Information

Dear forum members,
We are delighted to inform you that our forums are back online. Every single topic and post are now on their places and everything works just as before, only better. Welcome back!



Discussion

Discussion on Article:
Prescott: The Last of the Mohicans? (Pentium 4: from Willamette to Prescott). Part II

Started by: mino | Date 05/31/05 06:44:59 AM
Comments: 17 | Last Comment:  11/29/13 06:39:27 AM

[1-3]

1. 
About counters, have you bothered to check System Programming Guide Appendix A, there is around 40 pages on events and counters. Seems that you have just invented wheel again.
0 0 [Posted by:  | Date: 05/31/05 11:52:15 AM]
Reply

2. 
Thanks for doing he research about the previously un-publicised design features/faults of the Intel Pentium-4 based designs.

This has to be one of the worst written articles I have ever tried to read. It should have been achievable with 25% of the words after adding a few diagrams and animations. You may have done the research, have the understanding in your head and written a lot in the article but it was mostly repeated double talk repeated (deliberate repetition and bad grammar). They say a picture is worth a thousand words. You kept choosing to write the thousand words instead of a graphical method (table, diagram, cartoon strip, animation).

Sometimes you have to leave it for a day or two and have a few other people read it before publication. I work for a medical research unit. Medical articles we submit to journals wouldn’t even be sent to the external reviews if they were written like this. We have had over 80 refereed articles published in recognised journals alone over the past 15 years (plus more in many other types of publication and presentation of research).

Sorry about being so negative but it was just so painful. All the article achieves is a lousy attempt at boosting advert viewing. Yes, I could understand what you were talking about, but I felt there should be a better way to explain it. I myself am not perfect. I work with other staff who do the writing and I look after the IT side (databases, website, programming, desktop support, servers etc.).
0 0 [Posted by:  | Date: 06/01/05 07:16:16 AM]
Reply

3. 
Woh, that's a big article! I kinda tuned out half way through though...

Some points:
- pictures: we need some pictures!
- there's just too much text!
- *where's the proof*? If this stuff is undocumented, then the majority of it has just got to be guessed at, right? Not trying to undermine an article which took a year to make, but I mean, come on! One mistake in the analysis of the architecture could easily lead you in the wrong direction. Then to 'compensate' for going in the wrong direction you've gotta think up more an more extravagant ways of explaining certain behaviours...

Does anyone else think this?
0 0 [Posted by:  | Date: 06/05/05 11:19:08 AM]
Reply

[1-3]

Back to the Article

Add your Comment