Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Author Topic: Surface 3 - New direction, higher prices and crappy i3  (Read 50865 times)

Description:

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline fishy_fiz

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Join Date: Jan 2005
  • Posts: 1813
    • Show only replies by fishy_fiz
What a crock. An i7 and i5 trade blows for superiority in gaming. As already stated hyperthreading (the only real difference between the 2) sometimes hurts performance for gaming giving an i5 the edge. Clock for clock there's no real difference.
Near as I can tell this is where I write something under the guise of being innocuous, but really its a pot shot at another persons/peoples choice of Amiga based systems. Unfortunately only I cant see how transparent and petty it makes me look.
 

Offline Iggy

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Join Date: Aug 2009
  • Posts: 5348
    • Show only replies by Iggy
Quote from: SysAdmin;765070
Maybe it was a Windows 8 thing but the two i3 systems  I tried we're slow as f*ck and unresponsive sonetimes.

Lack of cores will do that.
"Not making any hard and fast rules means that the moderators can use their good judgment in moderation, and we think the results speak for themselves." - Amiga.org, terms of service

"You, got to stem the evil tide, and keep it on the the inside" - Rogers Waters

"God was never on your side" - Lemmy

Amiga! "Our appeal has become more selective"
 

Offline fishy_fiz

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Join Date: Jan 2005
  • Posts: 1813
    • Show only replies by fishy_fiz
Nah, its more likely other crappy h/w in a system holding the system back. Ive run Win8 on older dual core systems and Win8 ran nicely. Dont forget that unlike an i5 an i3 has hyperthreading, giving it 4 threads, which is much more useful for an OS than for single tasks (ie. most gaming)
« Last Edit: May 26, 2014, 02:46:13 AM by fishy_fiz »
Near as I can tell this is where I write something under the guise of being innocuous, but really its a pot shot at another persons/peoples choice of Amiga based systems. Unfortunately only I cant see how transparent and petty it makes me look.
 

Offline Duce

  • Off to greener pastures
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Join Date: Jul 2009
  • Posts: 1699
    • Show only replies by Duce
    • http://amigabbs.blogspot.com/
Hey Iggy,

In this machine, which is actually an older gaming PC from a few years ago - an i7 2600K, 32 GB RAM, nVidia 590.  My main gaming machine has a 4930K oc'ed a wee bit, 32 GB RAM, and 2 Titan cards.  Original Titan cards, not the new Titan Black.  Both run SSD's, this machine having a 240 GB OCZ for the boot drive and a standard SATA 1 TB drive for media, and the other more powerful machine has a 1 TB Samsung SSD solely.  Those drives were on sale recently for $460 so I had to snap one up, been real happy with it thus far.

The 4930 runs a bit hot for my tastes and I should have water cooled it from the start, but the Zalman cooler I have on it keeps it within range.
 

Offline Iggy

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Join Date: Aug 2009
  • Posts: 5348
    • Show only replies by Iggy
Quote from: Duce;765079
Hey Iggy,

In this machine, which is actually an older gaming PC from a few years ago - an i7 2600K, 32 GB RAM, nVidia 590.  My main gaming machine has a 4930K oc'ed a wee bit, 32 GB RAM, and 2 Titan cards.  Original Titan cards, not the new Titan Black.  Both run SSD's, this machine having a 240 GB OCZ for the boot drive and a standard SATA 1 TB drive for media, and the other more powerful machine has a 1 TB Samsung SSD solely.  Those drives were on sale recently for $460 so I had to snap one up, been real happy with it thus far.

The 4930 runs a bit hot for my tastes and I should have water cooled it from the start, but the Zalman cooler I have on it keeps it within range.

Nice cpu, but I don't understand why you are not water cooling.
At 130 watts, those do run hot, AND they are expensive.
Better cooling would increase the lifespan of the processor.
And, since you've spent a lot of money, an extra $100 or so seems like a minor outlay.

Also for less threaded tasks, the 4.8 GHz i5 might give you a run for your money at a fraction of the price.

Personally I would have forgone the SSDs and set up 4 disk RAID arrays (I don't trust storage media).
"Not making any hard and fast rules means that the moderators can use their good judgment in moderation, and we think the results speak for themselves." - Amiga.org, terms of service

"You, got to stem the evil tide, and keep it on the the inside" - Rogers Waters

"God was never on your side" - Lemmy

Amiga! "Our appeal has become more selective"
 

Offline Duce

  • Off to greener pastures
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Join Date: Jul 2009
  • Posts: 1699
    • Show only replies by Duce
    • http://amigabbs.blogspot.com/
It stays well within reasonable heat envelopes with the Zalman cooler, and I'm not a big fan of the closed loop water cooling solutions.  I like water cooling, but only when I do it myself, and it just wasn't worth the effort on this machine.  The machine sees a fair bit of transport to LAN parties and such, so keeping it simple worked for me.

SSD's are far faster than even the old WD Raptor RAID 0 arrays I used to use, so I went that way.

As for i5 vs. i7, I also do a fair bit of video and graphics work on the machine as well, so I opted for the i7.  Had it been solely for gaming I liked would have gone 780ti cards vs. the Titan's as well.
 

Offline Iggy

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Join Date: Aug 2009
  • Posts: 5348
    • Show only replies by Iggy
Yeah, Raptor access time is great, but even in a RAID array I'm sure an SSD would exceed their transfer rate.
I have a Raptor in my G5 MorphOS machine and have considered an SSD, but since it would be limited to the SATA1 transfer rate it isn't as attractive.

Its been awhile since I worked with video, but I remember how cpu dependent changes in format or resolution could be.
So I can see your argument for using the most powerful processor you can afford.
"Not making any hard and fast rules means that the moderators can use their good judgment in moderation, and we think the results speak for themselves." - Amiga.org, terms of service

"You, got to stem the evil tide, and keep it on the the inside" - Rogers Waters

"God was never on your side" - Lemmy

Amiga! "Our appeal has become more selective"
 

Offline gertsy

  • Lifetime Member
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Join Date: May 2006
  • Posts: 2318
  • Country: au
  • Thanked: 1 times
    • Show only replies by gertsy
    • http://www.members.optusnet.com.au/~gbakker64/
Moved from Raptors to dual 450MBps SSD RAID 0 on SATA3 for my new rig last year.
ATTO benchmark gives me consistent 800MBps read and close to the same writes. That's raw throughput for medium to large reads/writes. Speed!
Just gotta make sure the OS is backed up monthly, You could trust the Raptors through thick and thin but SSD: Time will tell.
 

Offline Duce

  • Off to greener pastures
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Join Date: Jul 2009
  • Posts: 1699
    • Show only replies by Duce
    • http://amigabbs.blogspot.com/
I feel the same about SSD's, Gertsy, and finally just built myself a FreeNAS box full of WD Red drives for backups.

Once every 24 hours all my systems plop a disk image file of all their drives on that FreeNAS machine, which is running a pretty hefty RAID 5 setup using ZFS.  Works a treat.
 

Offline Iggy

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Join Date: Aug 2009
  • Posts: 5348
    • Show only replies by Iggy
@ Duce

I can't imagine pumping that much info through my home network, but then with the latest routers, why not?

Interesting to see Raptors do that well.

I expected a larger margin on an SATA 3 interface with SSDs.
"Not making any hard and fast rules means that the moderators can use their good judgment in moderation, and we think the results speak for themselves." - Amiga.org, terms of service

"You, got to stem the evil tide, and keep it on the the inside" - Rogers Waters

"God was never on your side" - Lemmy

Amiga! "Our appeal has become more selective"
 

Offline SysAdminTopic starter

  • News posting Auto Agent
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Join Date: Aug 2009
  • Posts: 1393
    • Show only replies by SysAdmin
    • http://www.a-eon.com
The latest verbiage from MS hints that they are in inventory clearance mode for Windows on ARM.

From Panay and the Surface team

"Windows on ARM continues to be an important part of the Windows strategy. The Surface 2 (which runs Windows RT) is a great choice for both play and getting work done."

Don't expect any new Surface tablets from MS running with Windows RT. If you want one maybe get Surface 2 on a fire-sale.
Posts on this account before August 4th, 2012 don\'t belong to me.
 

Offline Duce

  • Off to greener pastures
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Join Date: Jul 2009
  • Posts: 1699
    • Show only replies by Duce
    • http://amigabbs.blogspot.com/
I have no doubts they will kill RT off entirely.  That being said, they simply haven't announced it yet.  They should be ashamed for ever bringing RT out, imo.  Nothing says "customer satisfaction" like buying an RT tablet with a "Windows" sticker on it then realizing it actually doesn't run traditional x86 programs in the least.

This last Surface event was originally sent out as "just something small", hinting about the Surface Mini, which was supposed to be an RT device as well.  Depending on who you believe, MS may have indeed made many of these and at the last minute changed the press release to be solely for the Surface 3.  Some Windows oriented sites claim up 10,000 to 20,000 of the Surface Mini RT tablets were indeed made, but they put them into stillbirth mode from Elop's orders.  I'm sure in 20 years some will be uncovered in a landfill in Alamogordo or somewhere, ET cartridge style.  :roflmao:

http://bgr.com/2014/05/20/microsoft-surface-mini-release/
« Last Edit: May 28, 2014, 01:53:15 AM by Duce »
 

Offline SysAdminTopic starter

  • News posting Auto Agent
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Join Date: Aug 2009
  • Posts: 1393
    • Show only replies by SysAdmin
    • http://www.a-eon.com
@Duce

Why would they announce Surface RT is dead when they still have millions of them sitting in warehouses? Announcing it's death now would cost them another 900 million dollar write off. Best to stay quite about it for a while and sell off inventory. The Surface Mini might have been a small tablet but it would have lost them big dollars in losses if they released it. The Mini Tablet market is overcrowded and brutal to get sales in. MS would save money just putting any Surface Mini's it already made in the landfill.
« Last Edit: May 28, 2014, 02:03:16 AM by SysAdmin »
Posts on this account before August 4th, 2012 don\'t belong to me.
 

Offline Duce

  • Off to greener pastures
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Join Date: Jul 2009
  • Posts: 1699
    • Show only replies by Duce
    • http://amigabbs.blogspot.com/
I understand your point entirely, but I also think if RT is turning out to be such a terrible mistake for them as you or I think it is, they might be better off cutting their losses in order to protect what they still have in regards to a "good name".  I'd honestly just kill the line off entirely, fire sale whatever is left after saying "RT is over" and let it be.  I compare it much to the Apple Newton fiasco, I'd just kill the damned thing off, take the jokes people will inevitably make, and cut my losses.  I'd quit playing the charade and take a bullet on it and just dump the things off at $99 a pop and never mention "RT" again.

RT is a disaster, and I'm convinced were it not related to Windows Phone so tightly and MS still trying to merge RT and WP8, they would have axed it long ago.  It's terrible.  I've heard people make jokes comparing it to Blackberry 10, but it's actually far, far worse.  BB10 is too little too late, where as RT as far as I am concerned is a very ugly wolf in sheeps clothing that I honestly consider that Microsoft has been actively deceptive in the marketing of it.  I *DO* know people that have bought an RT tablet off the shelves of Best Buy, having seen the things priced reasonably, the sales staff and in store documentation boasting about it "being Windows!", then they get the thing home and it runs no real Windows software.  A friend of my mother's did exactly that, looking for a little tablet to take on vacation to email her grandkids and also to play the little games she plays on her Windows PC.  At least she can still email with it, lol.  Otherwise it's a rather expensive doorstop.

RT has been worse for MS than the Zune, the Kin, than pretty much ANYTHING, lol.  People saw a "Windows" tablet in stores, went out and bought them, only to find out they do not run "real Windows" in the least.
RT is far different than the Zune, however.  I owned a Zune.  I loved the hardware - just LOVED it, but MS were too late to the game and I got sucked into the Apple ecosystem where I can find everything I could ever possibly want.  RT is just plain bad, it's not "too little, too late", it's just plain bad.

Try one, I dare you.  

Better yet, go to Best Buy, grab any various Windows Desktop App off the shelf, wander up to the RT tablets, wait for a Salesman to ask you if you need help.  Show him the boxed software, mention you want to run it on "that" tablet.  I'm willing to put 75% odds that he'd sell you the software and the RT tablet without blinking, and all the wishful thinking won't let you run that copy of say Elements on the Surface RT.

Money isn't that important to MS.  They lost billions over the years on the Xbox line, only starting to get above water after the 360 eventually became profitable.

It's been estimated that losses between Windows Phone, Skype and Xbox collectively may cost MS $2.5 in losses a year.  MS can eat those losses easily if their numbers show that the offerings in that sector will eventually become profitable.  WP is gaining traction, but it's still a loss.  Skype, I have no doubt it will become profitable, but I also fear MS will screw it up long before that happens - it's bad enough already.  Xbox division I think will be flogged off to someone else entirely.  Xbox One is bleeding money as well, they underestimated Sony and over estimated Kinect, for one.

I'd give RT the proverbial Viking Funeral it deserves.  I don't think the Surface 3, the full version will fare much better market share wise, but there at least *is* some market for it in Enterprise.

If I were MS, I'd simply give up the ghost and drop the hammer to save face.  Just admit RT was a mistake, flog what is left off for cheap, if they sell, great - if not, oh well.  I'd consider that the "right" thing to do rather than the rather evasive and deceptive marketing they have been doing with RT.
« Last Edit: May 28, 2014, 04:39:57 AM by Duce »
 

Offline SysAdminTopic starter

  • News posting Auto Agent
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Join Date: Aug 2009
  • Posts: 1393
    • Show only replies by SysAdmin
    • http://www.a-eon.com
Posts on this account before August 4th, 2012 don\'t belong to me.
 

Offline gertsy

  • Lifetime Member
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Join Date: May 2006
  • Posts: 2318
  • Country: au
  • Thanked: 1 times
    • Show only replies by gertsy
    • http://www.members.optusnet.com.au/~gbakker64/
Re: Surface 3 - New direction, higher prices aimed at corperate customers and crappy
« Reply #119 from previous page: May 28, 2014, 10:05:44 AM »
Quote from: SysAdmin;765190
http://www.fool.com/investing/general/2014/05/20/microsoft-corporation-launches-thermonuclear-war-o.aspx

Regardless of the noise. RT makes sense in regard to a runtime OS on alternative (to Intel) processors.  Albeit ARM only at this stage.
It's a case of damned if you do or don't for M$.
If all it achieves is get Intel out of its rut and into more competitive thinking about heat and power then that's something. The advances in Intel "i" CPU tech from Surface Pro to Surface Pro 3 are quite marked. It's the threat of market disruption that drives advancements for incumbents.
IMO having an i7(8 core) in a tablet is ludicrous. i5(4 core) is nigh on overkill. An i3(2 core) makes sense.  I am guessing people questioning the speed of an i3, haven't used a recent one or have other problems on their machine.  In general tablet type usage "browsing, consuming content, social, email" on a PC there is little speed difference between processors of the same release. Once you start doing productive multitasking stuff there is a obvious difference.

Sent this on an Android Kindle Fire 2 core. And it is markedly less snappy than my Wife's Surface RT or my daughter's hand-me-down iPad 2 for that matter.

Don't hear much bagging of the Kindle Fire here. ;)

As to the article, they don't even know the difference between PC sales and laptop. How a Surface would compete against a PC I don't know. Nor do they understand the concept of market disruption. Fool is appropriate.

Without prejudice and in good humour; If I were Microsoft I wouldn't be looking the Amiga.org Forum for marketing/product advice. ;)
« Last Edit: May 28, 2014, 10:18:21 AM by gertsy »