[deadalvs]

with maxwell 1.2

soon. maybe this week ...

* * *

deadalvs

[w i l l]

Looks like a Mac Pro for me after Christmas then. If I get paid.

[deadalvs]

Looks like a Mac Pro for me after Christmas then. If I get paid.

it seems really to be the way to go.

but i wait for january 6th or 7th... maybe we'll get a surprise... we never know.

anyway. if there's nothing new, i would buy a mac pro too, i think...

* * *

deadalvs

[w i l l]

A surprise from where..... Dell?

[deadalvs]

A surprise from where..... Dell?

sorry... no: apple.

there's apple expo in january or something like that.

people say they will announce the octo mac pro.. but i doubt they will release the 2.66 directly. maybe the 2.33 one. marketing ... ! fuck marketing !

* * *

deadalvs

[MetinSeven_com]

i read somewhare that Xp64 start to be different at 4Gb Minimum to accelerate process...
So with a quad core u will have only 2 gig per Core. It good for sure, but not big... What do you think about it ?
If we make one we will allow 16 Gig to have a very large scene sclae possibility.

I usually have no very complicated scenes in terms of amount of objects and polygins. 8 GB must be enough for me, as I can already work very well with my current 2 GB RAM.

[Duncan]

Heres a good article on quadcores.
Really interesting stuff about Vista Ulitmate Edition.
Heres a couple of quotes
http://www.tomshardware.com/2006/11/30/ ... uad_cores/

As soon as Microsoft Vista arrives, things will change a bit. Windows XP is unable to tell physical processors apart, and it will distribute the processing of threads to all CPU cores as they are available. Whether the cores are located on one, two or multiple CPUs is irrelevant here, which can cause inter-processor thread-switching. This should be avoided, as it might entail the relocation of thread data as well - isn't that a nice new bottleneck!

Windows Vista Ultimate Edition will be able to tell processors or nodes apart from simple processing cores. This allows the operating system to assign threads in a more resource-efficient manner: one large task can be executed exclusively on CPU A, while another huge workload runs autonomously on CPU B. Inter-processor task switching is eliminated due to the enhanced hardware awareness of Vista Ultimate, and performance will scale much better with increased core count per processor.

[MetinSeven_com]

Cool, thanks for the tip!

[tanguy]

yeah that is really interesting !
We was to the point that we ask ourself if we change OS Xp64 for linux sys... But too much complex fot the corolar softwares to use / psp player Mov and Mp3 etc.....
Vista ultimate seem to be a really good major release of there Old Old core system... Hi ha

[MetinSeven_com]

I guess you're right: to maintain software compatibility the antique Windows / MS-DOS core will probably still be present in some way. Or would they emulate the old shit these days?

[Mihai]

And how much does Vista "Ultimate" cost?

[MetinSeven_com]

Good question. I haven't looked into the local prices over here.

[KRZ]

199 euros...in a systembuilder-version (means no documentation nor support).
not too much i think

[Boris Ulzibat]

199 euros...in a systembuilder-version (means no documentation nor support).
not too much i think

I think i is too much. Apple's MacOS X versions cost less in a retail version, and i simply do not believe that Vista will be THAT different from XP.
At least lots of promised "groundbreaking functions" won't be implemented in it.

[-Adrian]

199 euros...in a systembuilder-version (means no documentation nor support).
not too much i think

Very fair price imo (given the full version costs ~550€), i just hope "no support" only means technical assistance from personnel and is not related to the many software patches that microsoft products need.

If you have any insight on that, let me know.

p.s. I hope the 64bit driver situation gets better soon.