Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst ... 234
Results 31 to 39 of 39

Thread: AMD FX-8150 With The Open64 5.0 Compiler

  1. #31
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    5,411

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by AnonymousCoward View Post
    Regarding Intels and virtualization, at least for the 2500/2600 the normal models have both vt-x and vt-d, the k models only vt-x.
    this is just intel terrorism! just buy a amd black edition then you do have "K-Model"+"VT-D"

  2. #32
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Linuxland
    Posts
    4,723

    Default

    At least nowadays they have the decency to include vt-x in most models. In the C2D range the exact same model came with all three combinations:

    http://ark.intel.com/products/36500/...-1066-MHz-FSB)

  3. #33
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    135

    Default

    And telling people, they have to buy AMD, is no terrorism?
    Power consumption is a matter. I live in Germany, I pay 0.25/kWh (~0.338USD). I did many calculations on currently (say: august until mid of october) available data, including the first BD-benches on those "bad" sites (anadtech, tomshardware etc.) - Taking the (at that moment) current workload, only the additional costs for electricity would give me a new SandyBridge i7, if things get worse even a i7 + Mainboard! This calulation was done for the usage time of 5 years (that's the minimum). So running the SNB for 5 years instead of BD gives me a new CPU for free! This calculation was based on the hope, that I would get a AM3+-Board with onBoard-GPU. As there is nothing like that ATM, There are further 30++ for a dGPU, further costs for power consumption. The i7 95W TDP are CPU+GPU, BDs 125 are CPU-only. So there are not only 30W more on the BD-side (read: by TDP, the actual plus in consumption is a different story), but >50W (depending on the GPU chosen).
    And saying "hoo, the rest of my household appliances isn't powerefficient, so buying a power efficient PC is useless" is sort of stupid. If I can save good money with only one machine, I will do it.
    BTW: 3000W for your oven is quite a lot. Mine (a Miele) uses 1000W, only takes ~5min. from 20C to 250C, and the big rest of the usage time it "idles". Using SB instead of BD gives me 1-2 big loafs of bread (self-baken) per week for free - incl. ingredients.

    And now, I stop this useless discussion. Never wanted to start a flamewar, my first post in this thread was only about the uselessness of both "benchmarks" (running only one app vs. running as many CPU/GPU-intensive tasks as you can). It was last year, when I said, I need a new PC in 2011. All the months, I said "wait for BD...". BD was not what I expected, so I went for SB... i7 for 245, and BD? 230 for the 8150. And it is not available. So even if I would have gone for BD, I would not have been able to buy one... (Only the 4100 is available here, some shops also offer the 6100. All others are "Ohne Liefertermin"). It was my decision, I am happy with it, nevertheless I will recommend AMD-based systems when it is appropriate.

  4. #34
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    59

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by schmalzler View Post
    And telling people, they have to buy AMD, is no terrorism?
    Power consumption is a matter. I live in Germany, I pay 0.25/kWh (~0.338USD).
    Of course you do now that Merkel was stupid enough to shut down Germany's nuclear power plants. (no offense)

  5. #35
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    217

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by leeenux View Post
    Nice one, buddy. You found a mobile part with both enabled, and it's just barely under $200. I was using the logical choice, the Core i5 2500 desktop part as a point of reference. I wonder how much research you had to do to figure out that some of those mobile parts did have both enabled? At any rate, being a mobile part, the laptop vendor will probably take the liberty of disabling that VT-whatever for you, and removing the BIOS option to enable it, so it's kind of a moot point. Let's stick to desktop CPUs.
    You're a fool. Read the fucking page I linked you. Socket 1155 which is *gasp* a desktop part!

    Core i5 2400, another resource.
    http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16819115074

    Core i5 2500, with VT-x and VT-d
    http://ark.intel.com/products/52209/...ache-3_30-GHz)

    Its obvious you're getting torn up in here because you're just too stupid to hang. ;-)


    FWIW, I have a Core i5 2400 in my media server right now. Without any copious amounts of research, I easily determined it supported the VM functionality I wanted.

  6. #36
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    217

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Tgui View Post
    You're a fool. Read the fucking page I linked you. Socket 1155 which is *gasp* a desktop part!

    Core i5 2400, another resource.
    http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16819115074

    Core i5 2500, with VT-x and VT-d
    http://ark.intel.com/products/52209/...ache-3_30-GHz)

    Its obvious you're getting torn up in here because you're just too stupid to hang. ;-)


    FWIW, I have a Core i5 2400 in my media server right now. Without any copious amounts of research, I easily determined it supported the VM functionality I wanted.
    EDIT: Oh, and I got my Core i5 2400 a month ago from Microcenter for $149, not just barely under $200. Its still priced at that as well.

  7. #37

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Tgui View Post
    And get the k model, lose VT-d. The normal virtualization stuff is now mainstream enough for Intel to not remove it from random CPUs it seems, but for what is VT-d useful/needed?

  8. #38
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Linuxland
    Posts
    4,723

    Default

    Wikipedia:
    An input/output memory management unit (IOMMU) enables guest virtual machines to directly use peripheral devices, such as Ethernet, accelerated graphics cards, and hard-drive controllers, through DMA and interrupt remapping. This is sometimes called PCI passthrough.

  9. #39
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    217

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by AnonymousCoward View Post
    And get the k model, lose VT-d. The normal virtualization stuff is now mainstream enough for Intel to not remove it from random CPUs it seems, but for what is VT-d useful/needed?
    I really don't remember. In some cases I think there might have been performance hits using it. I can't site a source off the top off my head though. We aren't here to learn though, we're here to be pedantic and condescending. Stick to the guidelines.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •