Buffalox

joined 1 year ago
[–] [email protected] 3 points 3 days ago

Yes this too is really a turnaround compared to "old times". Intel used to be the safe choice, that's definitely not the case anymore.

[–] [email protected] 32 points 4 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (5 children)

Absolutely, if Intel hadn't been sleeping on their laurels for 5 years on desktop performance, and had made 6 and 8 core CPUs themselves before Ryzen arrived. Ryzen would not have been nearly as successful. This was followed by the catastrophic Intel 10nm fab failures, allowing AMD to stay ahead even longer.

So absolutely, AMD has been helped a lot by Intel failing to react in time, and then failing in execution when they did react.
Still I think congratulation is in order, because Ryzen was such a huge improvement on the desktop and server, that they absolutely deserve their success. Threadripper was icing on the cake, and completely trashed Intel in the workstation segment.

And AMD exposed Intel's weakness in face of real competition. Arm and Nvidia had already done that in their respective areas, but AMD did it on Intel's core business.

[–] [email protected] 65 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago) (15 children)

I predicted in 2017 stock price over $100 when that happened.
Took about 3-4 years longer than expected, but still congratulations to AMD, on their successful fight back from the brink of bankruptcy.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 4 days ago

And he is, one review at a time.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 4 days ago (1 children)

Power consumption is not efficiency, PPW is.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 4 days ago (4 children)

From then on the entire point is moot.

No it's not, because the point is that design matters. When Ryzen came out originally, it was far more energy efficient than the Intel Skylake. And Intel had the node advantage.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 4 days ago

I heard that they don't have similar problems in China, because they've made laws against it.
Why can't we do that here in EU?

[–] [email protected] 4 points 4 days ago

No but the M4 Max is claimed to be as fast, and Intel improved their chip, so it's down from 250W for previous gen! And the M4 Max is faster.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 4 days ago (4 children)

The new Intel Arrow Lake is supposed to max out at 150W, but it doesn't. And that's still almost 40% better than previous gen Intel!
So hovering around 80-90W max is pretty modest by today's standards.

[–] [email protected] 16 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago) (6 children)

The laws of physics apply to everyone

That is obviously true, but a ridiculous argument, there are plenty examples of systems performing better and using less power than the competition.
For years Intel chips used twice the power for similar performance compared to AMD Ryzen. And in the Buldozer days it was the same except the other way around.

Arm has designed chips for efficiency for a decade before the first smartphones came out, and they've kept their eye on the ball the entire time since.
It's no wonder Arm is way more energy efficient than X86, and Apple made by far the best Arm CPU when M1 arrived.

The great advantage of Apple is that they are usually a node ahead

Yes that is an advantage, but so it is for the new Intel Arrow Lake compared to current Ryzen, yet Arrow Lake use more power for similar performance. Despite Arrow Lake is designed for efficiency.

It's notable that Intel was unable to match Arm on power efficiency for an entire decade, even when Intel had the better production node. So it's not just a matter of physics, it is also very much a matter of design. And Intel has never been able to match Arm on that. Arm still has the superior design for energy efficiency over X86, and AMD has the superior design over Intel.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 5 days ago

Absolutely, My kitchen scale remains accurate and can use the same battery for years.

[–] [email protected] 61 points 5 days ago (2 children)

I look forward to watching a Gamers Nexus review of this. I hope it's as good as they say. 😀

74
submitted 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) by [email protected] to c/[email protected]
 

My old $200 Motorola G9 Power phone lasted almost 4 years with only very minor scratches. Obviously in that period I have dropped it a few times getting out of the car, where the phone sometimes work itself out of my pant pocket while I drive, and then it slips out when I get out of the car. But no problem on my previous phones, despite the Moto had cheap Panda glass front.

Then I bought my $800 glass back Xiaomi 13T Pro in January, and I loved the phone for the camera and good specs. But alas after only 4 months, and single drop of just 30 cm while sitting on the porch, the glass back immediately cracked! The back now looks like an ugly mess, and the high water resistance is very likely gone too.

For sure the last time I buy a phone with a glass back!!!

I wonder why glass back is so popular, and I curse the media for reviewing the Samsung Galaxy S2 as "feeling a bit cheap", because the back was synthetic, and drop tests showed it was 10 times as durable as the iPhone with its glass back.

Samsung did it right in the beginning, glass backs are a curse.

PS: I don't use condoms for my phones, if they need that for daily use, it's an obvious design flaw!!!

The glass back is supposedly there to give a premium feel to the phone. But because it's fragile, people have to use a cover, but with the cover, the premium feel of a glass back is gone anyways?
How is glass back not a design flaw?

EDIT FOR CLARIFICATION:

I am not clumsy, that's why I believe the phone should be able to last without cover. This was the first time the phone slid out of my packet, and I've NEVER dropped it out of my hands. One 30 cm slip and it's broken. Where for instance my Moto had maybe 4-6 in all over the years, and remained unscathed, apart from some tiny scratches.
The sliding out of pocket does occur maybe a couple of times per year, but it's a low drop, and the phone should absolutely be able to handle that tiny drop, as it's an item for everyday use.
I've also never had problems with scratches on my screen on any phone, which is the reason people use screen protectors I guess, which I don't either, because they are ugly, for instance they create a tiny ring around the camera, and they feel awful IMO, my phone came with it, and it took exactly 10 seconds for me to decide to remove it, because I could feel the edge of the screen protector when using the phone.
But please stop with the dropping my phone regularly comments! Just because I dropped my Moto a few times (slid out of pocket) over almost 4 years! Always from low height, which it should be able to handle a few times.

 

https://www.youtube.com/@Thunderf00t

I considered hard weather this really belongs in Technology, but came to the conclusion that exposing a scammer that is considered a tech genius, does belong here. Because debunking a technology company is as important as showing it, when it's considered valid.

That said, I believe most people here are already aware that Musk is not to be trusted blindly. But just how bad it really is, may be news to some.

9
submitted 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) by [email protected] to c/[email protected]
 

Hi I had an App previously, that was just called Write for simple note taking, where you could take a picture, and make simple edits, like using a simulated marker to highlight.
I used it for the very simple task, of taking a picture of our shopping list, and then striking things I've purchased, which IMO can be very helpful when you have big shoppinglists, which we tend to have.😋
In principle the standard photo edit on my phone can do it, but it's not very good at it, because it's clumsy to resize and navigate the list.
Obviously I prefer an app that is free and without advertising.
Maybe others will find this helpful too?

19
submitted 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) by [email protected] to c/[email protected]
 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UdI1tsnlRoI

  • Screen HDR10 Amoled has an insane 2600 nits!
  • The screen is FLAT (Thank you Xiaome) 👍
  • Cameras are amazing (Video slowmotion at 720p 960fps) 😋
  • IP68 dust/water resistant
  • 120 Watt Charger
  • Mediatek Dimensity 9200+ (Claimed to beat Snapdragon 8 Gen 2)
  • 4 generations up to Android 17 Android upgrades and 5 year security support

Obviously It has all the expected sensors and features.

The corners that were cut to get the price down are pretty few IMO:

  • Gorilla Glass 5 instead of Victus.
  • Plastic instead of Alu edge.
  • No Wireless charging

Here (Denmark) the Xiaome 13T Pro is cheaper than One Plus 11, and it beats it in every aspect. It's almost (but not quite) as good as the Samsung S23 Ultra. To me this seems by far the best option in the price range.

The non pro is $100 cheaper, and you get a slightly less powerful SOC, 67 Watt charger instead of 120, less RAM/Storage, although there are ranges for both.

Edit PS 09. Oct. 2023

Just ordered the pro version with 12 GB Ram and 512 MB storage for € 669,- including tax or USD 565,- excluding tax.

I was waiting for our Solar panels to go online, and that was finally finished today.

I originally planned to buy the One Plus 11, but the curved screen and opposing power/volume buttons turned me away from that.

I'm extremely excited as my current phone is a very cheap older budget phone (Moto G9 power). It has served me surprisingly well, considering it was sub $200 including tax.

view more: next ›