Forum Replies Created
one word guys…
yeah any overclocking of these will have to be done via PLL interface using an app like setFSB or whatever.
unless someone wants to have a bash at writing their own custom bios…. 😀
that’s fair enough man, i can understand why you’d be wary.
i’ve seen people managing to get the atom to run at 2 – 2.2 ghz in other systems.
Whats the point of trying to watch a 1920*1080 resolution video on a 1024*600 resolution screen?
I’ve got quite a large collection of 1080p and 720p films and tv episodes and have tried a couple of 720p items on the NC10 and found it to come out of sync so i really don’t think the graphics card is up the task. It is only a 10.2″ screened netbook and isn’t designed for it. I can understand that if you’ve got an existing library of videos that you’d like to watch but you may well have to think again i’m afraid.
the point is that it takes a very goddamn long time to reencode these files so being able to play them on the machine without modification is both time saving and space saving in that you dont have to retain two levels of compression of the video.January 14, 2009 at 5:55 am in reply to: [NC10]Wireless Mouse reciever – installing inside Sammy? #179042
bluetooth works more like a wifi wireless network than anything else except with a much less complicated encryption system.
nice smiley on the whiteboard.
also, arent intel aware that people simply dont want to buy something as ridiculously poweful as a c2d or c2q when they dont need it?
there has jsut been a massive economic shift through most of their marketplace and basically people arent gonna buy fuck cuz they can’t afford to…
theyr really stupid if they are gonna DELIBERATELY AVOID making an awesome product that is heavily affordable and satisfies the budgets of the vast vast vast majority of basic computer users, demand for high quality mobile media and inevitably expands their sales into an untapped lower cost echelon of, albeit smaller, per unit income.
mor income is better than stagnating sales.
if intel dont do this with nvidia, it will be the only mistake they have made so far in the netbook market and almost deffinitely the worst mistake they could make.
consumers know the nvidia name and trust it.
that and we will lose all the lovely benefits that would come of such an alliance.
indeed merry christmas all.
im looking forward to an awesome family dinner.
telewest blueyonder (now virgin media managed).
10meg. you actually get ten meg if the other server will send it.
they speed manage during peak times, so if you dl over 1gb during a certain time period, for that time period they will cut down your speed to 20% of your max line speed.
i use about 450gb down and 150gb up a month and they’ve never said anything about it to me.
no complaints other than the asymmetry, but that’s something that’s institutional to britain so i can’t really beel at them for not giving or even offering it to me.
7 will be a step forward on all platforms but really the issue here is that we have a product that is part of a standardised market and is about to totally deviate away from in in the interests of being there first.
it will be good in itself i guess but seriously, its not gonna do the current model justice, which is pretty dissappointing.
i have checked out three different ones so far and not seen this problem yet…
are the affected ones from a specific batch or factory line or something?
Not to question the impartiality of someone who uses an Intel logo as his moniker, but when and how have you used a Via Nano processor, especially with the Trinity chipset? The old Via processor used in the HP Mini Note 2133 did suck, but the tests i have read comparing the Atom and Nano have consistently given the edge to the Nano. If you have clocked them yourself or have more real world tests please share. Thanks.
i only use the i7 logo as it is a masterpiece of a cpu. i’m an appreciator of all manufacturers but at the end of the day it’s down to which product does the trick in real life use.
im talking about having side by sided the nc10 with an eee 900 of the nano variety.
now i know that yes, one cpu is double the speed of the other and i took that into account at the time, one thing that i forgot to take into account is that the atom has hyper threading, giving it an even bigger advantage clock for clock. basically the conclusion that i came to was that a nano of that speed provides a basically unuseable speed of computing for even basic tasks.
i’m in a unique position also in that i have access to lots of other random computer hardware and found that the nano at 800mhz provided a disasterous experience when copared to equally clocked celeron and amd duron desktops using slower ram and conventional hard drives.
one thing i did notice however, is that when the nano is given something algorithm based to do it is intrestingly fast.
at 800mhz it will convert a wav to mp3 format in only a few seconds longer than an atom will do the same job. it also benchemarks equally to the atom, or close enough for the difference not to matter.
yet if you simply ask it to open control panel or start up office and open a word document you are left there in the dust by the atom. in real life use of a portable deivce i would say not having to wait for word to crank up for ages is much more preferrable than being able to do an encoding task really fast which you may do once every three months on a device that 70% of it’s owners will not use for anything more than hitting up their exchange server and battering through a couple of thousand words a day.
if they were to be matching the atoms clock speed with the via cpu i would be less inclined to see this move as a step backwards for the device but as the haven’t done so and even with a matched clock speed the atom is automatically faster in real world use because of it’s threading capabilities. i recon the move to nano cpus is a disasterous blow to the performance of an otherwise decent machine. i really hope that they change their mind and hold off for a dual core or higher clocked atom with an integrated nvidia chipset gpu.
im also slightly upset at the form factor change, why are they turning something that was an awesome concept (cheapo tiny laptops that are actually decent performers) into average laptop sized, processing powerless computers that may well have an 8 hour battery life but no longer offer any advantage to just going and buying any regular 15.4″ laptops at the same pricepoint.
of course, the proof will be in the pudding so to speak. we will see, if they do use a nano, what its capable of, but i doubt it will be much. there is a reason 9/10 netbook form factor device manufacturers went with the atom as their cpu. i agree with it.
microsoft doesn’t have a clue what its doing anymore.
fumbling around in the dark.
has abouf fifteen elbows and no arse.
ive used the nano’s. they absolutely suck. i’ve used lower clocked celerons thar were better.