Jump to content

Best CPU


wahaha
 Share


Recommended Posts

The "best CPU" wouldn't be anything that evolved from an x86 ancestor. It would be MIPSy or some other RISCish contraption, with a Harvard architecture at the bare minimum.

 

Even a PowerPC is superior to the x86 descendents. Damn Bill Gates & IBM! Just imagine if the original PC had been 68000 based! Oh for the joys of a regular instruction set instead of one loaded down with a bunch of special purpose "fast" instructions and slow general purpose ones. The history of computing could have been vastly different!

 

The optimizations used to keep Pentium class CPUs moving ever faster would have given a good architecture a real boost. I'll bet economies of scale would have us running nearly a factor of 10 faster (in terms of performance, rather than raw clock speed).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 116
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

The "best CPU" wouldn't be anything that evolved from an x86 ancestor. It would be MIPSy or some other RISCish contraption, with a Harvard architecture at the bare minimum.

 

Even a PowerPC is superior to the x86 descendents. Damn Bill Gates & IBM! Just imagine if the original PC had been 68000 based! Oh for the joys of a regular instruction set instead of one loaded down with a bunch of special purpose "fast" instructions and slow general purpose ones. The history of computing could have been vastly different!

 

The optimizations used to keep Pentium class CPUs moving ever faster would have given a good architecture a real boost. I'll bet economies of scale would have us running nearly a factor of 10 faster (in terms of performance, rather than raw clock speed).

 

"......I believe there is a govt within our govt!"

 

It has nothing to do with Bill Gates, IBM, or Oracle.........It has to do with "the establishment" and us.

 

:stare:

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The "best CPU" wouldn't be anything that evolved from an x86 ancestor. It would be MIPSy or some other RISCish contraption, with a Harvard architecture at the bare minimum.

 

Even a PowerPC is superior to the x86 descendents. Damn Bill Gates & IBM! Just imagine if the original PC had been 68000 based! Oh for the joys of a regular instruction set instead of one loaded down with a bunch of special purpose "fast" instructions and slow general purpose ones. The history of computing could have been vastly different!

 

The optimizations used to keep Pentium class CPUs moving ever faster would have given a good architecture a real boost. I'll bet economies of scale would have us running nearly a factor of 10 faster (in terms of performance, rather than raw clock speed).

 

"......I believe there is a govt within our govt!"

 

It has nothing to do with Bill Gates, IBM, or Oracle.........It has to do with "the establishment" and us.

 

:stare:

 

 

:stare:

 

Exactly! It has to do with the "establishment" of the standards that predominate in the desktop market. And that had everything to do with an IBM engineering decision in 1980 or 1981. They chose the 8088 for the PC because the 8087 existed (allowing floating point math in hardware ... but with a truly atrocious architecture) whereas the Motorola 68881 (I think?) was not yet in production. The irony of this was that little software made use of the 8087 (we had to use a hacked version of Lotus 1-2-3, the premeire spreadsheet of the day) until well after Motorola was shipping production versions of their FP chip.

 

The "establishment" didn't choose to stick us with less efficient computers! The "establishment" could get more work done if they were more efficient. But market practice "established" an inefficient architecture with which we're now stuck. Kinda like we're stuck with the QWERTY keyboard, not because of a conspiracy, but because of engineering decisions made long ago. Since most keyboard users are trained in QWERTY, no significant group makes the transition to the Dvorak keyboard, which would greatly increase typing efficiency.

 

Similarly, English is becoming the "lingua franca," while a rational language like Esperanto is not adopted widely enough to be useful. And that's a conspiracy of Celts, Romans, Normans, and Vikings combined with the technological innovation that has exploded out of the US of A.

 

:stare:

 

But you're right about the "us" part, at least to an extent. Few of us are willing to take the extra effort required to establish efficient new standards. Hence, the market doesn't support them, hence they remain curiousities or on the fringe.

 

sigh

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wonder what the military is using. The budget they is vast' date=' and it's definitly not spent on the soldiers[/quote']

 

whatever they want!;)

 

seriously though, they use BIG supercomputers for their major stuff and they give the soldiers, who need them anyway, regular pcs. one of my bro-in-laws is an a/v guy for the army in iraq and they issued him a g4 powerbook or something like that. he loves it though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wonder what the military is using. The budget they have is vast' date=' and it's definitly not spent on the soldiers[/quote']

Windows and Pentiums. Not for everything, but I've heard stories about shipboard weapons and radar systems having to be rebooted because WinNT froze.

 

Scary, eh?

 

There was a time (about 15 or 20 years ago) when the Air Force was planning on having all code run on a 1750 processor (a mil-std, proprietary device) and written in Ada ... to the best of my knowledge, that never happened.

 

HAARP has multiple CPUs, buses, and operating systems. Suns, Pentiums, PowerPCs, Motorola 680x0s. ISA, PCI, CPCI, VME buses. Windows of all different flavors, linux, Solaris, QNX, DOS, as well as proprietary RTOSes.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

AMD all the way.I update my computers every 2 years,I don't think I can do it with an Intel system.AMD let you explore the full potential of the CPU,unlike Intel locked,overpriced and hard to Overclock CPU.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, i have bot an Intel CPU and an AMD one, and now i can,t really tell a difference, some years ago well, it was true AMD was less stable but now, my AMD 64 3000 works fine and as for the INTEL, its a P4 2000 and well it never has give me problems so i think until some of the companies makes a new tech breakthrouh, its a near tie...

As for MAC...ack i don,t really like them too cute ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

AMD all the way.I update my computers every 2 years' date='I don't think I can do it with an Intel system.AMD let you explore the full potential of the CPU,unlike Intel locked,overpriced and hard to Overclock CPU.[/quote']

 

the pentiums are not hard to oc. not hard at all. most 2.8 ghz 775 p4s will oc past 3.6ghz, usually past 3.7ghz!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 months later...

Wow, wahaha, I haven't seen this thread in a LONG long time.

AMD all the way. my 2.0 ghz 64 bit amd runs every bit as well as a 3.2 ghz intel, and this is actually cheaper, runs cooler, and with a 200 mhz overclock, runs the equivilent of 300 mhz intel quicker.

 

Would go quicker but I don't want to on air.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've always been an AMD fan. Have used Pentiums but always got better performance out of the AMD. Currently running Dual Athlon 1900+ (1.6Ghz). Getting old now I know. Hopefully I will be upgrading soon and will be going aith Athlon 64 all the way.

 

SR

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
 Share


×
×
  • Create New...