Date: Sun, 26 Oct 2003 08:45:22 -0800 From: Peter Wemm <peter@wemm.org> To: Doug Rabson <dfr@nlsystems.com> Cc: cvs-src@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/sys/i386/i386 pmap.c Message-ID: <20031026164522.916482A7EA@canning.wemm.org> In-Reply-To: <1067169164.13776.10.camel@herring.nlsystems.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Doug Rabson wrote: > On Sun, 2003-10-26 at 06:41, Peter Wemm wrote: > > Jeff Roberson wrote: > > > On Sat, 25 Oct 2003, Peter Wemm wrote: > > > > > Wow, pentium4 sucks. Yes, I agree then, we should revert the change. > > I'll do it. > > > > > > Intel looks more disappointing every day. > > > > Well, think of their optimization goals... The pentium4 was designed for > > two things.. 1) to increase MHz, since thats all dumbass customers and > > sales droids understand, and 2) to increase game framerate benchmarks. > > Anything that didn't contribute to that goal and consumed transistors > > started losing. > > The trick is to find some way to make intel interested in your problems > (e.g. change a large site from using intel processors to amd). When the > marketing people start to care about an application, the technical > people start to collect instruction traces to use for optimising the > next generation. Funny you should mention that.......... Cheers, -Peter -- Peter Wemm - peter@wemm.org; peter@FreeBSD.org; peter@yahoo-inc.com "All of this is for nothing if we don't go to the stars" - JMS/B5
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20031026164522.916482A7EA>