Welcome Guest! To enable all features please Login or Register.

Notification

Icon
Error

Profile: ibnMuhammad
Name: ibnMuhammad Offline
Joined: Tuesday, November 12, 2013(UTC)
Last Visit: Thursday, October 2, 2014 11:16:14 AM(UTC)
Number of Posts: 3
[0.00% of all post / 0.00 posts per day]
Thanks Given: 0 (View Thanks)
Thanks Received: 0
Thanked Posts: 0
Community Reputation Received:
View All Posts by User
Topic: Lost Opportunity? Windows 10 Has The Same Minimum PC Requirements That Have Existed Since 2006   Go to last post
Posted: Thursday, October 2, 2014 10:34:09 AM(UTC)

I actually believe the specs for Vista/7/8 are already far too high!!

Why in the world would you need more than a Pentium 2 (maybe 3) CPU (i.e. more than 800mhz) and more than 512mb just to run an operating system?

You buy a PC to run productivity apps on top, not to run the OS alone!

The more resources and cpu-cycles required to run an OS means the less resources available for the rest of the apps which actually matter.

Come on Joel, maybe you thought it was April fools today?! :)

Topic: Lost Opportunity? Windows 10 Has The Same Minimum PC Requirements That Have Existed Since 2006   Go to last post
Posted: Thursday, October 2, 2014 10:25:09 AM(UTC)

Wow, what a dumb post.

The OS is a damn operating system who's role is to manage the hardware and resources as efficiently as possible and GET OUT OF THE WAY of the user so that you can run productivity apps on top.

It's job IS NOT to occupy gigs of RAM, so you have no resources left for anything else on top!

There's NO NEED at all for an OS to justify more than 512mb of RAM, because the point is to serve you a desktop so you can go off and do the things that matter.

The stupidity of this post can be summed up by reading some comments here: -

http://tech.slashdot.org/story/14/10/02/1724236/lost-opportunity-windows-10-has-the-same-minimum-pc-requirements-as-vista

Topic: AMD Confirms Kaveri Integrated Graphics Has 512 GPU Cores, Runs Battle Field 4 at APU13   Go to last post
Posted: Tuesday, November 12, 2013 5:53:15 PM(UTC)

This is all well and good... and congratulations to AMD on the performance of the GPU... but if we're honest with ourselves, this is nothing surprising. They are afterall (sadly), a mostly GPU company.

The single most important question that everyone should be asking is, what are they doing in terms of CPU performance, how are they closing the massive gap between them and Intel?!

Let's not forget guys, the CPU is still the single most important piece of hardware of every device, from routers, phones, tablets, servers, laptops, and desktops. Sure, it's great there's a little more emphassis on GPU while browsing the web, and watching videos for the general public, but I can't help but feel Intel has the right balance.

i.e. do your normal daily tasks (not including intense gaming) on an Intel i5 CPU, and watch how the GPU hardly reaches 5-10% utilisation.

Intel's integrated GPU is more than capable for everyday tasks, from photoshops, architects, video's, and even complex graphics from games... but if anyone wants serious gaming, they buy a serious graphics card.

So yet again, we're left asking... what are AMD doing to fix their dreaded single-threaded CPU performance??