Intel today announces (under NDA) octal-core technology by end of 2008.

[shredhead666]

>|<>QBB<

>|<>QBB<

Yes it will. You think that software vendors will not want their customer base to benifit from higher performance, whatever the application.

{some stuff...}

I'd like to think so, but I really haven't noticed that much of a difference in performace w/ my Core duo chip running at the same clock speed as a pentium 4. In the desktops we have at work, the fastest ones are the ones running at 3.4 Ghz. I'd be interested to see how well Vista handles multi-threading applications because either XP doesn't handle it well, or developers are just scared to start doing parallel threading.

 

[shredhead666]

>|<>QBB<

>|<>QBB<

RAID0 - 2 drives. None are single. You can argue that RAID0 doesn't fall into the definition of what RAID is all about, because no redundancy exists. Nevertheless it is a way to extend a HDD in a serial manor.

http://www.lacie.com/products/product.htm?pid=10128

There is, but only to the extent that the hardware is redundant and you can rebuild the array should one physically fail. The data surely isn't redundant.

 

[King Crimson]

>|<>QBB<

>|<>QBB<

There is, but only to the extent that the hardware is redundant and you can rebuild the array should one physically fail. The data surely isn't redundant.

You're contradicitng yourself. RAID0 provides no redundancy, only volume appending.

"RAID 0 is the performance side of the house. RAID 0 or "striping" uses two drives in conjunction with one other for speed. Data is divided when it is written to both drives so that the workload is balanced and thus more efficient. The data is broken up into chunks or stripes when it is alternatingly stored. There is no redundancy of data with RAID 0."

 

[Variable]

>|<>QBB<

>|<>QBB<

You're contradicitng yourself. RAID0 provides no redundancy, only volume appending.

"RAID 0 is the performance side of the house. RAID 0 or "striping" uses two drives in conjunction with one other for speed. Data is divided when it is written to both drives so that the workload is balanced and thus more efficient. The data is broken up into chunks or stripes when it is alternatingly stored. There is no redundancy of data with RAID 0."

+1

I'm typing this on a RAID0 array Yay for RAID0 Though if I had the cash I'd buy another couple drives and make it RAID 0+1 just because I dread if the array ever goes bad...

 

[King Crimson]

>|<>QBB<

>|<>QBB<

+1

I'm typing this on a RAID0 array Yay for RAID0 Though if I had the cash I'd buy another couple drives and make it RAID 0+1 just because I dread if the array ever goes bad...

RAID 0+1/10 is expensive and more suited for database servers that need very high performance - nested RAID stripped mirror set.