BabaGanuche

Because it just works. What is wrong with it other than it looks old? And how would a new one fix that?
 
And the beta one is everything I hate about modern UI design.

There is no such thing as a metric 6-32 screw, it is just a 6-32 screw.
 
However if you just want the metric dimensions of the screw they are 3.5052 mm diameter with a pitch of 0.7938 mm
 
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unified_Thread_Standard

Because it just works. What is wrong with it other than it looks old? And how would a new one fix that?
 
And the beta one is everything I hate about modern UI design.

Because it just works. What is wrong with it other than it looks old? And how would a new one fix that?
 
And the beta one is everything I hate about modern UI design.

Because it just works. What is wrong with it other than it looks old? And how would a new one fix that?
 
And the beta one is everything I hate about modern UI design.

Because it just works. What is wrong with it other than it looks old? And how would a new one fix that?
 
And the beta one is everything I hate about modern UI design.

Because it just works. What is wrong with it other than it looks old? And how would a new one fix that?
 
And the beta one is everything I hate about modern UI design.

Why are you folks so hung up on ISA wars? lol
 
FWIW: the ISA is almost irrelevant when it comes to power efficiency or whatnot. The ISA only means what mnemonics your compiler should spit so that a CPU can throw those into its decoder, after that step you can do your microarch in whatever way you want.
 
"but muh apple": Apple could've done an x86 CPU as good if they had a license, which they don't, so they went for the 2nd ISA that has the best compiler support, is mature enough and that they can easily get a license to build whatever they want.
 
To the ones talking about servers, current ARM CPUs are not really that more efficient than x86 offerings. Ampere is already a couple generations behind, and AWS' graviton is not that impressive, Epyc offers both better performance and better power efficiency, and the end cost is not that higher.
Let's see if things shake up a bit when Ampere finally releases their One CPU with their own uarch instead of using the boring ARM's neoverse. But once again, the difference is within the uarch, not the ISA itself. Anyhow, inertia is really strong in this area, just see how Intel still has the majority of server devices at the same time that AMD is outselling them with those Epycs. ARM won't "replace" anything, it's just going to add to new fleets and live alongside other options.
 
For ARM to have any impact on desktop you'd need a really compelling CPU. Neoverse is not fit for desktop/laptops, and ARM's mobile cores are shit for anything 10W+. Let's see if qcomms new nuvia-based cores are any good in this scenario.
Other point is having proper windows support since most desktops run it, but that's up to MS to give a crap and put an actual effort into improving things.

These have been out for a while and that answer is 13 gen = 14 gen within a 1-2% for most cases.
 
 
 
 

These have been out for a while and that answer is 13 gen = 14 gen within a 1-2% for most cases.
 
 
 
 

These have been out for a while and that answer is 13 gen = 14 gen within a 1-2% for most cases.
 
 
 
 

It is not limited to 120Hz it is limited to DP 1.4 bandwidth, The HBR3 column of this table. This is where the 4k 120 and 8k 30 numbers on the spec sheet come from.
 
Video format Transmission mode / Maximum data rate Short-
hand Resolution Color
depth
(bpc) RBR HBR HBR2 HBR3 UHBR 10 UHBR 13.5 UHBR 20 5.184 Gbit/s 8.64 Gbit/s 17.28 Gbit/s 25.92 Gbit/s 38.68 Gbit/s 52.22 Gbit/s 77.37 Gbit/s Maximum refresh frequency with CVT-RB v2 timing uncompressed (Hz) 1080p 1920 × 1080 8 95 154 288 406 555 688 884 10 77 125 237 337 468 587 770 1440p 2560 × 1440 8 55 90 174 251 354 452 609 10 44 73 141 205 293 378 516 UWQHD 3440 × 1440 8 41 68 133 193 277 358 491 10 33 55 107 157 227 296 412 4K 3840 × 2160 8   41 81 120 174 229 323 10   33 65 97 142 187 267 5K 5120 × 2880 8     47 69 102 136 195 10     37 56 82 110 159 8K 7680 × 4320 8       31 47 63 92 10         37 50 74  
 

That is not how displayport works. It supports a specific bandwidth not a specific refresh rate.  4k @ 120Hz 8bit color is 8 * 3  3840 * 2160 * 120  = 23,887,872,000 bits per second and 1080p @ 360Hz 8 bit color is 8 * 3 * 1920 * 1080 * 360 = 17,915,904,000 bits per second. Since the bandwidth for 4K @ 120 is supported and the bandwidth for 1080p @ 360Hz is less that it, it means it is also supported.

Firefox mobile still does, I just tested it.

Firefox mobile still does, I just tested it.

Total die percentage as well as core area die percentage for these isn't that out of wack and as for power that's insignificant compared to the execution units for example. ARM isn't living in the 80's/90's, neither is x86 for that matter, and all of this ARM vs x86 stuff date back to then and it's hardly all that relevant today. Performance and efficiency isn't won and lost at the ISA aspect of CPUs/SoCs.
 
 
 
https://www.servethehome.com/amd-epyc-bergamo-epyc-9754-cloud-native-sp5/2/ (I highly recommend watching their video and LevelOne on Zen4c/Bergamo)
 
AmpereOne has to get near triple it's performance or something like that while maintaining or slightly increasing power to match Zen4c. Problem is the power increase for it is not going to be only slightly.
 

https://amperecomputing.com/products/processors
 
All these ARM, RISC, x86 comparisons, advantages, disadvantages just don't matter at the end of the day when looking at actual market products available.

Why would I stop thinking something that is true? AMD is way more efficient than Intel for desktop CPU's with stock settings. This is a chart that shows the amount for energy for a CPU to compute a fixed amount of work. You have to go to 8th to get the first Intel CPU and 16th to get the second one.
 
 

 
Source:
Mic drop

Why would I stop thinking something that is true? AMD is way more efficient than Intel for desktop CPU's with stock settings. This is a chart that shows the amount for energy for a CPU to compute a fixed amount of work. You have to go to 8th to get the first Intel CPU and 16th to get the second one.
 
 

 
Source:
Mic drop

The problem with having AI getting copyright is problems like this, https://www.vice.com/en/article/wxepzw/musicians-algorithmically-generate-every-possible-melody-release-them-to-public-domain, where the AI exhaustively copyrights a particular area.

This is quite common in NA, along with interruptible service for air conditioning. The water heating has been a thing since at least the 80's and the AC since at least the early 90's. Both could have been in place longer, I just do not have any personal knowledge of it older than that.

The problem with having AI getting copyright is problems like this, https://www.vice.com/en/article/wxepzw/musicians-algorithmically-generate-every-possible-melody-release-them-to-public-domain, where the AI exhaustively copyrights a particular area.

You decisions in combing the AI tools may be creative enough to qualify you as the artist but that is something that I am not sure about since most of the output was not create by you. Something like how phone number are not copyrightable but the arrangement of can be copyrightable. I would think there is some amount work
 
My concern over all of this as I see AI art as a very cool and beneficial to society tool assuming that is handled properly. It would allow more people to have art for things that would otherwise would not. Your example is a perfect one for why I think it can be a good thing.
 
This is one of my main concerns on how this can turn into something very bad.
 
No, as it would not be original.
 
https://guides.lib.umich.edu/copyrightbasics/copyrightability
 

You decisions in combing the AI tools may be creative enough to qualify you as the artist but that is something that I am not sure about since most of the output was not create by you. Something like how phone number are not copyrightable but the arrangement of can be copyrightable. I would think there is some amount work
 
My concern over all of this as I see AI art as a very cool and beneficial to society tool assuming that is handled properly. It would allow more people to have art for things that would otherwise would not. Your example is a perfect one for why I think it can be a good thing.
 
This is one of my main concerns on how this can turn into something very bad.
 
No, as it would not be original.
 
https://guides.lib.umich.edu/copyrightbasics/copyrightability
 

You decisions in combing the AI tools may be creative enough to qualify you as the artist but that is something that I am not sure about since most of the output was not create by you. Something like how phone number are not copyrightable but the arrangement of can be copyrightable. I would think there is some amount work
 
My concern over all of this as I see AI art as a very cool and beneficial to society tool assuming that is handled properly. It would allow more people to have art for things that would otherwise would not. Your example is a perfect one for why I think it can be a good thing.
 
This is one of my main concerns on how this can turn into something very bad.
 
No, as it would not be original.
 
https://guides.lib.umich.edu/copyrightbasics/copyrightability
 

This has been debunked by Ian Cutress here:
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=3-nAnb_kIko