro X, SlySoft CloneDVD mobile, ffmpeg), not some obscure BS encoder or plugin that costs $10k. Otherwise it's the software equivalent of a paper launch: A nice feature, but you're not likely to get any benefits from it. I guess it depends on how accessible the feature is to compiler builders and whether they are taking advantage of it.
|
|
#
¿
May 29, 2013 01:27
|
|
|
And here we go... just ordered my upgrades from Newegg. Bummer that the motherboard only allows up to 32 GB, but I guess that's consumer hardware for me.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 2, 2013 12:28
|
|
|
LooKMaN posted:
So it seems I "only" got the Deluxe mobo instead of the Deluxe Dual because that was the highest one Newegg had two nights ago. I like how they're talking about "Dual Intelligent Processors", but "Dual" as part of the product name means something else. This is not confusing at all, nosiree. Oh well, it's not like I really needed Thunderbolt on a PC right now, and there's always the next upgrade. They're really too clever for their own good with those product names and descriptions.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 4, 2013 00:53
|
|
|
Agreed posted:I find that consistently overspending on motherboards has never let me down when it comes to getting all the features I want. And done up the rear price-wise. Take that as you will. I did get the most expensive ASUS one Newegg had, so I don't know what to say. I guess next time I'll go beyond Newegg and Amazon, which means different uncertainties. I had checked out the features, and it's not such a big deal. Thunderbolt is more of a "nice to have" thing for me on a PC, realistically I won't need it at all before the next upgrade.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 4, 2013 02:14
|
|
|
Factory Factory posted:
Um, so this news from a site whose writer uses "off of" in a table is to be taken seriously? Also I like this comment: "This is good news guys. This means we don't have to run out and buy new stuff." If only all tech progress would stop, our crap would be the latest forever!  
|
|
#
¿
Jun 18, 2013 07:42
|
|
Oh, they source it from VR-Zone. So VR-Zone reported this.
|
There is no situation in the English language where "off of" is correct, and using it is a sure sign of the author not being a professional writer, which puts the research in question, at least a little bit. That's what I meant. That being said, I've checked out some different sources, and even more than a week back there was talk of that Haswell refresh already, so I guess it's true. My apologies.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 18, 2013 10:32
|
|
|
Alereon posted:That's not what these words mean. This is "off of" meaning "off from", in the sense of "40 PCIe lanes branching off from the processor". More importantly, a grammar argument is the stupidest possible argument. Ok, after having this now come up twice, if I may defend myself this once (I'll let it drop after this), it's not always THAT stupid. There is some correlation between good research and good grammar. It comes from being thorough and being willing and able to learn. In other sub-forums of SA people are rightfully mocking the spelling and cognitive abilities of the Tea Party and the way they express themselves. So... Aside from those considerations of whether this is good language, there's also the one that more colloquial expressions give away the fact that some information does not come from official sources. It matters to me a little bit whether information on CPU roadmaps, tech etc. comes right from the source or hearsay. I'll get "off of" the subject now.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 23, 2013 08:36
|
|
|
HalloKitty posted:That said, they sell a product to people who have no idea what it even is, so I guess marketing have a difficult job. I know what a CPU is - it's that box under the desk that the keyboard and display are connected to.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 4, 2014 10:05
|
|
|
wdarkk posted:Really the only reason to buy discs now is if iTunes/Netflix/Amazon doesn't have what you want. I would strongly disagree with that on any good display of reasonable size (maybe not on the typical computer screen). Not only the compression artifacts, but also the general looks and (for lack of a better word) "flow". The differences are obvious in many places and not as esoteric as in higher bit rates in music. (Example: http://hdguru.com/blu-ray-vs-hdtv-streaming-services-a-quality-comparison-review/) e: Forgot to add that this is probably going to be even more obvious once 4K content appears (if ever), due to the limits of the amounts of data people can be reasonably expected to stream over the existing infrastructure. Mr. Smile Face Hat fucked around with this message at 05:03 on Oct 6, 2014 |
|
#
¿
Oct 6, 2014 04:57
|
|
|
Palladium posted:http://www.kitguru.net/components/cpu/anton-shilov/asustek-and-intel-confirm-global-shortage-of-intel-skylake-microprocessors/ I "think" it's "annoying" how that "article" puts all "processor names" in "quotes" and how that "interrupts" the "reading flow". I never thought we'd see the day when CPUs would become family heirlooms, but here we are. Mr. Smile Face Hat fucked around with this message at 01:31 on Aug 17, 2015 |
|
#
¿
Aug 17, 2015 00:54
|
|
|
I'm just so bummed that they're not gonna have Itanium anymore. I was gonna build me an Itanium rig any day now. I think I'll need a few nanoseconds to get over it.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 5, 2019 02:56
|
|
|
mobby_6kl posted:Clearly Intel should go back to Slot 1. Looks like “pentium(r)!!!”. Mr. Smile Face Hat fucked around with this message at 02:51 on Apr 5, 2019 |
|
#
¿
Apr 5, 2019 02:48
|
|
|
Dr. Fishopolis posted:the market is definitely dumb, it's literally a reactive graph of rich people feelings about things they barely grasp. If only there was a way to force people to not pay undue heed to AMD and Nvidia (not to mention ARM-based detritus) and their misguided, certainly ill-fated attempts and instead back up the strong and righteous cause of Intel, because if only given enough time, Intel will surely advance their processes.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 30, 2020 00:48
|
|
|
Mr.PayDay posted:Intel was there when all evolutions and innovations happened the last 2 decades Yeah, they're losing their edge to well-run companies with better ideas and more talent. And they're actually really, really nice. In contrast, Intel don't know what they really want. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZUjDMdSwefk
|
|
#
¿
Jul 30, 2020 10:02
|
|
|
Beef posted:Intel should have added the Lena encoder and it would have won in every benchmark tbh. redeyes posted:The apple M1 is fast because it has encoders for video formats. When they use a non-supported codec it flats flat on its rear end. So now the Intel chuds are posting their hot takes that it's all just about video and image encoding. Even the generalized benchmarks are all rigged!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
|
|
#
¿
Nov 28, 2020 02:22
|
|
|
I love how this shows him holding every Itanium 2 ever sold.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 14, 2021 10:10
|
|
|
https://www.theverge.com/2021/1/15/22232554/intel-ceo-apple-lifestyle-company-cpus-commentquote:“We have to deliver better products to the PC ecosystem than any possible thing that a lifestyle company in Cupertino” makes, Gelsinger reportedly told Intel employees. Idiot. e: What I mean is: NAME your competition, acknowledge who and what they are, identify what you need to change. Don't be cute about it.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 15, 2021 15:12
|
|
|
Kazinsal posted:He phrased it that way to rile people up. That's what his job is. I get it, but it makes him look smug, downplaying an existential threat and having a grasp on Apple like Steve Ballmer ca. 2001. Intel's problem is complacency, and he just looks like more of the same.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 16, 2021 00:56
|
|
|
DrDork posted:I don't think anyone at Intel isn't aware that it's an existential threat. Then why did they get into the situation they're in now? This was all predictable and telegraphed years in advance. Also, reading this thread as someone who's not an Intel insider (what a great pun, heh, I have lots of their CPUs actually, but am not a company insider), the general attitude of this thread seems to be: "Desktops? Pffft, who cares when there's the server market?" "Server market share? Pffft, they have service contracts until 2080!" Etc, etc, basically the Dick Jones school of project management: "I had a guaranteed military sale with ED 209 - renovation program, spare parts for twenty-five years... Who cares if it worked or not?" I don't get the impression that everyone at Intel is very aware of the situation.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 16, 2021 02:28
|
|
|
WhyteRyce posted:Pat is obviously being smug and dismissive of Apple because of what some people are saying on a dead forum You're really giving your utmost to dismiss everything I'm saying, great effort! I remember reading in this thread that a lot of mighty insiders whose important opinions must not be dismissed are regulars here, so if posts are being made here that Intel has no problems after all and there's not a lot of disagreement with that, maybe I can be forgiven as taking that as just a little representative of the company. Particularly if it just about 100% matches its actions.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 16, 2021 02:51
|
|
|
WhyteRyce posted:So, again, I didn't hear Pat's speech to the employees or his email or whatever. And everyone seems to be hammering on and interpreting The Verge article which mentions one whole line. They aren't even talking about the original Oregonian article which had a little more context. Public Relations 101: Don't start off your new position with something that makes you look dumb, even if accurately quoted. (Referring to the "lifestyle company" quote, not the "good" one.) I'm 100% sure he's a nice, intelligent person and very nuanced if you get to know him. Just needs to learn something about PR. I wish him and Intel good luck!
|
|
#
¿
Jan 16, 2021 03:11
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 19, 2024 03:12 |
|
|
WhyteRyce posted:I’m sorry I’m dismissive of your opinion but considering you and I weren’t in the employee meeting or knew what the whole statement was and are going off a clipped statement I think it’s really silly to treat any of our opinions of the CEO as all that worthwhile Reacting to this later because you edited this into your post after mine: With that kind of logic, nothing ever means anything, because who knows, maybe Hitler took everything back in the parts of his meetings that were never published. Face it, the guy said something that makes him look smug / tone deaf /dorky to people who don't dig deep or give him the benefit of the doubt.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 16, 2021 03:28
|
|