All Things Microsoft > Microsoft Hardware
CNet Propagates Mhz Myth, Goes "Hardcore"
Refalm:
CNet spoof news
[EDIT]OK, sarcasm is a accepted Refalm, but me (Refalm) thinks that Refalm shouldn't put hook crosses instead of the CNet logo. So Refalm, don't do it again!
* Edited by Refalm *[/EDIT]
[ October 30, 2002: Message edited by: Refalm ]
Pantso:
quote:Originally posted by The_Muffin_Man/B0b:
But they didn't say anything about chip architectures did they?
You can't compare across chip architectures. They don't even regard architectures as an issue.
[ October 24, 2002: Message edited by: The_Muffin_Man/B0b ]
--- End quote ---
Very true! Nowadays, noone seems to care much about chip architectures. It's like Intel and AMD are the only processor manufacturers out there for most people. :(
hm_murdock:
you can't even really compare the Athlon and the P4. and yet people try to compare RISC to CISC and use that as a basis for "why (insert brand x) sucks compared to Wintel, because we have 3GHz"
funny how back in the day, PPC whipped the holy living fuck out of x86 wihle at a lower clock... and everybody in the world was aware of it... but they've now conveniently forgotten that because now their stuff has big numbers and is "a couple of seconds faster" on running a filter that takes ten minutes to apply in Photoshop.
When you throw that many clock cycles at something... yeah, it'll be faster. But that doesn't make it *better*!
Master of Reality:
quote:Originally posted by TheQuirk-V654654.54:
These are not your worthless Australian dollars.
--- End quote ---
ya, he's talkin about ultimate Canadian dollars. Your crappy australian dollars are our canadian dollors' bitch
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[*] Previous page
Go to full version