Celeron, Duron, or Samuel II

Quote:

---

Originally posted by KR02:
i got a question:
what advanced features (mmx, SSE, 3dNow, ect) will the samuel have, and how much of an affect will this have on benchmarks.

---

At least MMX and 3dnow will be supported AFAIK, don't know about SSE but probably not.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by KR02:
also, if q3a works better on Intel machines because of the fact that the compiler prefers them, shouln't ID release seperate versions for AMD and Intel chips (they could go in the same box)?

---

It's mainly not a compiler issue, it's the hand writed assembler parts that makes it. Carmack probably worked on a P3 and thus he made a lot of SSE optimizations, while the 3dnow stuff wasn't used too much.

I hope that you're right about the Duron. I'd prefer to see it ahead oh the Celeron in more than just performance.

------------------
"I don't think so", said Rene Descart. Just then, he disappeared.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Humus:
It's mainly not a compiler issue, it's the hand writed assembler parts that makes it. Carmack probably worked on a P3 and thus he made a lot of SSE optimizations, while the 3dnow stuff wasn't used too much.

---

I'm pretty sure Carmack uses Intel's compiler, which is quite geared towards SSE optimizations. I don't think there is any assembly coding necessary.

hehe, i dont deal with site content... i work for internet.com and deal with the "Online Communities" (forums).

But i personally am a big PC hardware buff so u'd catch me right there overclocking my computer and rigging my Air conditioner to it or something...

With my post though, im merely saying if VIA makes a processor, dont cut it down till we see how it performs. If anything, any processor would do fairly well coupled with a chipset designed for just that processor.

Just ignore the fact that the processor has anything to do with <cough> Cyrix...

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Arcadian:
I'm pretty sure Carmack uses Intel's compiler, which is quite geared towards SSE optimizations. I don't think there is any assembly coding necessary.

---

For best performance handwritten assembler is preferable, to some extent at least. You're probably right about Carmack, but I would do handwritten assembler, but I'm a nerd https://www.sharkyforums.com/images/.../2005/06/5.gif