3 ms·

2-13% seems very disappointing considering how long the 7000 series has been out. I was hoping we'd see more like 80-200% based on the gains we've seen from App

2-13% seems very disappointing considering how long the 7000 series has been out. I was hoping we'd see more like 80-200% based on the gains we've seen from Apple and Nvidia in this time/

syspec 2y ago
Why not 300% - 30,000% at that point? Since it's just hope
- smcleod 2y ago
  Because that starts to be quite unrealistic.
- n0n0n4t0r 2y ago
  I was always told to be careful with what I'm hoping for:)
homebrewer 2y ago
AMD continues to carry 50 years of software compatibility. Apple broke it completely just a few years ago. It's not a fair comparison.
- smcleod 2y ago
  Most people don't want 50 years of old software to work. They want current software to run fast, with low power consumption.
  - vid 2y ago
    "Most people" could get by with a Chromebook. But "most people" is made up of many groups, if you ignore those groups you have nothing but a race to the bottom.
  - Dalewyn 2y ago
    You will take my Winamp and mIRC from my cold dead hands.
- AshamedCaptain 2y ago
  Note that they don't: https://blog.stuffedcow.net/2015/08/win9x-tlb-invalidation-bug/ https://blog.stuffedcow.net/2015/08/win9x-tlb-invalidation-b...
  - hu3 2y ago
    > There is code in Windows 95 through Me that performs the incorrect sequence of operations mentioned in the AMD manual. That's a small depreciation. Not to mention you'd have a much easier time running Windows 95 in VirtualBox or QEMU you really needed it (good luck). That's completely different than going from i386 to arm architecture.
    - AshamedCaptain 2y ago
      Actually no, since running under VirtualBox is effectively still running the same code in the same processor, it will also crash and burn under VirtualBox. Just pointing they don't care about "50 year program compatibility", never have. At best they care of last 10 years.
      - hu3 2y ago
        Funny, I'm running Windows ME in VirtualBox on my new AMD processor right now. And so are others with WinME/Win95 if you bother to search. And phasing out 0.0001% of the spec is still caring a lot more than replacing 100% of the architecture.
        AshamedCaptain 2y ago
        You are running a _patched_ version of Windows ME. The original Windows ME will just crash on first boot if you try to use it. The fact that _you have to search_ to find the fix to use it proves my point... Why does it matter if it's "0.0000001%" of the spec they broke, if it's exactly the .% a major operating system needs to run? Does it matter if they break "0.1%" or "50%" of the spec if as a consequence your 50 year old software doesn't run any more?

2-13% seems very disappointing considering how long the 7000 series has been out. I was hoping we'd see more like 80-200% based on the gains we've seen from Apple and Nvidia in this time/

syspec 2y ago

Why not 300% - 30,000% at that point? Since it's just hope

smcleod 2y ago
Because that starts to be quite unrealistic.
n0n0n4t0r 2y ago
I was always told to be careful with what I'm hoping for:)

homebrewer 2y ago

AMD continues to carry 50 years of software compatibility. Apple broke it completely just a few years ago. It's not a fair comparison.

smcleod 2y ago
Most people don't want 50 years of old software to work. They want current software to run fast, with low power consumption.
- vid 2y ago
  "Most people" could get by with a Chromebook. But "most people" is made up of many groups, if you ignore those groups you have nothing but a race to the bottom.
- Dalewyn 2y ago
  You will take my Winamp and mIRC from my cold dead hands.
AshamedCaptain 2y ago
Note that they don't: https://blog.stuffedcow.net/2015/08/win9x-tlb-invalidation-bug/ https://blog.stuffedcow.net/2015/08/win9x-tlb-invalidation-b...
- hu3 2y ago
  > There is code in Windows 95 through Me that performs the incorrect sequence of operations mentioned in the AMD manual. That's a small depreciation. Not to mention you'd have a much easier time running Windows 95 in VirtualBox or QEMU you really needed it (good luck). That's completely different than going from i386 to arm architecture.
  - AshamedCaptain 2y ago
    Actually no, since running under VirtualBox is effectively still running the same code in the same processor, it will also crash and burn under VirtualBox. Just pointing they don't care about "50 year program compatibility", never have. At best they care of last 10 years.
    - hu3 2y ago
      Funny, I'm running Windows ME in VirtualBox on my new AMD processor right now. And so are others with WinME/Win95 if you bother to search. And phasing out 0.0001% of the spec is still caring a lot more than replacing 100% of the architecture.
      - AshamedCaptain 2y ago
        You are running a _patched_ version of Windows ME. The original Windows ME will just crash on first boot if you try to use it. The fact that _you have to search_ to find the fix to use it proves my point... Why does it matter if it's "0.0000001%" of the spec they broke, if it's exactly the .% a major operating system needs to run? Does it matter if they break "0.1%" or "50%" of the spec if as a consequence your 50 year old software doesn't run any more?