DDR4 RAM Demonstrated at ISSCC available in 2013

30mins faster? My XT based Packard Bell booted into it's OS and was "ready to use" in around 5-10seconds. Most current systems don't even complete POST that fast. My 386SX booted into Windows95a in around 60-90seconds. My 486DX4-100 booted into Windows98SE in around 60-90seconds as well.

I guess we should refer to some of your past posts.....you know, the claim that a GTX580 is barely faster than your 8800GTS? Or, lets look at more recent claims....like that prior to the GF8 series we had to upgrade yearly because it was the only way to game....lol. You post more bull**** than anyone else on this forum. Oh, while I'm at it....lets remind everyone of your claim that most thermal paste is conductive....which couldn't be further from the truth.

You're just as bad as the guy on THG that thinks MS should actively support any Windows version that can still be installed on a computer, regardless of it's age.

 

A minute and a half is ages. My Windows 7 boots up from POST (after the POST) to the desktop fully loaded in under 30 seconds. My Windows XP with my P4 could only DREAM of that. Sure it got to the desktop in a decent amount of time, but still took ages loading even the smallest amount of programs.

I never said the 580 was "barely" faster than my card, if I remember I did say that the GTS420 or something like that was though. Although I was only basing that off texture fillrate which they were close to the same with my card something like 2GT/s more.

I guess I should rephrase my other statement, most AFTERMARKET thermal paste is conductive. AS5, which is the most popular is conductive. As is IC Diamond and OCz Freeze. All 3 of which are very popular pastes.

 

420 heh. iirc you compared a 470 to you card. Lmao

 

How ironic considering you're prob responsible for 90% of it.

Looool - So says the guy still using a 6 year old GPU because it "still plays the latest games". Nice contradiction there...would you like a bigger shovel? That way you could dig yourself a hole even faster than you are already....

 

When did I do that? The only time I compared my card to a modern one was when someone stated that my 8800 was about equal to a GTS420. Which according to the texture fillrate, its faster. I didnt really look up any benchmarks. But I never compared my 8800 to a 470.

 

MOST "aftermarket" thermal pastes are not conductive.

IC Diamond, is non-conductive....as per it's manufacturer:

Source: IC Diamond Thermal Compound

As for OCZ Freeze....and obviously not very popular as it's been discontinued...

Source: OCZ Freeze Extreme Thermal Conductivity Compound

In fact, I'll even correct a statement I previously made and post accurate information directly from the manufacturer of Arctic Silver 5...

Source: Arctic Silver® 5

So, even though it's not electrically conductive, it IS in fact electrically capacitive...

 

And I also had to upgrade my CPU/RAM/Mobo so it could keep up. So I have a new platform, with an old GPU. So no, not even my AMD X2 was "built to last".

Your theory that any technology was ever "built to last" is flawed and proven false.

 

post 128
http://forums.guru3d.com/showthread.php?t=357532&highlight=Cambria+8800gts+320&page=6

 

I claimed it appeared to be closer to the performance of. Not that it was. As I said already, I was basing that off of texture fillrate.

Its pretty funny that theres actually people in this world that still think an Athlon XP is a fast processor and that the FX series was even any good. Thats rich.

 

You also claimed that the performance difference between your 8800GTS and the GTX470 was "little"....

Let's see how your card handles Tesselation.....I need a good laugh....

 

What the hell does your platform have to do with the price of fish in Texas?? Your GPU is 6 years old, that's all that matters.

You have negated your own argument and supported mine because you are still using old tech...I'm sure you're just arguing for the sake of it.

Btw I was still using an 8800GTX up until 4-5 mths ago....

 

When you enter the world of DX9 lasting for about 8 years, then we can have an argument about why my GPU is fine but my CPU was not.

Funny enough, I too would love to see my card handle tessellation!

 

8 channel DDR4 - Yum Yum for Integrated CPU Graphics

 

Too bad the bandwidth would be wasted on integrated graphics....

 

You seriously have to be trolling now. Too far in to back out, is that it?

Nowhere ever did I say the XP was still a fast processor, I said it booted faster than my 955 that's all, so quit misrepresenting what I said and stick to the facts.

 

Then why did you even feel like bringing up an Athlon XP if you did not think it was still a fast processor? There was no point.

The facts are, is slow as hell and really had no place in this thread to begin with.

 

You forget that most games dont need crazy hardware anymore to run.
Well their games that require like crysis for example but who still play that anyway.

 

Me. From time to time. I like to enjoy the tropical landscape every now and then and play with the A.I.

 

Who gives a flying **** how fast it is?

You keep harping on about the speed not me, it was you who first commented about how long it took to boot up.
The only thing I said was that I had one....it was a tongue-in-check reply to DeltaTux about how long hardware lasts. Do you take everything so literally?

 

Amazing how illiterate you appear to be.

Your first post stated that at some point in time in your fairy world there existed "built to last" hardware.

Me, and some other people, stated that hardware has never been "built to last" and that technology has always been moving forward.

You then replied that "I dont know about that, I have some AMD Athlon XP in the other room still humming along" as if you were bragging that the Athlon XP was "built to last".

Granted I was being sarcastic when I said it probably takes an hour to boot up. I was merely trying to explain that the Athlon XP is considered to be massively slow today.

You then had to go and compare it to your Phenom 2.

Did I miss anything?

I guess my point is, why did you even bring up an Athlon XP if you are not trying to say that its still fast? Because it does NOT support your argument that some hardware is built to last. As the Athlon XP is not even worth of being used for much more than web browsing today. And it would be rather slow at that.