[QUOTE=Amiga OS;48060397]I didn't know Steam servers ever transferred anything quicker than 3mbit :v:[/QUOTE]
Personally I hit ~6MB/s but that's the cap of my own connection. Friend in Prague regularly hits 25+ MB/s
[QUOTE=Amiga OS;48060397]I didn't know Steam servers ever transferred anything quicker than 3mbit :v:[/QUOTE]
Ever tried changing your region?
[QUOTE=Demache;48060403]The Minneapolis servers do, I've seen it cap around 8 MB/s. I'm not sure about the UK obviously. :v:[/QUOTE]
I've hit 7.2MB/s but that was at like early morning on a Tuesday.
Normally its like 3.5~5.2MB/s for me as long as you don't use the Manchester server, the data centre that one is located in is a god damn joke.
Oh hey, I even have IPv6 connectivity now. Thanks, Comcast!
...
... wow. Send that sentence back in a time machine to me five years ago, and I wouldn't believe you if you told me I said it.
[QUOTE=gman003-main;48060100]Modern processors are too complex for a simple count of how many "cores" they have to be meaningful. Let's look at the smallest part that cannot be subdivided and still be a full processor core, for AMD's and Intel's current desktop microarchitecture.
An Intel Haswell "core" contains:
1 instruction fetch unit (256 bits/clock)
4 instruction decoders (1 complex, 3 simple)
8 execution ports
4 integer ALUs, 2 FPUs, 2 vector units, 4 load/store units, and several miscellaneous processing units
1x 32KiB L1D cache (64B/c, 4c latency), 1x 32KiB L1I cache (64B/c, 4c latency), 1x 1536B uop cache, 1x 256KiB L2 cache (64B/c, 11c latency)
Pipeline length: 19 stages, 14 if uop cached
A Haswell "core" can physically run two threads simultaneously, sharing resources. This is disabled on many processors (most Core i5, Pentium and Celeron processors).
An AMD Bulldozer "module" contains:
1 instruction fetch unit (256 bits/clock)
4 instruction decoders (all identical)
6 execution ports
4 integer ALUs, 2 FPUs, 2 vector units, 4 load/store units
2x 16KiB L1D cache (32B/c?, 4c latency), 2x 64KiB L1I cache (32B/c?, 4c latency), 1x 2MiB L2 cache (32B/c?, 21c latency)
Pipeline length: 20+ stages (AMD has categorically refused to specifically say how much)
A Bulldozer "module" is sold as two physical cores. You can disable the ability to run a second thread on the module in software; this sometimes helps performance in very linear code.
Overall, an Intel core is about the same as an AMD module on raw processing bandwidth. However, there are several other factors. Bulldozer features the same narrow L1D$ as Haswell, but has a slower and less responsive L2$. So whenever it stalls on a read from L2 cache, it wastes about twice as many clock cycles as Haswell. The L3 cache is even worse - 65 cycles latency versus 25 on Intel.
The other inefficiency is on branch mispredict. On very old processors, whenever a core hit a branch instruction (if X then Y else Z), it would stall until the result was computed, then continue from there. Modern (meaning post-1990 or so, can't remember exactly when we got this on desktops) CPUs will take a guess as to which way the branch will go, and keep the pipeline going while it computes the actual result. If it guessed right (which it can usually do about 95% of the time), it just keeps on going. If it guessed wrong, it wipes out every instruction that it was running in the meantime, and starts over. On Haswell, that's between 14 and 19 stages being flushed. On Bulldozer, that's 20-30. The longer pipeline made it somewhat easier for them to hit such high clock speeds, but it had the cost of a higher penalty for mispredicting a branch instruction - and from studies, Bulldozer's branch predictor is actually worse than Intel's. [B]All told, I'd estimate a Bulldozer-based chip needs to be clocked about 30% higher than a Haswell-based one in order to get similar performance.[/B]
The final issue is power efficiency. Intel has a major advantage in fabrication technology, and so their processors need far less power for similar performance, and they don't need to push their power consumption as high to get good clock speeds. AMD, meanwhile, is way behind on fab tech, so they're less efficient at similar clock speeds, and they've been pushing their cores to the absolute limit to try to match Intel on compute performance. Power consumption goes up exponentially with increased clock speeds, so AMD chips suck down far more power than Intel ones (200W vs 90W for some comparable chips). The overall amount of electricity is negligible in the grand scheme of things, at least for a home user, but every watt of power it uses becomes a watt of heat, and that heat has to be removed. More heat means more fans, and more fans means more noise. So it's a simple, inescapable fact that an AMD-based computer will be louder than a comparable Intel-based computer.[/QUOTE]
Its more like a 80%, if you only look at singlecore performance.
[QUOTE=gman003-main;48060632]Oh hey, I even have IPv6 connectivity now. Thanks, Comcast!
...
... wow. Send that sentence back in a time machine to me five years ago, and I wouldn't believe you if you told me I said it.[/QUOTE]
I've had ipv6 connectivity since 2011
[QUOTE=gman003-main;48060632]Oh hey, I even have IPv6 connectivity now. [B]Thanks, Comcast![/B]
...
... wow. Send that sentence back in a time machine to me five years ago, and I wouldn't believe you if you told me I said it.[/QUOTE]
i still don't
Pretty much no Canadian ISP has bothered with IPv6.
Our smaller ISPs have been trying to switch to IPv6 for years because they are acutely running out of IPv4 addresses themselves.
[QUOTE=Cold;48060656]Its more like a 80%, if you only look at singlecore performance.[/QUOTE]
Though as always, this does vary depending on the workload. As I recall, bulldozer was incredibly heavily focused on integer operations.
Lot of UK ISPs also don't support IPv6. However we can still access sites using it because tunnelling.
[QUOTE=~Kiwi~v2;48060864]ipv6 in NZ isn't exactly great either
theres 2 isps that serve it natively
Orcon(my current isp and fuck them im switching away from)
Snap
The only issues they get is connectivity issues but that's down to the router of choice, they both suffer from ipv6 issues to a point where reboots is the only way to even get online/get dhcp auth from the isp's gateway after 6 hours[/QUOTE]
Consider yourself lucky then. Some ISPs implement IPv6 as dual stack lite, meaning you get a public IPv6 subnet and a private IPv4 address, with IPv4 Internet connectivity via carrier-grade NAT, meaning you can't host servers (listen on ports) with it.
[QUOTE=Reagy;48060889]Lot of UK ISPs also don't support IPv6. However we can still access sites using it because tunnelling.[/QUOTE]
Are you talking about some UK specific thing? Because there's a few [url=https://tunnelbroker.net]global, free IPv6<->IPv4 tunnel providers[/url].
[QUOTE=DrTaxi;48060992]Consider yourself lucky then. Some ISPs implement IPv6 as dual stack lite, meaning you get a public IPv6 subnet and a private IPv4 address, with IPv4 Internet connectivity via carrier-grade NAT, meaning you can't host servers (listen on ports) with it.
Are you talking about some UK specific thing? Because there's a few [URL="https://tunnelbroker.net"]global, free IPv6<->IPv4 tunnel providers[/URL].[/QUOTE]
Yeah aware of the free providers, its more a massive gloried proxy server they give us though, we can access IPv6 sites but if you try to query the address directly it wont do anything. And it's certainly not Dual Stack or CG-NAT because it doesn't act like either.
It's seriously just another bandaid solution to not just going straight IPv6.
[QUOTE=~Kiwi~v2;48061005]Some ISPs do CG-NAT.
Like Bigpipe and Flip in NZ however you can pay a one off $45 with bigpipe for a static public ipv4 and it's there for life of the account.[/quote]
Mine will just switch you back to IPv4-only if you ask them. The really weird part is they also run full dual stack in some other areas.
[quote]BTW anyone want to buy me a SSL cert so I can run the webserver at 443 :v:[/quote]
You can just get [url=https://www.startssl.com/]StartSSL[/url] or wait for [url=https://letsencrypt.org/]Let's Encrypt[/url]
[QUOTE=wickedplayer494;48060756]Pretty much no Canadian ISP has bothered with IPv6.[/QUOTE]
With the small ISP I work for, having IPv6 on our network doesn't make sense when pretty much none of our radio hardware supports it. It might be possible to hand out IPv6 over PPPoE, but even then the demand just isn't there. Nobody has ever gotten a phone call that asked for it. And we have much more important stuff to do.
[QUOTE=gman003-main;48060100]An Intel Haswell "core" contains:
...
Pipeline length: 19 stages, 14 if uop cached
An AMD Bulldozer "module" contains:
...
Pipeline length: 20+ stages (AMD has categorically refused to specifically say how much)
[/QUOTE]
~20 stage pipelines? I can't even begin to imagine what they're doing with all those stages.
Here's me thinking instruction pipelining was as simple as fetch/decode/execute/writeback :v:
(well, it is for the architectures I deal with, but those are microcontrollers so it's not at all comparable.. just hammers home how fucking complicated modern CPUs are)
[QUOTE=Falcqn;48061348]~20 stage pipelines? I can't even begin to imagine what they're doing with all those stages.
Here's me thinking instruction pipelining was as simple as fetch/decode/execute/writeback :v:[/QUOTE]
Instruction fetch, instruction length decode, instruction decode, reorder, then several stages for execution depending on what exact instruction it is (with padding to make them all the same, for reliable latency), then some complex retirement stages (writes are usually buffered). A lot of the stages don't necessarily do much except let the signals move along the wires.
Also, you think 20 stages is crazy? A GPU texture mapping unit typically has 600+ stages. Most of which are "do nothing", because they're just there to hide memory latency because you're basically [I]guaranteed[/I] to have at least one cache miss per texel.
Architectures are scary.
laptop life is sad, but kinda cozy
what's the lightest music app/podcast app out there? my processor is a potato
What kind of potato are you running exactly that can't even handle multimedia playback?
Man, China is awesome. I bought a mini 720p IP camera for $20. And you can get decent quality 1080p outdoor cameras for about $82. When my dad and I move, I'll definitely be wiring up a few to watch the cars in the driveway, back of the house, check for packages sitting at the door, ect.
[QUOTE=Sand Castle;48061415]laptop life is sad, but kinda cozy
what's the lightest music app/podcast app out there? my processor is a potato[/QUOTE]
if you're cool with a webapp
[url]http://play.pocketcasts.com[/url]
pocketcasts is literally the best podcasting app for any platform
[QUOTE=Sand Castle;48061415]laptop life is sad, but kinda cozy
what's the lightest music app/podcast app out there? my processor is a potato[/QUOTE]
Foobar is pretty stupid light and Juice for downloading podcast subscriptions. But seriously, what processor are you even running? A Pentium II is overkill if your playing music.
[QUOTE=Demache;48061485]Foobar is pretty stupid light and Juice for downloading podcast subscriptions. But seriously, what processor are you even running? A Pentium II is overkill if your playing music.[/QUOTE]
Not with iTunes.
[QUOTE=DrTaxi;48061524]Not with iTunes.[/QUOTE]
Well I wouldn't consider iTunes for Windows to be a shining example of efficient program design. :v:
[QUOTE=Demache;48061564]Well I wouldn't consider iTunes for Windows to be a shining example of efficient program design. :v:[/QUOTE]
No, but a natural choice if you want podcasts and were considering getting a Mac earlier.
Not that I'd support it :v:
[QUOTE=DrTaxi;48061578]No, but a natural choice if you want podcasts and were considering getting a Mac earlier.
Not that I'd support it :v:[/QUOTE]
I said it a few years ago, and I'll say it again. Its a pretty bad sign when a program runs [i]better[/i] in a virtualized Hackintosh, than natively in Windows.
That being said, iTunes is pretty solid in OSX though.
Jesus fucking Christ. I've been troubleshooting my grandpa's network all night and ATT does their shit in the most convoluted asinine ways possible. The entirety of his internet and 5 cable boxes are running off of a single twisted pair. Yes you heard me right, one twisted pair. BI_D3
this is my processor
[IMG]http://i.imgur.com/yzwDPRL.png[/IMG]
Jesus Christ people have actually purchased those? No offense.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.