Well I still remember when you could get a good AMD CPU for a fraction of the price intel had to offer at that performance level (Duron vs P3, Athlon XP vs P4, A64 vs P4). I think you are remembering through the fog of nostalgia. Back when AMD chips were competitive or better than Intel chips they …

I'm a bit biased as I've had to deal with the crap AMD is currently putting out as server chips. The current opterons have the same crappy architecture as their desktop chips, but without the clock speed advantage. I run workloads that really can use multiple cores and don't use the FPU much (web, …

Why not sell the 8230e and buy a micro-ATX LGA1155 for your 2500K? Outside of some very specific edge cases that would give you the better system and suck a lot less power.

Only the new ones, there are many more that were not new at the time of acquisition. 1984- 65C02 1989 - 80386SX20 1995 - AMD486DX4120 1996 - AMD486DX5133 1997 - P166 MMX 1999 - K6/2 333 2000 - 2 X Celeron 466 2001 - Pentium 3 Mobile 1 GHz 2001 - Duron 1 GHz 2002 - Athlon XP 2400+ 2004 - Athlon 64 …

Yeah, I guess the A10 isn't fully a quad core, but damn... I guess I just expected AMD's top mobile APU to distance itself a little more from one of Intel's slowest processors. Especially with such a high Turbo frequency. There's a few more things at play here than just core marketing BS. 1. The …

Added two new CPUs to the VP9 chart: the AMD A10-8700P mobile APU and Atom X7 Z8700. Both are quad core parts. The A10 runs at 1.8GHz with a max turbo frequency of 3.2GHz; the Atom runs at 1.6GHz with a max turbo speed of 2.4GHz. I thought for sure that the A10 would crush the Atom, but it was …

Only other cards I always kept are 100MBit ISA NICs, though I think I only have a single one and I've somewhat understood that this isn't especially useful for speedier networking, but it won't set your entire network back to 10MBit. Unless you have a really old and crappy 100Mbit hub, pluging in a …

In addition to what everyone else has said about the non-standard case, it does not have a backplate opening. The cutouts for the rear ports are integrated into the case. Unless you found a MB with exactly the same port layout (not happening) you would have to physically cut the case to make it fit. …

I have dealt with literally hundreds of these machines. I was in IT at a large call center and this was a popular model. If it wasn't done already, it needs a complete re-cap. We had near 100% failure rate on the caps on the motherboards. It was to the point that Dell ran out of replacement …

I'm taking the single-core numbers for all processors in question, because we're comparing single and multi-core processors. You cannot (I think this is the seventh time in this thread I've said this now) compare the "overall passmark score" (the "big number" in red) between single-core chips (like …

h time: you CAN NOT take the "overall" passmark score when comparing multi-core to single-core processors). No it doesn't. The Atom they are comparing has a 600MHz clock deficit. That is huge. That was the point I tried to make earlier. It's not a fair test because of the clock speed difference. If …

smeezekitty wrote: And you are not cherry picking? I do agree on the Core2 celeron though. It will shred just about anything discussed here. According to obobskivich's crazy numbers the P4 1.6 will tie the Celeron 220 being discussed 😀

The Tom's review by itself invalidates this statement, with the 2.2GHz P4 outperforming both Atom offerings in a variety of benchmarks, and the Passmark scores support that assertion as well (and for what feels like the millionth time: you CAN NOT take the "overall" passmark score when comparing …

Tom's also did a more comprehensive test with multi-core Atom: http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/atom-d510-pentium-4-nettop,2649-4.html Ignoring the graphics tests because they used different GPUs, when the clock speed is taken into account the Atom 230 1.6 is faster than the P4 2.2 per clock in …

With Passmark, you cannot directly compare overall scores between single and multi-core processors - Passmark heavily favors multi-core hardware (and the developers of Passmark even acknowledge this), and you will never see that "5x the speed" in a real world application as a result. If you look at …

Atom is (markedly) worse per-clock than P4, so performance will be worse than higher-tier P3s (e.g. Tualatin) and AthlonXP in many cases. That may or may not be a bad thing, and keep in mind Atom is fairly power efficient (it uses less power than the 945 chipset that it's commonly paired to). It …

You need to lower the sharing security on the Windows 7 machine. This link explains it better than I could: http://www.tannerwilliamson.com/windows-7-sev … -samba-smb/394/

I'm new here, but I've been dealing with storage issues for 20+ years. The problem is that your RocketRaid 404 is a FakeRAID controller. The RAID is done by the software in the card's BIOS and the driver, not in hardware. Linux and thus Clonezilla will either ignore FakeRAIDs or see them as just a …