Get out of your student bunker and consider these facts:
Well, if I'm a college student, I guess that makes you a high-school student.
Which would match this needlessly angry and self-aggrandizing rant inspired by the fact that you know everything.
You disappoint me.. because I thought you were better. But maybe I'm more daunting than I think. In any case, I thought we were still friends.
But friendships can end, while the beautiful world of computer hardware will always be here.
That is my only solace in trying to, and for the last time, complete this debate.
1./ There are MILLIONS of P4's still in operation around the world today in nearly every single office you walk into. In fact, the majority of businesses have PC over 2 years old, and even their servers still on P4s. It is the investment cycle. Companies DO NOT buy the latest and greatest every year and throw away all last year's machines.
That is very true. I worked in 7 different bases during my time in the Israeli army, as an Administrator, and most of what I saw, fixed and replaced were Pentium 4-based machines. Some of them were older 1.4Ghz rigs and some were Dell 3.0Ghz, which came in slightly shinier dark blue cases. The reason they still used Pentium 4, as far as most of the higher ranking officers told me behind closed doors, was that it can't run anything that a soldier shouldn't be doing. Thus, there was no reason to ever replace them. The people who told me this usually had much better and more expensive rigs. My experience at my father's company, ever since I was little was the same, and every computer-related job I've donated my time too was thus - there is no reason to ever upgrade unless the machine literally dies.
2./ If companies SWAPPED their P4 systems for Atom systems, they would pay for themselves pretty quickly in terms of power savings... BUT no company in their right mind would downgrade their PC's performance wise. Power savings? A few dollars per month. Productivity loses? Hundreds of dollars. No one will "upgrade" from a P4 to an Atom while the Atom is still unable to compete in performance terms with the machines that are to be upgraded.
I don't know where you got this absolutely ridiculous idea.
The upgrade route upwards from Pentium 4 goes no where near Atom.
I'll say it again - Atom is a specialized CPU. It is and will be utilized by niche markets.
If companies wanted to upgrade their Pentium 4 - which they do not - they would get Core 2 Duo. Any Conroe core takes less power than Netburst, and there have been low-power varieties for years now. An E4300 would use far less power than Pentium 4 and run it into the downgrade. And that's even still in the 65nm process. I've seen and helped companies upgrade specific computers to Pentium Dual-Core since a year ago. Now, I'm guessing every high-enough ranking manager has his own low-TDP 45nm-based Dual-Core.
And to be perfectly honest, I don't know many companies that care about saving a few dollars a month on power. They're all used to Netburst.. anything below is usually amazing to them.. or rather it would be, if they cared. In the military, they honestly didn't. Every sector only had to worry about productivity. They could host overclocking contests on the front area of the base and as long as they met demands, no one wold care. Some companies I've seen are the same. In regards of smaller companies that perhaps just began their life? I'd simply love to see them switching from Pentium 4 to Atom 330.
3./ I have 3 Atom 330 systems, one Atom N280, 4 P4 systems, a P3-S system, 2 Q6600 systems, and 1 Xeon 2xE5420 system. I know what I'm talking about, and those benchmarks shown above are REAL WORLD NUMBERS conducted on the same OS, in my office. So STOP denying those numbers
I'll work up.
I have 1 Atom 330 system (because it's my little pet and I luves it), one Atom N270-based ASUS 1000HA netbook, my precious Pentium 3 667Mhz from my early days, 2 P4 systems (the rest I didn't build myself), 2 Conroe E2200 and E4300, 2 Wolfsdale E5300 and E7300, and 1 Q6600.
I listen to my CPU's, I look at them, I understand them. As cheesy as that sounds, it allows me to claim that benchmarks don't mean much to me, as they are not rarely false at depicting real-world performance.
I know for a fact what I say. I can't make a graph about it.. but the same can be said about most great types of knowledge. I can make a video with my HD camcorder, but even that wouldn't do it justice. You just have to see for yourself.
And maybe, just maybe, it has some subjective elements to it. So neither of us are right.
4./ An Atom 330 CANNOT handle 1080p PERIOD. The ION chipset can.
Do you have an Atom 330 without ION? I do. And I can prove that it runs 1080p.
It's the only reason I bought the damn thing, so if it couldn't, you'd think I would have sent it back already, or have been really pissed off.
5./ Read my previous posts again and again until the message finally gets through: there is
plenty of scope for intel to improve the performance of the Atom
before it gets anywhere near cannabilising their higher performance processor sales. The Q6600 is 5-10x the performance of the Atom 330. That means Intel can double the performance of the Atom 330
and it still will not interfere with sales of Core 2 Duo/Quad based processors
You mean brainwash myself with lies? NE-VER! (homage to GiantBomb)
Scope.. which has already been filled by the.. other CPU's Intel sometimes released when they can pause for a second and take their eyes off of their glorious Q6600.
This has been enjoyable. I have nothing to hold against you.
