Recent content by senorpyro

Have you tried different power levels with the WRT? I've seen the best results with a setting in the 100-125'ish range on all the WRT's we have here (misc v2-v4 inc. L's), as above that point there's enough extra noise introduced that reliability and throughput actually decline...

interesting...

sweeeeeeeeet

Ahh... gotta love HFS... aint it great?

first and foremost, intel is not using DDR2 1066... the extreme edition 3.47 and 3.73 use a 1066 bus, but memory speeds are at ddr2-533 and ddr2-667 yes, it took apple way too long to adopt DDR, and even when they did there was little to be gained from the G4 implementations that they first...

it doesn't really matter what they do, it's a *nix based OS, and as such there's a 99.9% propability that somebody will figure out how to get around whatever apple institutes by either modifying or replacing the core *nix files with standard ones... it's really just a matter of time before...

i was actually rather unimpressed with that anandtech article... the thing that bothered me the most, was that the message i was left with was that the processor is great, but it's OS X's fault that the performance is sub-par.... but they didn't bother testing the g5 with a different OS to...

it'd definitely be cool if the retail versions had both pci and pci-e connectors like that though.... the problem is it'd be far too convenient, so we'll never see it :(

you're aware that the first gen smithfield 'pentium d' dual core chips are going to have hyperthreading disabled - right? for the time being, hyperthreading on dual core is going to be an extreme edition only feature.

in reality, though it'd likely work, you know there'd be some substantially newer and cooler chipset out that gives you other new toys by the time dual core chips are available. given the fact that you've already got an a64 and are even remotely considering upgrading again, i get the...

you're looking at synthetic benchmarks. sisoft scores don't mean diddly squat when it comes to performance. there are some places where dual channel does help - i'm not about to argue that. but the fact is there are relatively few places where that is the case, and in those situations...

well, i'm running an a64 2800 on a k8t800 based chaintech board with 2 dual sided ddr400 modules and everything is working perfectly. i have to imagine if a board as pathetic as my chaintech can do it on a <relatively> ancient chipset that many other boards should be able to do the same.

come on people, haven't you been reading the reviews? dual channel memory adds very little performance for the athlon64's. with the p4's, there's a HUGE increase in going from single to dual channel memory... the a64's are usually seeing increases in the 1-5% range.... if anything.

fyi, with all ati cards radeon 7000 and newer, you don't need a converter - there are extra pins in the s-video plug (in the center) that are the composite output - so the 'converter' that comes with the cards doesn't actually convert the signal, it just allows you to use the pins that are...

first off, the '9800 pro' in question isn't really a 9800 pro - it's an el-cheapo card which are known to suck. to be a true 9800 pro it's got to have 8 pipes, a 256 bit memory bus, and be clocked at atleast 380 core, 340 mem (ddr = 680). ati didn't sanction the bastard of a card known as...