|
|
| News Link » /news/newsarticle.asp?searchid=22185 |  Cogito (110) Oct 07, 2009 - 10:23 am
| | I'm gonna hold out for a bit. My 4870 should keep me happy for the next six months. I suspect those 5870 cards should be selling for $275 or less by then, especially if "Fermi" hits the streets and performs as hyped. Flag this | Edit this post |
| News Link » /news/newsarticle.asp?searchid=22144 | Cogito (110) Sep 17, 2009 - 11:35 am
| | Maybe because nVidia is going be late to the DX11 party? Downplay it's importance (Just like DX10.1) to supress ATI sales and buy time 'till they can introduce their own DX11 part and THEN tout all of it's new features and performance. Flag this | Edit this post |
| News Link » /news/newsarticle.asp?searchid=22118 | Cogito (110) Sep 10, 2009 - 12:41 pm » Edited on Sep 18, 2009 - 04:30 am
| | While the ATI line of video cards have done very well (I personally use a Palit 4870 1GB), their CPU sales would suggest that most people recognise the superior Intel price/performance ratios. Flag this | Edit this post |
| News Link » /news/newsarticle.asp?searchid=22092 | Cogito (110) Sep 03, 2009 - 11:54 am
| | Yeah, bandwidth limitations are an issue now and will continue to get worse as software stresses current technology. We'd have to add more data lanes between CPU, Memory and system components(Expensive hardware design reconfiguring and compatibility issues)or resort to large caches of yesteryear. I don't see much of an issue incorporating a gig of high speed SDRAM on the CPU and even on chipsets. Am I all wet on this? Flag this | Edit this post |
| News Link » /news/newsarticle.asp?searchid=22092 | Cogito (110) Sep 03, 2009 - 07:09 am
| | Yes, there are a FEW applications that can take advantage of more cores. However, even current benchmark results show a diminishing return as you increase the number of cores. My guess is that relatively few people are recording HD with their systems, but a huge majority of them are playing 3D games of some sort and those games rarely benifit substantially by having more than 2 cores. By the time software support for more than four cores becomes mainstream, AMD's technology will be antiquated. Again I argue, AMD's six-core announcement is nothing but marketing BS. Flag this | Edit this post |
| News Link » /news/newsarticle.asp?searchid=22092 | Cogito (110) Sep 02, 2009 - 11:49 am
| Can you say "No appreciable performance enhancement?"
Most current and near future software barely takes advantage of two cores, nevermind 6 cores. It's just marketing BS.
Faster video cards and more memory make more sense dollar wise. Flag this | Edit this post |
| News Link » /news/newsarticle.asp?searchid=20579 | Cogito (110) Jun 23, 2008 - 05:06 am
| I'm drooling with anticipation of the release of the 4870 cards. If the 4850 cards are any indication of what's to come with the 4870 cards, nVidia will need to rethink it's pricing policies with cards going for over $600.00.
P.S. About time AMD/ATI Flag this | Edit this post |
| News Link » /news/newsarticle.asp?searchid=20481 | Cogito (110) May 22, 2008 - 06:55 am
| Here I was thinking EQ2 and Vanguard were big installs. 25.1 GB folks! No wonder it took an hour to install on my system! Wasn't long ago when people thought 250 GB hard-drives were overkill for most folks. Now I'm considering a terabyte drive for my next system.
P.S. The game has been great so far. Flag this | Edit this post |
| News Link » /news/newsarticle.asp?searchid=20174 | Cogito (110) Mar 27, 2008 - 04:49 am
| In the article, the question is asked "And so once again we’re faced with the decision: AMD or Intel?"
Surely they can't be serious. Based upon the benchmarks, the 9850 is dominated by the Q6600 and they still come to the conclusion that the comparison is a "wash" between the two.
This "fanboyism" has become rather desperate in nature and does nothing but to further erode FiringSquad's legitimacy as a reliable and unbiased site. Flag this | Edit this post |
| Siteseeing Link » /news/siteseeingarticle.asp?searchid=4067 | Cogito (110) Apr 30, 2007 - 08:16 pm
| Mizkreant writes:
"Gun ownership advocates always cite lower crime rates of US states with higher gun ownership, while conveniently avoiding the fact that countries that prohibit private gun ownership altogether have much lower rates of violent crimes than the entire United States."
One country with VERY strict gun laws, the UK has seen dramatic increases in crimes involving guns despite ever stricter laws. Here's the hint, criminals don't give a crap what laws you put in place. Here's a quick article supporting this: http://abcnews.go.com/2020/story?id=3083618&page=1 and
"If as you say, only a few VT students would've been armed on that day, what are the chances that one such student would have run into Cho Seung Hui? Unless you're advocating that such students should have hunted him down, which equates to vigilantism."
Suggesting the absurd does not bolster your argument. However, it is everybody's responsibilty to protect oneself. YOU are your own first line of defense. This is why I have carried concealed firearms since '85. I WILL fight back. Flag this | Edit this post |
| Siteseeing Link » /news/siteseeingarticle.asp?searchid=4067 | Cogito (110) Apr 30, 2007 - 04:44 am
| "You start putting guns on everyone, and while you might end these rampages at a few killings instead of 30, you'll probably increase the frequency of shootings to begin with. Nevermind the fact that guns are accident prone, and a HELL of a lot of responsibility."
Nobody is talking about arming everyone on campus. Only a few would even consider having a firearm. However, towns and states with liberal gun laws also have lower rates of violent crime (Including gun crimes). Your assertion that there would be more shooting on campus if there were more guns is unsubstantiated. It's the "Armed society is a polite society" effect.
BTW GUNS are NOT accident prone, people are. And yes, safe gun ownwership IS a lot of responsibilty, but that can be attributed to all of our rights". Flag this | Edit this post |
| Siteseeing Link » /news/siteseeingarticle.asp?searchid=4067 | Cogito (110) Apr 29, 2007 - 10:07 am
| | Mizkreant, nobody is talking about arming every college student. The current policies prohibit VT students from having firearms on campus. However, as usual, such rules and regulations are ignored by people with criminal intent (Hence, why such laws do nothing but unarm law-abiding citizens). Had even a single student victim been allowed to to arm themself, this madman's killing spree men have been ended earlier than it had. The question that needs to be answered is that does a student's constitutional rights end as soon as he steps onto campus property? Flag this | Edit this post |
| Siteseeing Link » /news/siteseeingarticle.asp?searchid=4067 | Cogito (110) Apr 25, 2007 - 06:49 am
| "VT Trained To Shoot On Firing Range"
Does this even matter? Who gives a shit?
This should be about how a NON-citizen with a documented record psychotic and criminal behavior was able to purchase a firearm despite the background check. Flag this | Edit this post |
|
|
|
|
