Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Hardware and Software => Topic started by: Reschke on January 04, 2003, 09:08:13 PM
-
I am starting to look around at replacing the CPU, motherboard and RAM and power supply. The power supply is a no-brainer for me.
Current setup that is absolutely trouble free after power supply issues.
AMD Athlon T-Bird 1.4GHz (266)
512MB PC2100 DDR
ASUS A7V266
Abit Siluro GF4 Ti4400
Diamond MX300
3Com 905B TX 10/100
TEAC 24x10x40 CDRW
OS = WinXP Home
DX 9
Here is what I am looking at from Intel. I have found a really good deal on this through Pricewatch from a company I have bought alot from in the past.
Intel I am looking at as a possible upgrade.
ASUS P4PE
512MB Samsung PC2700 DDR 333
P4 2.26 (533FSB) retail version
I will have an AMD kit I am thinking of going with but right now I just want some Intel wonderkid input. I have not personally used an Intel based rig in a few years and the last ones I built were when the P2 was on the market and P3's were starting to show up in tiny trickles.
-
i must admit up front to be intel biased :)
now, dollar wise you get more 'performance' with the amd rigs. stability wise, intel is the way to go. in the game your performance with the intel rig will be excellent, depending on your video card strength. I am running a p4 1.8 and it runs very good...that is, after i got rid of the gforce 2 mx card.
later, bockk
-
OK here is my AMD comparison from the same group I get a good bit of hardware from online.
A7N8X
256MB DDR 333
Athlon XP 2600 (2.133GHz 333FSB)
Volcano 8 HSF
Here is my cost after shipping on this setup: $520...OUCH!!!!
On the Intel my cost after shipping is $435! I will end up with 512MB of memory and a faster CPU with a retail setup to boot if I go that route. Plus my alleged buddy is looking like he is wanting to screw me on the AMD setup unless there is something I need to know about the N-Force2 chipset?
-
Why exactly are you upgrading? I certainly hope it's not for AH... An athlon 1.4 is quite sufficient for AH.
When you go beyond your current system, you may need to specify what programs you run that are causing you to upgrade. Then check hardware sites and look at their benchmarks, because at speeds above a generic athlon 1.4, you're going to see application-specific reasons to go for either Intel or AMD.
I have an Athlon 1.4 and wouldn't dream of spending a cent to upgrade it now, because I mostly game with AH and it's far more powerful than AH requires. As I type this, AH H2H host is running minimized, outlook express is running, I have slashdot in another web browser window, I run motherboard monitor, and the distributed.net client is also running. And nobody in my arena complains about warping and I can even fly with all that crap running with framerates between 50 and 100 (although I usually don't unless testing things.)
Again, if an athlon 1.4 isn't sufficient, then the application you use probably runs measurably better on either an Intel or AMD cpu, and you should find out FIRST before buying anything. Check for benchmarks that use that application or type of application before you buy, or you might get disappointed.
-
Well one reason is because I have a guy that wants to buy my current CPU, motherboard and RAM. I don't ask questions because he does it every 1 to 1.5 years. Last fall he bought my Athlon 700 and 512MB SDRAM and an ASUS A7V motherboard. He has been really happy with that and wants this if I decide to sell it. This started when I was working in the computer shop here in town and he bought from me then. Now he calls to see what I have and what I am willing to sell. Secondly I just trying to get some information from people who currently run Intel setups. This way I will at least have an idea of what they see. Also I don't just play AH. I play IL-2, IGI 2, NASCAR Racing 2002 Season and several other games that I am beta testing.
Primarily the reason behind this thread is the guy that wants to buy my setup. If he does then I need a few days to get everything on order in and going before he picks up this stuff and I don't want to sit around waiting on hardware to show up without something to have in the box here.
Don't get me wrong my 1.4GHz Athlon runs nicely in everything I do and want to keep doing. I just think that my next CPU will be Intel based on the price I have right now. I need to do some talking with my buddy to see why he is so high on his AMD CPU setup.
-
Your AMD setup is quite a bit faster than the Intel one you posted. The nForce 2 boards are the fastest boards for AMD processors at the moment and are IMO the best chipset currently available for AMD processors, and the A7N8X is the fastest board of the bunch. (One note, you will want 2 256 MB sticks to take advantage of the dual channel DDR setup offered by the nForce 2 chipset, that gives a decent performance boost.) The 2600+ is also a lot more powerful than a 2.26B P4, I'd say it's equal to a 2.53B P4.
That said, the Asus board you picked for the Intel route is excellent. It uses the 845PE chipset, which will support HT enabled P4s and is a bit faster than the older i845e and g chipsets. Until the Granite Bay chipset is available the i845PE is probably the best option for the P4 as far as Intel chipsets go. I feel you should consider using a 2.4B P4 though, there should be very little cost difference. I'd say the best "bang for the buck" at the moment for Intel CPUs is between the 2.4B and 2.53B.
What video card are you going to be using for you new system? (You aren't going to get a bit of a performance boost if you are stuck with something like a GeForce 2 MX varient. ;) )
Either of your two options (Intel or AMD), would be excellent choices. The AMD setup would be a bit faster if you stuck with a 2.26B P4 though. Which ever setup you choose, IMO you've picked the best 2 motherboards available.
-
Yeah but now we see again the MHZ illusion in effect..
More Mhz is not always faster.. :)
-
reshke, forger the XP 2600 and get the 2400 or cheaper , and L 1 bridge is not cut off , so you can just change multiplicator in bios and get to 2600 , and is it 13 micron ,even with standart heatsinek it heat less like your curent AMD
about ram , 256 is not inaf that sure
-
I am sticking with the items I listed above aside from the CPU, motherboard and RAM in my first post. So I will have a GeForce4 Ti4400 running as my video card.
-
Well after all the recommendations through here and through email I have tried and tried to locate a better deal on the AMD setup with either a 2400 or 2600 CPU and I can not find one.
I still end up around $125-$200 more trying that route versus the Intel route even going with Blooms recommendation of going higher with the Intel CPU between 2.4 and 2.53GHz. I have found one though using an ASUS A7S333 based board.
-
Originally posted by bloom25
Your AMD setup is quite a bit faster than the Intel one you posted. The nForce 2 boards are the fastest boards for AMD processors at the moment and are IMO the best chipset currently available for AMD processors, and the A7N8X is the fastest board of the bunch. (One note, you will want 2 256 MB sticks to take advantage of the dual channel DDR setup offered by the nForce 2 chipset, that gives a decent performance boost.) The 2600+ is also a lot more powerful than a 2.26B P4, I'd say it's equal to a 2.53B P4.
Alright Bloom you said something here that has piqued my interest a bit. You mention that I would want to use 2 sticks of 256MB memory for the 'dual channel DDR' that the nForce2 chipset has. Why is that? I was under the impression that the DDR memory itself would handle something like that and that was one reason for not having more than one stick of memory. So if you can break it down for me in a quick synopsis that would be great.
Thanks.
-
The nForce 1 and nForce 2 boards are capable of running in what is called dual channel mode. This doubles memory bandwidth. (The DDR in DDR SDRAM means Double Data Rate - this is something different. DDR SDRAM transfers data twice per clock cycle, thus has 2x the bandwidth of regular SDRAM running at the same frequency.) Using 2 sticks of memory on an nForce series board enables this feature.
The extra bandwidth improves performance by around 5 - 10% on nForce 2 boards. It really depends on the application what kind of an increase in performance you get.
I don't have the time to type a long post; unfortunately I've got tons of work to get done tonight. Anandtech has lots of good information in and linked to from this article: http://www.anandtech.com/mb/showdoc.html?i=1759
If you go AMD, do not use a A7S series board, the A7N8X is much faster and FAR more stable.
-
Reschke, I just chnaged from an old (very troublesome AMD, think the mainboard was screwed up) to Intel.
Now, the thing with AMD vs Intel is that in the past, the AMD Athlon compared to P3 was up to 30% faster when running at the same Mhz (say 1.5ghz AMD equeled 1.7 or 1.8 ghz P3). This advantage was lowered when the P4 arived but it was still there. Then Intel released their new P4's, basicly they're still called p4 and nothing else. The advantage of speed that AMD had disapired and AFAIK and have understood by reading different reviews from both magazines and toms hardware (and reading lots of benchmark tests, compared prices etc) the Intel P4 (new version) are quite a bit faster then the AMD. There is also no better "bang for buck" anymore as the prices for Intel has been greatly lowered as long as you don't go for the very newest of them (meaning 3 ghz or so).
Another thing, to be able to use the maximum performance of the P4 you must use RDRAM (which is expensive as hell). Chose a P4 with DDR RAM and the CPU won't be used to its full potential.
Intel is quieter and takes less power aswell.
I used to be PRO AMD but am changing over to Intel with the release of their new P4 and the Northwood core together with their greatly reduced prices. The "rule" with less Mhz AMD cpu being equal to higher Mhz Intel CPU doens't apply anymore, it was in the past but is gone now.
I'd go with an Intel if I were you, I just got my self a new computer from Dell (first time in long I haven't built my self).
Looking at the FSB on the Intel components you're thinking about ut uses RDRAM (533 Mhz 1066 RDRAM is expensive, very expensive compared to other RAM but worth it if you're getting a P4)
My System now is:
Intel 845 E chipset
P4 2.4 Ghz.
512 Mb of 533 Mhz RDRAM
ATI Radeon 9700 graphics card with 128mb memory.
60 Gb HD @ 7200 rpm.
Very happy about it, it runs silent, flawless and very fast. I score 13,300 points in 3D Mark (1024x768x32bit color).
-
Thanks bloom25 and Wilbus. All this is good information and is helping the decision making process. Still not sure which way I am going since the guy who is wanting to buy my current mobo and CPU still have not made up his mind.
-
I guess you haven't been looking at the benchmarks lately wilbus..
The latest AMD architecture beats 2.4Ghz P4 while running only at 1Ghz.. lol.
Even the current athlon XP beats P4 Mhz per Mhz clearly, that's why they now have the + ratings which indicate the performance level compared to Intel.
Athlon XP 2600+ (2133 MHz) outperformed Intel P4 2554Mhz.
Intel had to go all the way to 2.8Ghz to match XP2600+@2.13Ghz.
http://www6.tomshardware.com/cpu/20020826/index.html
I'm not going to buy anything Intel because they're implementing Palladium to the hardware.
-
Uhmm,, 1 Ghz AMD beat P4 2.4? People who wrote that were probarly on crack or something.
Go to tomshwardware and check out some benchmarks and read more about the latest P4's.
As for me not looking at benchmarks, did it a couple weeks ago.
At the moment AMD has nothing that can challange the pure speed of the fastest P4's, saing that a 1 Ghz AMD can beat a 2.4 Ghz P4 is like saying a row boat would win over a battleship on a shootout.
-
No Wilbus they weren't on crack, it's the new 64-bit architecture..
Dunno which benchmarks you've been reading Wilbus but Tomshardware says:
" Athlon XP only comes with the model number "2100+". Still, this Athlon XP is impressively close to Intel's P4-flagship."
http://www6.tomshardware.com/cpu/20020506/index.html
"Today, Intel finally releases its first Pentium 4 2.2 GHz that is based on the advanced 'Northwood' core, while AMD presents AthlonXP 2000+, clocked at 1.67 GHz."
"In any case, one thing is visible: in the majority of performance tests, the new Pentium 4/2200 is ahead. After all, the top AMD processor has to make do with 1666 MHz, while its archenemy steps in with 2200 MHz. A closer look at the comprehensive benchmarks reveals that in Office performance as well as Linux Kernel compiling, the Athlon XP still takes the lead, despite its 32% clock speed disadvantage!"
http://www6.tomshardware.com/cpu/20020107/index.html
"In the benchmark results, the Athlon XP 2300+ cannot quite keep pace with the Intel Pentium 4/3000, but the values that we measured are very impressive."
So Athlon XP at 1866Mhz cannot quite keep up with Intel 3000Mhz, but comes close..
Where did that gap go Wilbus?
-
Seems that my memory played tricks on me.. It wasn't 1Ghz vs 2.4 but 1.2Ghz vs 2.2..
Anyway here is the comparison chart:
-
Mrsid, why didn't you say it was their new 64 bit? You made it sound like it was their old 1 ghz Athlon. Sure you said it was their latest but it hasn't been released yet... or has it?
-
wilbus , your truble with AMD was cose of VIA,
have never problem with kt 333 but kt 266 vas realy a plague
and about new AMD in 13 micron give very tough fit to any but realy any even uber INTEL , and if asociated with Nforce 2 and ddr 2700 the n even uber intel with latest rambus not shining just be a same or decimal numeric diference
-
Anyway... would still go with a P4 if I bought one now....
-
The Opteron and Athlon 64 are not available yet. Another XP revision (Barton core) with 512 kB of L2 cache is coming first.
Wilbus, you've got some errors in your post as well. The Athlon XP GREATLY outperforms the P4 at the same clockspeed. The P3 and the Athlon were actually very close in performance at the same clockspeed. The Athlon was a bit faster, but not 30% faster. If a P3 and P4 ran at the same clockspeed, the P3 would outperform the P4. Power consumption is also almost the same between the fastest Athlons and P4s now. I think the Athlons actually consume less power, but I haven't looked for a while now. (Newer Athlons are Throughbreds are built on a .13u process, just like the P4s. They also have fewer transistors. Older Athlons were on .18u. - Palominos.)
It really doesn't matter what you pick Reschke, either Intel or AMD would be a good choice. I've built both recently and both perform very well. It really depends on the application which is faster.
-
from Tomshardware:
"Let's look at the situation from an overall perspective: with the introduction of the 3.06 GHz P4, Intel has distanced itself from the competition at AMD, still unable to supply its top model, the XP 2800+. In practical terms, this means that the XP 2600+ (2133 MHz) is the AMD product competing with the P4 3066 (3.06 GHz). The Athlon 2800+ was only able to match the 3.06 GHz P4 in a few areas: 3D rendering, Cinema 4D and SPECviewperf. The difference is particularly apparent with Sysmark 2002. Advanced users should note that the Athlon XP 2800+ only approaches the performance of the 2.8 GHz P4 when the Dual-DDR333 platform is used."
They're talking about considerably faster than what you were stating MrSid.
The AMD and Intel stuff is comparable in performance and price at the high end (Slight edge on price to Intel at 2600) , with the nod going to AMD for price at 2000 (Rating for AMD speed for Intel) and below.
AKDejaVu
-
you can buy that AMD set up from MWAVE for about the sam e pirce if not cheaper! go for it!
-
Thanks again guys and I did read that article over on anandtech there bloom. Its just the type of light reading I was looking for at work. I printed in out so I could look like I was doing something at work while my boss was in the next office. :D
-
LOL, depending on your job that may or may not earn you "perk points" from your boss. :D
When it comes to CPU pricing DejaVu is right. AMD is quite a bit cheaper than Intel from the 2100+ level down. Above that, Intel and AMD are roughly equal in price. It really depends on your own preferences which CPU brand you choose once you get to the 2.2 GHz level and up. Performance wise, both have their strong points. Gaming performance is nearly equal. Intel's P4 is faster in most video editting applications (optimized for SSE2). AMD leads Intel in most engineering and scientific type applications (x87 FPU performance is better on the Athlon).
-
AkDeja: Wilbus was stating that AMD no longer has the Mhz per Mhz edge it used to.. The comparison you showed proves it wrong.
They're comparing a 2Ghz chip to a 3Ghz chip and, gee, it doesn't quite manage to beat it in performance. If the AMD chip would run at 3Ghz, Intel would be left in the dust.
This is what I was talking about. I know well that the top of the line Intel chip will always be faster and ludicrously expensive. I'm not going to go that route anyway.
-
buy intel and help a fellow flier:cool:
no bias here
-
Originally posted by mrsid2
AkDeja: Wilbus was stating that AMD no longer has the Mhz per Mhz edge it used to.. The comparison you showed proves it wrong.
They're comparing a 2Ghz chip to a 3Ghz chip and, gee, it doesn't quite manage to beat it in performance. If the AMD chip would run at 3Ghz, Intel would be left in the dust.
No, they are saying the 2.13GHz AMD compares to the 2.6GHz Intel, but please do continue to exagerate away. That's what most of your posts seem to be about.This is what I was talking about. I know well that the top of the line Intel chip will always be faster and ludicrously expensive. I'm not going to go that route anyway.
Ya, and you didn't read what was quoted nor did you check pricewatch. The AMD top of the line are priced a little higher than the Intel (Not counting the 3.06 since AMD has NOTHING THAT COMPETES THERE).
Price for performance... the Intel is winning out at the higher end. Its pretty even down to 2.1, where AMD wins on the price vs performance for low end stuff.
AKDejaVu
-
AkDeja you seem persistant in missing the point here..
1000Mhz AMD is (it is) faster than 1000Mhz Intel. Get it? Wilbus tried to make a point that the performance difference was somehow disappeared. It isn't.
And I'm not going to go that way = I'm not going to be a tard and pay triple price for the latest CPU which will be half price in two months be it Intel or AMD. I prefer to buy a CPU in the 'sweet spot' and OC it as far as it goes.
I hope this finally clears it out.
-
MrSid,
You are somewhat confusing the issue. Wilbus did not do a MHz to MHz comparison. You did.
Once again, the AMD 2600+ and Intel 2.6GHz are virtually identical in performance and price. When I read your posts, you seem to be trying to say things that really don't matter. Aside from what I just said here... what does matter?
So an AMD 2600+ is only running at 2.133GHz, it does not take away from the fact that AMD is still calling it a 2600 and it performs the same as its Intel counterpart... for the same price. The key things are performance and price... right? The rest is just propoganda.
AKDejaVu
-
Now, the thing with AMD vs Intel is that in the past, the AMD Athlon compared to P3 was up to 30% faster when running at the same Mhz (say 1.5ghz AMD equeled 1.7 or 1.8 ghz P3). This advantage was lowered when the P4 arived but it was still there. Then Intel released their new P4's, basicly they're still called p4 and nothing else. The advantage of speed that AMD had disapired and AFAIK and have understood by reading different reviews from both magazines and toms hardware (and reading lots of benchmark tests, compared prices etc) the Intel P4 (new version) are quite a bit faster then the AMD.
The way I understand it, this text can only be understood as a direct Mhz to Mhz comparison. Nothing to do with ratings, prices or such.
-
the Intel P4 (new version) are quite a bit faster then the AMD. There is also no better "bang for buck" anymore as the prices for Intel has been greatly lowered as long as you don't go for the very newest of them (meaning 3 ghz or so).
The "New version" is the hyperthreading processors. And... they are much faster.
When he uses the term "bang for the buck"... well... he's talking about that thing you didn't think he was talking about.
Most of it, you just read in what you wanted. Then you added a generous dose of exageration. 2g as fast as 3g. Yah.
BTW.. you would have done better if you would have called him on the power and noise statement. I've yet to hear a processor that made noise that wasn't seriously broke... and the high end P4s use just as much if not more power than the AMDs. But you didn't... so there.
AKDejaVu
-
nothing eternal even Intel not :D
just like Nvidia, got kicked bellybutton be Ati, hope 1 day intel will be also
nothing personal AKdjw i just realy hate monopolist dictature :D
-
AkDeja that might be so if you were in the place to choose what I'm commenting to or not. That's not the case though.
You've clearly made up your position and will stand in it regardless of cost.. So I'm not going to dull my knife rubbing it on stone.
I wish you luck and success with the Intel route, especially when Palladium will bite you where it hurts. :)
-
LOL! ya.. right. When you can't win the "what we got" game.. you go to the "what we were promised" card. Typical AMD ;) LOL!
-
Deja I can honestly say that if I had big money laying around to spend on this "hobby" then I would probably have stuck with Intel since the days of the Pentium 200MMX. However I jumped onto the AMD bandwagon with both feet when the mark reached 300MHz with the K6-2 and I have not looked back. For me its simply about the price of the CPU and it has been for several upgrades now.
The only reasons I am thinking of going Intel is the Hyperthreading I have been reading so much about and the my cost of an Intel setup that is similar to an AMD 2600+ CPU based rig. I still am not sure how it effects playing games but I would think that it does not have an effect at this time frame due to the way software development for games tends to run. So if you have some information on that aside from what I have read on Toms Hardware I would like to hear about it. Thanks!
-
I was not trying to convince you of anything Reschke.. see my advice to you above. Either way your OK.
But whenever someone comes in with the "AMD RULEZ AND INTEL SUCKS!" line... I'll be here to keep them honest. Especially when they start saying a 2ghz AMD is as powerfull as a 3ghz Pentium.
AKDejaVu
-
AkDeja I'm not trying to say anything, I just quoted TomsHardware.. Although I admit that I read the text wrong at first, they were mixing XP2600 and 2800 in the same paragraph.
"The Athlon 2800+ was only able to match the 3.06 GHz P4 in a few areas: 3D rendering, Cinema 4D and SPECviewperf."
I think it's pretty damn good performance Mhz/Mhz if 2800+ could match 3.06 at ANY benchmark. I already admitted that Intel is the speedking at top of the line.
Pricewise I wouldn't mind buying Intel at the moment either. But after reading the R&D hobbies (palladium) I must protest against them. Palladium is the biggest single threat to free computing the world has ever changed. They're planning to embed hardware protection that will block out any unwanted content from your computer regardless of your own wishes.
This whole thing is a pandoras box.. First it may be used for RIAA's purposes, administering music licenses.. But it's so easy to embed all other nasty things with it. MS can force hardware vendors to authorize only MS OS's through palladium.. You can't even install anything else.. The government can choose you shouldn't read certain documents. IN fact they can choose you won't ever even find out they're there if YOUR computer is concerned.. Etc.
I really don't like the way things are progressing there.
-
MrSid,
I think you need to read up on that feature a little more.
And... if it does all the things you say it does... AMD is going to have to release it too.
AKDejaVu
-
Akdeja according to AMD press conference, those features will never be embedded in AMD hardware.
Maybe they were roadkillting, I hope not.
Whatever Intel, MS and RIAA excuse it for, palladium and the future implementions that WILL follow it if it goes through are bad.
They severely jeopardise the freedom of digital information and provide the means for the corporations to control all access to the digital media without the consent of the end user. That is, if he's dumb enough to buy the hardware.
The Pentium unique serial ID was just the first poke to the bee's nest. It all starts there.
Of course unique identifiers have been used in hardware for a long time already, but that's a different story altogether.
-
Dunno about you, but this worries me a lot:
There will be remote censorship: the mechanisms designed to delete pirated music under remote control may be used to delete documents that a court (or a software company) has decided are offensive - this could be anything from pornography to writings that criticise political leaders. Software companies can also make it harder for you to switch to their competitors' products; for example, Word could encrypt all your documents using keys that only Microsoft products have access to; this would mean that you could only read them using Microsoft products, not with any competing word processor.
You might be allowed to lend your copy of some digital music to a friend, but then your own backup copy won't be playable until your friend gives you the main copy back. More likely, you will not be able to lend music at all. These policies will make life inconvenient for some people; for example, regional coding might stop you watching the Polish version of a movie if your PC was bought outside Europe.
Pirate software can be detected and deleted remotely.
But a recent software update for Windows Media Player has caused controversy by insisting that users agree to future anti-piracy measures, which may include measures that delete pirated content found on your computer.
Here's an interesting point: What stops them from remotely detecting any keywords they don't like and deleting stuff from your computer without you even knowing? This thing is REALLY dangerous.
When you boot up your PC, Fritz takes charge. He checks that the boot ROM is as expected, executes it, measures the state of the machine; then checks the first part of the operating system, loads and executes it, checks the state of the machine; and so on. The trust boundary, of hardware and software considered to be known and verified, is steadily expanded. A table is maintained of the hardware (audio card, video card etc) and the software (O/S, drivers, etc); Fritz checks that the hardware components are on the TCPA approved list, that the software components have been signed, and that none of them has a serial number that has been revoked. If there are significant changes to the PC's configuration, the machine must go online to be re-certified. The result is a PC booted into a known state with an approved combination of hardware and software (whose licences have not expired). Control is then handed over to enforcement software in the operating system - this will be Palladium if your operating system is Windows.
http://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/~rja14/tcpa-faq.html
Over my dead diddlying body.
-
MrSid,
You will find that Intel has never released anything that says the above. Some people have taken a small amount of information and ran a long way with it.
AMD has the luxury of saying whatever they want... they always have. They let Intel do something, wait for reaction, then criticize apropriately before doing it themselves. Remember... they are the company that said "FPUs are highly overated... customers just don't need them."
Eventually your processor is going to have a serial number... there really is no way around this. If you stop and think about the direction that PCs will turn you will realize why. With wireless networking and things like wireless IDE and wireless USB, you need that feature.
The greatest worry about the new features Intel is introducing is that software will require it to be there (since it can be disabled) prior to being installed. If that's the case, AMD will NEED it too.
Right now, you're seeing a lot of reaction to a little information.
AKDejaVu
-
BTW, you may want to differentiate betwen TCPA(Intel) and Palladium(Microsoft). Palladium is all software being generated by Microsoft. That's what all of the hype is about. And... once again... its overstated.
Amazing what people will write when they find that they may not be able to steal other people's products for long.
AKDejaVu
-
"You will find that Intel has never released anything that says the above. Some people have taken a small amount of information and ran a long way with it. "
Yeah Intel is just the main driving force in developing that toejam.
Call it what you want, but once the technology gets implemented, you no longer own or administer your own computer.
Hey, if you're so fond of it you can do it even today. It's called being 0wned. Just open your ports and mellow out. :rolleyes:
-
you guys are worried about unique id's on your hardware?
you already are 'uniqely' ID'd by your modems MAC address.
every modem on the web is ID'd by this.
-
Originally posted by mrsid2
"You will find that Intel has never released anything that says the above. Some people have taken a small amount of information and ran a long way with it. "
Yeah Intel is just the main driving force in developing that toejam.
Call it what you want, but once the technology gets implemented, you no longer own or administer your own computer.
Hey, if you're so fond of it you can do it even today. It's called being 0wned. Just open your ports and mellow out. :rolleyes:
Sigh...
Intel is driving it... ya right.
Dude.. you're only going to see what you want in any of this. Intel does not care about software licensing. In case you didn't notice... they are a hardware company.
When things go wireless... there needs to be an exclusive way to id your computer for reasons too numerous to list. You can pretend that isn't the case all you want, but it will just make you look obtuse.
Everything you are bashing is being driven by Microsoft. They are the ones with vested interests in licensing. Bash them all you want.
Oh... and I feel for those that will no longer be able to "back up" copies of 3D-Max and Autocad2000. Its a downright shame.
:rolleyes:
AKDejaVu
-
AkDeja you know as well as I do that Intel is developing the hardware lock side of things. Dunno what's your reason behind the coverup job.
You work for Intel maybe? :)
-
The hardware lock side of things...
Hmmmmm.
Hardware doesn't lock things... software does... unless you know of a way for hardware to know what it should and should not be locking.
Oh.. and you may want to read that whole article... especially:Intel and AMD appear to plan for the second generation of TCPA functionality to be provided in the main processor for free.
Get it?
BTW.. this is being promoted as an IT tool. Something that is completely able to be disabled, unless your IT blocks it. Now, I have worked with IT here at work quite a bit... and not once have they tried to dictate what I could and could not do with my computer at home. At work though...
AKDejaVu
-
have owned AutoCAD since version 9 and IF you own it there's no reason to back it up. I can get free (shipping charge) media to replace if needed.
ok.. so who needs it?.. jk
-
Ak if I understood right, it's made clear in that article that the technology being developed will require an 'approved' OS and 'approved' applications on the computer before it even boots up. That is quite effectively a hardware lock.
AMD first announced they were going the tcpa way, but later on they denied any participation in it.
If what you say is correct and it's only an 'IT' tool that can be disabled, it would be of no use to RIAA or others who seek to regulate the licenses with it.
I'm sure they'll be promoting this as the next coming of Jesus if they can fool people into it that way.. :)
As said, MS mediaplayer 9 already forces you to sign consent to delete software without your knowledge or permission if MS chooses to do so.
That, and a law that criminalises attempts to circumvent built-in copy protection methods pretty much mean you can't turn it off.
-
They can deny participation in its development all they want. If they are going to brake into the buisness sector, they will need it.
And, the hardware is told what to check. That is what makes it a software setup. If you work IT, you could see exactly why this would be desireable.
There is nothing that says it will only let a home user only load certain software. It says itself that the feature can be disabled.
Once again... you are only seeing what you want to see.
AKDjeaVu
-
Originally posted by mrsid2
As said, MS mediaplayer 9 already forces you to sign consent to delete software without your knowledge or permission if MS chooses to do so.
You're talking software again. And I didn't see this stated in the article. I saw that Microsoft makes you agree to future federal regulations regarding the issue, but not that it should be able to arbitrarily delete items.
It was a play on words that seems to have worked. If you have a problem with that, you may want to talk to your congressman. He's the one that's going to have to vote in that type of thing.
AKDejaVu
-
Once again I'm only seeing the possibilities given with this kind of tech. It says this it says that.. Then one day when majority has this tech they say what they want. Orwell couldn't even dream about this stuff and now it's becoming a reality.
AK the MP9 thing wasn't in the article but it's common knowledge. Hardware or software alone can't do squat, but if they're built in a way that they force you to use the combo, then it's effective.
The way I see it is that they'll introduce this to people a bit like creative sneaks in its software.. You can't use the hd functions of their mp3 players without installing their software which is not so nice since it often porks your OS.
Ever heard the saying wolf in lambs clothing? I wouldn't trust a word. Give the devil your little finger and it'll take the hand..
And btw I work IT so I know well what this means. On a professional and marketing side this sounds great.. But as a private person I can't allow any third party to access my data let alone choose what I may or may not hold on my hd.
But naturally the choice is yours.. You can just close your eyes and pretend nothing's happening. Maybe it'll just go away.
-
Well.. at least you're giving up the "Its only Intel... not AMD" sales pitch.
And I think you don't quite have the faith in the voters, customers and taxpayers that you should have.
There was something called DivX that was supposed to be similar to the dastardly "Listen 3 times CD" mentioned in that article. Any idea why it failed?
Any idea why you can purchase telephones for your house?
The tendancy is usually toward less regulation... not more. The only thing to be even remotely "worried" about is copyright infringement. And I doubt that will make it past many watch dog groups. But if it does... there'll be alot of people squeaking that that diddlying microsoft actually wants them to pay for the OS they've been using for free for 7 years.
AKDejaVu
-
Ak there are huge amounts of people that can't even see the dangers invested in this. That is why there is a real danger that bills will be passed which will give out too much power to corporates and/or governments.
There are already monopoly accusations against MS.. There are already complaints from hardware manufacturers because MS presses them to sign contracts that more or less force them to distribute MS OS's with new computers etc. If they have even the slightest chance to limit competition via this (say, stop Linux from booting on the puter for example) they will.
I really hope it would be as easy as you seem to picture it..
But it's for sure that the day I have to give third parties access to my computer so they can regulate the contents, I will quit using it.
-
Umm.. you do realize that Microsoft's anti-trust suits would hinder them here as opposed to helping them... right?
Microsoft can in no way limit a pc to run only their software. They day they do that, they will be broken up.
Microsoft CAN impliment controls that mean you can only run a VALID COPY OF THEIR OS without violating anti-trust laws.
One would be bad, the other would be... well... valid.
But that's not really what this system is about. You'll know when it happens, because more than just a few fringe articles will appear on it. These things are not simply "slid" in.
The "news" posted in the cited article is pure conjecture and hype based. Sorry... but its true.
AKDejaVu
-
IMO if you're doing nothing 'wrong' why worry who's watching?
-
Umm.. that's totally the wrong attitude.
That's also why Intel has done this in conjunction with several privacy groups to prevent such a thing.
AKDejaVu
-
The biggest boogie-man here aren't the corporations in the end.
They may use the system to milk you but that's basically it.
The worst risk in allowing third parties regulate your data is that the government will start to use it for thier purposes. One day they may pass a bill that makes having pornography on your computer illegal. Delete. Just one example..
That would suck wouldnt it? We all love pr0n.
The intelligence agencies may use it to eavesdrop your activities and covertly manipulate or destroy data on your computer if they don't approve what you're doing etc. etc. Saves them the trouble of tapping into anything, they'll just use the built in functions to monitor you.
The system allows 'digital 1984' to happen. It allows Big Brother in a major way. Actually it's THE tool to make it happen.
This is what I worry in the end.
Never before has there been a medium for corporations or governments to access your everyday routines without you knowing or most important without our consent. Never before have they been able to manipulate your files, papers whatever without you knowing (well unless agents actually came to your house, broke in and did it..) or without your consent.
How do they define which MP3's are illegal? What if you make your own music and pack them with mp3? How do you ensure privacy of your home movies if a third party has access to them? They'll have to view them to judge if they're legal or not :eek:
There's no way in hell that the day won't come when the RIAA worker who's in charge of evaluating 'suspicious' files will find your home movie so good he can't help but share it with his closest friend. And only with him/her of course.
If the tool is there, sooner or later someone is going to make use of it. Maybe it will start with tracking terrorists.. Then they find it useful to track down major criminals.. Before you know it the agency has tapped in every computer linked in the states and they actively search anti-government etc. data from your computers. You might be blacklisted for making a joke etc.
Hell, they're already doing it through the net traffic.
I've seen what constant spying and constant loss of freedom of speech does and in my opinnion this progress clearly opens up dark visions.
Or maybe things will keep simple: We'll have one palladium machine which we use to do net transactions, buy music movies, shop hardware etc.. And then we'll have one non-palladium machine which we use for private stuff.
The trouble is that RIAA is lobbying to implement mandatory copy protection systems to ALL hardware. I have no idea how that will work or affect our privacy. I'm just suspicious it won't have a positiove effect.
-
The tool is already there. Its called your internet connection. There still is not a way to get into a disconnected PC.
And... you may want to re-read that article and see what was said about spying. Please... cause you're going in a totally different direction right now.
AKDejaVu
-
This whole concept goes way beyond that article.
You're right about that net conn thing. However it's necessary to connect to the internet so we end up with that two machine configuration again. No big deal just $1k extra expense.
It's not a question about how to go around the problem, it's the whole principle of putting this stuff in the computers in the first place just because some corporation is paying off and lobbying congressmen in order to ensure thier profit.
-
Nobody wants congress involved:
http://biz.yahoo.com/rc/030123/tech_piracy_1.html
MiniD
-
The whole "OS locked to a valid computer" and "locking apps to a registered CPU" thing MAY sound great, if your one of the computer law and order types.
But how many of you have actually worked on computers where this is done???
Basically this is how many high end UNIX workstations already works. And is SUCKS !!
At my job, we have a Silicon Graphics workstation (SGI), an Octane. And I don't give a crap about copying illegal programs or such things. I just want it (ie software that we validly own) to work when they're suppose too. I can't even begin to describe how many times our "licenses" all of a sudden dont' work, and we have to spend hours and hours on the phone trying to get new ones. And of course nobody can explain why all of a sudden they fail.
Oh, and its no suprise that we have to pay thousands of dollars each year for "support" contracts so that they can give me new licenses when the old ones fail.
Its no suprise that individuals and corporations are moving away from extremely overpriced high end workstations, to much simpler and easier to operate linux based PC clusters.
So now they want to do this to PC's as well? em
-
From workstations to linux clusters? Maybe some... but LINUX will always have the curse of minimal support. Most buisnesses don't like that.
I think you'll see a greater move towards wireless in the near future. There are just too many upsides. Of course, there's one major fricking downside (security), but that seems to be what's being adressed.
MiniD
-
You can hire one full-time linux geek to maintain the cluster for the price of the support :)
-
Never before has there been a medium for corporations or governments to access your everyday routines without you knowing or most important without our consent. Never before have they been able to manipulate your files, papers whatever without you knowing (well unless agents actually came to your house, broke in and did it..) or without your consent.
ok Orwell,
just disconnect from the internet (then your data is 'safe')
or keep printed documents (same as always)
never make available to others what you want to keep private.
You KNOW what you're getting with global connections (internet)... the possiblity that someone will have access to your 'stuff'.
-
Originally posted by mrsid2
You can hire one full-time linux geek to maintain the cluster for the price of the support :)
yea... right. Then he quits and you're screwed.
Oh well.. simple solutions for those that think they'll never have problems.
MiniD
-
Wlfgng you dont seem to get the real picture..
This stuff enables them to quietly censor whatever they like from your computer. See no evil hear no evil..