Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Intel to bring back Hyperthreading with Nehalem core

Last response: in CPUs
Share
February 14, 2007 1:35:37 AM

http://www.tgdaily.com/2007/02/13/amd_intel/

apparently a 20 - 40% performance boost as well, over Core 2 I'd assume.

brings up some worries with AMD to be honest. AMD seems to take quite some time for architecture releases, where intel is now pumping them out. AMD releases Barcelona, which assuringly will be faster than core 2, but intel will immediately follow it up with 45nm, THEN nehalem.

wonder if AMD will release follow up info to Barcelona?

discuss.
February 14, 2007 2:20:36 AM

no need to discuss because this is old news. we discussed the hell out of it 2 weeks ago.

try searching the forums next time.
February 14, 2007 5:20:17 AM

Quote:
no need to discuss because this is old news. we discussed the hell out of it 2 weeks ago.

try searching the forums next time.


really? thought this was new. solly.
Related resources
February 14, 2007 6:20:03 AM

Quote:
AMD releases Barcelona, which assuringly will be faster than core 2


Yes, when AMD recently demoed Barcelona running against a C2D it was obvious that AMD has a real weiner on its hands! :lol: 
February 14, 2007 6:56:23 AM

Quote:
AMD releases Barcelona, which assuringly will be faster than core 2


Yes, when AMD recently demoed Barcelona running against a C2D it was obvious that AMD has a real weiner on its hands! :lol: It smokes C2D in Task Manager. :D 
February 14, 2007 7:11:41 AM

AMD will do what AMD does best.It will keep striving to provide us gamers with a decent core that runs awesome for most apps.I admit that INTEL has made significant progress in the cpu area,but AMD will still come out with something better.Remember that AMD put out the 64 bit cpu way back in 2003-2004.It took INTEL that long to catch up and surpass AMD.I'd have to say that we are in good hands with AMD, and we should be looking to the future for what AMD will come out with.I think we'll all be surprised.

Dahak

AMD X2-4400+@2.6 S-939
EVGA NF4 SLI MB
2X EVGA 7800GT IN SLI
2X 512MB CRUCIAL BALLISTIX DDR500
WD300GIG HD
EXTREME 19IN.MONITOR 1280X1024
THERMALTAKE TOUGHPOWER 850WATT PSU
COOLERMASTER MINI R120
February 14, 2007 7:25:49 AM

Quote:
I'd have to say that we are in good hands with AMD, and we should be looking to the future for what AMD will come out with.I think we'll all be surprised.


Dude, according to the US Life Expectancy Chart, I've only got 28 more years on this mortal coil. Will that be long enough? :D 

Quote:
It smokes C2D in Task Manager. :D 


Yeah, and it runs this 40% faster!



:lol: 
February 14, 2007 7:38:03 AM

I hope they don't bring back hyperthreading, I'd rather pay more for more cores and no hyperthreading. Hyperthreading sucks IMHO.
February 14, 2007 8:03:03 AM

how does hyperthreading suck it can give 20% increase in real world encoding apps.
February 14, 2007 8:22:40 AM

Dude you got a lot of years left.With the way technology is progressing,I figure that by 2020,we'll be taking our desktop pc with us wherever we go.Why???Because they will be no bigger than a walkman from the 90's.MP3 players will be the size of a late model hearing aid.The modern HD will no longer be manufactured as the solid state technology our scientists are working on,will be common and moderately cheap.Most people look at the here and now.But if you look at all the leaps and bounds we have taken just in the last 10 years,and you can see for yourself just where we are likely to end up in another 10-15 years.But to say what I wanted to in the biginning,I see AMD and INTEL both makings huge advances in the world.I also believe that we will have a third major competitor in the cpu market by then.

Dahak

AMD X2-4400+@2.6 S-939
EVGA NF4 SLI MB
2X EVGA 7800GT IN SLI
2X 512MB CRUCIAL BALLISTIX DDR500
WD300GIG HD
EXTREME 19IN.MONITOR 1280X1024
THERMALTAKE TOUGHPOWER 850WATT PSU
COOLERMASTER MINI R120
February 14, 2007 8:37:26 AM

Ummm... it only gives a performance boost if you have multiple threads or processes, it only performs better in very special circumstances, especially if its on an already multicore processor, you would get better performance if you added more cores. In some cases hyperthreading can hurt performance.

http://news.zdnet.co.uk/hardware/0,1000000091,39237341,00.htm

One of the main reasons i dislike hyperthreading is the security risks involved. Cryptographic keys can be recovered by using special techniques on processors with hyperthreading enabled.

http://www.daemonology.net/hyperthreading-considered-harmful/
February 14, 2007 10:37:38 AM

Quote:
I also believe that we will have a third major competitor in the cpu market by then.


That's a certainty. CRA Semiconductors. New, up and coming company that is going to make big news in the CPU field in the next few years. They have already announced that their first processor will be a 22nm, SpecialK, golden gate, 32 core monster that will achieve 1.7 TFlops while in power-saving mode at 5.5W. They have just released information that they have tested it against a QX6700 and achieved a benchmark 150,000% faster across the board on actual 32 bit popular apps. They haven't publicly demoed the CPU but they have promised that they will soon.

Hmm... you don't believe CRA, but you believe AMD? :wink: :lol: 
February 14, 2007 10:38:14 AM

Quote:
Remember that AMD put out the 64 bit cpu way back in 2003-2004.It took INTEL that long to catch up


I don't think this statement is quite fair, Intel released its 64 bit processor back in 2001 (and it was 2 years late), its strategy at that time was to migrate users to a new architecture. (The second time Intel tried this in their history and the second time it failed).

At the time I think they believed Itanium would be like the Pentium Pro and win over the market so that when they released (whatever Itanium desktop product would have be called) they would capture the desktop market. There pig headness meant they did not release a 64bit version of x86 architecture rather than an inability to do so.

The core 2 processor in many ways is a direct result of these mistakes, Intel only woke up to their P4 processors being appauling when their own mobile processors @ 1/2 the clock speed started to perform nearly as well in key benchmarks. (Forget you competitors this was an alternate project team in Intel that was appearently a laughing stock) The Pentium M was always a good processor, I guess the laughing stock had the last laugh.

What is the Core 2 Duo, as I understand it a description could be a Multi-Core Pentium M with some of the learnings from P4 & Itanium mixed in for good measure.

Never underestimate Intel and never underestimate AMD, these are companies that are pushing the envelope 10% of what they could if they had to, most of the time economics just doesn't justify them doing so.

One last thing because I can't resist. Itanium was not as stupid an idea as it sounds, I've did some SQL work on a multi-processor Itanium server and it was frightning, it could do the sort of things machines just can't do.
February 14, 2007 10:58:09 AM

Quote:
AMD will do what AMD does best.It will keep striving to provide us gamers with a decent core that runs awesome for most apps.


How is this different from what Intel does? 8O
February 14, 2007 11:27:27 AM

Quote:
http://www.tgdaily.com/2007/02/13/amd_intel/

apparently a 20 - 40% performance boost as well, over Core 2 I'd assume.

brings up some worries with AMD to be honest. AMD seems to take quite some time for architecture releases, where intel is now pumping them out. AMD releases Barcelona, which assuringly will be faster than core 2, but intel will immediately follow it up with 45nm, THEN nehalem.

wonder if AMD will release follow up info to Barcelona?

discuss.

I'd cut a zero from these numbers; 2-4% is more reasonable for Core2 arch and more than good, this is bad news, it means intel will not have something radically new in it's architecture and is rather trying to squeeze the last drops from it. It's only strong point remains frequency ramping.
February 14, 2007 11:55:45 AM

Quote:
http://www.tgdaily.com/2007/02/13/amd_intel/

apparently a 20 - 40% performance boost as well, over Core 2 I'd assume.

brings up some worries with AMD to be honest. AMD seems to take quite some time for architecture releases, where intel is now pumping them out. AMD releases Barcelona, which assuringly will be faster than core 2, but intel will immediately follow it up with 45nm, THEN nehalem.

wonder if AMD will release follow up info to Barcelona?

discuss.

I'd cut a zero from these numbers; 2-4% is more reasonable for Core2 arch and more than good, this is bad news, it means intel will not have something radically new in it's architecture and is rather trying to squeeze the last drops from it. It's only strong point remains frequency ramping.

The problem with Hyperthreading in the pentium4 was that the p4 pipeline could only retire two instructions per clock cycle. So even though Hyperthreading could, under some conditions, issues as many as 6 instructions per clock, it didn't matter as you always ran into the 2 instructions per clock retirement limit.

The idea was to keep the pipeline full all the time, but with the 2 instruction retitement limit, it didn't matter.

c2d is 4 issue wide stem to stern, so keeping the pipeline full actually make sense as it can retire 4 versus 2.

In most apps hyperhtreading was worth -2 to +5% in a P4 - but in some server applications it was worth +20% or more.
February 14, 2007 12:11:26 PM

the problem is that there is NO PLACE for HT in an efficient architecture like K8 or Core2; they are very efficient and it doesn't matter how many instructions Core2 can carry, it's just that HT gets not enough cache misses and pipeline stalls in it. The P4 got 30% because it was highly inefficient and the fact is that Core 2 took not 30 but a good 80% over that.
Even conceptually, there's no reason to run 2 threads on a core that is used at about 90% of it's efficiency because you can ideally squeeze only the remaining 10% out of it (but then will also have to subtract from this a 4-5% of synchronization, ending up with only 5% gain. :roll:
The p4 was different; usage was, say 60%, with HT you could get another 20% and that was fine because you got to use 80% rather than 60% of the fullpotential.
February 14, 2007 1:47:15 PM

Quote:
AMD will do what AMD does best.It will keep striving to provide us gamers with a decent core that runs awesome for most apps.I admit that INTEL has made significant progress in the cpu area,but AMD will still come out with something better.Remember that AMD put out the 64 bit cpu way back in 2003-2004.It took INTEL that long to catch up and surpass AMD.I'd have to say that we are in good hands with AMD, and we should be looking to the future for what AMD will come out with.I think we'll all be surprised.

Dahak

AMD X2-4400+@2.6 S-939
EVGA NF4 SLI MB
2X EVGA 7800GT IN SLI
2X 512MB CRUCIAL BALLISTIX DDR500
WD300GIG HD
EXTREME 19IN.MONITOR 1280X1024
THERMALTAKE TOUGHPOWER 850WATT PSU
COOLERMASTER MINI R120



Intel had Itanium IA64..a flop but it was 64 bit nonetheless....
February 14, 2007 2:57:29 PM

Quote:
Dude, according to the US Life Expectancy Chart, I've only got 28 more years on this mortal coil. Will that be long enough? :D 


lol :lol: 

Colombia — Life Expectancy: 66.71 male, 74.55 female.

damn :p  , I have 45.71 ...the only thing I regret is that I am gonna end up seeing paris hilton sex tape when shes 60-70 8O

and why do women live more then us men?..I guess true evil lives for ever :twisted:
February 14, 2007 3:00:12 PM

Quote:
Dude, according to the US Life Expectancy Chart, I've only got 28 more years on this mortal coil. Will that be long enough? :D 


lol :lol: 

I told 1Tanker a few hours ago that he had horseshoes up his a$$. And now he's even getting credited for my lines! Life is NOT fair!!!! :cry: 
February 14, 2007 3:22:10 PM

Quote:
Dude, according to the US Life Expectancy Chart, I've only got 28 more years on this mortal coil. Will that be long enough? :D 


Youngster! I can remember when a '55 T-Bird was a brand new car. Wish I was old enough and rich enough then that I could have bought a couple of them. One to drive and one to stick in a garage for safekeeping. Could sell it now and buy myself an island to retire on.
February 14, 2007 6:01:14 PM

Quote:
Dude, according to the US Life Expectancy Chart, I've only got 28 more years on this mortal coil. Will that be long enough? :D 


Youngster! I can remember when a '55 T-Bird was a brand new car. Wish I was old enough and rich enough then that I could have bought a couple of them. One to drive and one to stick in a garage for safekeeping. Could sell it now and buy myself an island to retire on.If you're that old, and can remenber anything, you're doing well. :D  j/k
February 14, 2007 6:12:40 PM

Quote:
Sailer wrote:
CaptRobertApril wrote:
Dude, according to the US Life Expectancy Chart, I've only got 28 more years on this mortal coil. Will that be long enough?



Youngster! I can remember when a '55 T-Bird was a brand new car. Wish I was old enough and rich enough then that I could have bought a couple of them. One to drive and one to stick in a garage for safekeeping. Could sell it now and buy myself an island to retire on.

If you're that old, and can remenber anything, you're doing well. j/k


hes around around what? 60? Ill bet he can kick your ass more ways then we youngsters even imagine :lol:  (no insult intended)

and damn , I envy you...you were at the 60´s ..sex,drugs,love and more sex...and then jimmy hendrix..and then sex :cry:  it makes cry for being born on 1986 8O
February 14, 2007 9:51:14 PM

Quote:
Sailer wrote:
CaptRobertApril wrote:
Dude, according to the US Life Expectancy Chart, I've only got 28 more years on this mortal coil. Will that be long enough?



Youngster! I can remember when a '55 T-Bird was a brand new car. Wish I was old enough and rich enough then that I could have bought a couple of them. One to drive and one to stick in a garage for safekeeping. Could sell it now and buy myself an island to retire on.

If you're that old, and can remenber anything, you're doing well. j/k


hes around around what? 60? Ill bet he can kick your ass more ways then we youngsters even imagine :lol:  (no insult intended)

and damn , I envy you...you were at the 60´s ..sex,drugs,love and more sex...and then jimmy hendrix..and then sex :cry:  it makes cry for being born on 1986 8O

Not quite 60 yet, but have been around awhile. As for the 60's, they were fun in ways and hard in others. Got involved in a little problem called Vietnaum. And yes, the Air Force taught me more ways to cause grave bodily harm then I like to think about.

Nice thing about the sex back then. Even the worst things around could get cured by a shot from the doctor. And there was Woodstock. Never quite forget that. They were fun years, and I still drive my Cobra.
February 14, 2007 10:06:30 PM

Quote:
the problem is that there is NO PLACE for HT in an efficient architecture like K8 or Core2; they are very efficient and it doesn't matter how many instructions Core2 can carry, it's just that HT gets not enough cache misses and pipeline stalls in it. The P4 got 30% because it was highly inefficient and the fact is that Core 2 took not 30 but a good 80% over that.
Even conceptually, there's no reason to run 2 threads on a core that is used at about 90% of it's efficiency because you can ideally squeeze only the remaining 10% out of it (but then will also have to subtract from this a 4-5% of synchronization, ending up with only 5% gain. :roll:
The p4 was different; usage was, say 60%, with HT you could get another 20% and that was fine because you got to use 80% rather than 60% of the fullpotential.


You know very little about hyperthreading...do some research. Hyperthreading is much more suited for an architecture such as Core.

This is beside the point anyhow because we know nothing about the Nehalem architecture, it could be something completely different from Core.

Also, Nehalem will NOT have hyperthreading. It will have the 2nd generation of hyperthreading which may or may not be anything like the original.
February 14, 2007 10:20:19 PM

Quote:
You know very little about hyperthreading...do some research. Hyperthreading is much more suited for for an architecture such as Core.

8O
I'll bring these up once again; hoped so much I'd not need them any more:


This is a P4 HT simplified diagram; shows why HT works so well on it.


And this shows why HT WON'T work well on a Core2 arch; simply NO PLACE.

Quote:
This is beside the point anyhow because we know nothing about the Nehalem architecture, it could be something completely different from Core.
Also, Nehalem will NOT have hyperthreading. It will have the 2nd generation of hyperthreading which may or may not be anything like the original.

Still remains HT; or informally P4 viagra. Do you think intel FORGOT to add HT instructions when they were mixing the Conroe mud?!!! Or, do you think AMD was so stupid that they didn't give it a try ?!!!
You also have to understand that the efficiency of HT is inversely proportional to the efficiency of the core on which it is implemented; this counts much more that the way in which it gets implemented and bla, bla, bla. I can bet my PC they won't pull more than 8% out of it.
February 14, 2007 10:40:06 PM

Conroe is also a much wider, much more powerful architecture.

It may not have too many benefits in the desktop market where the number of CPU intensive threads used at any given time is small, but I'd expect it to be very useful in servers, where IBM, Sun and other Intel processors already have SMT or similar technologies.
February 14, 2007 10:50:18 PM

Well, the fact prove that:
1- intel dumped HT together with the P4, just because it gave no considerable benefits.
2- No one has seen HT on a different arch than netburst; none of the newer K8, Core2 or K10 has implemented it after the P4.
3- On The 20-stage, somehow more efficient Northwood, HT only managed to squeeze 20% compared to the ~30% it got from the stupid Netburst (to which it owns the fame of 'performance booster')
4- (My speculation); When Nehalem will be released, it will probably be the last Core2, so with this HT, intel is trying to squeeze the last drops of perormance from it before jumping to a new design.
February 14, 2007 10:59:14 PM

Quote:
Well, the fact prove that:
1- intel dumped HT together with the P4, just because it gave no considerable benefits.

I think it had to to do with time, Intel needed Conroe as soon as possible.

Quote:

2- No one has seen HT on a different arch than netburst; none of the newer K8, Core2 or K10 has implemented it after the P4.

Not yet on x86, but IBM has implemented it in Power5, both the Xbox360 and Cell processors, Sun is using it in Niagara, and Intel is using a variant in the Montecito Itanium 2s.
February 14, 2007 11:08:16 PM

Quote:
I think it had to to do with time, Intel needed Conroe as soon as possible.

Nothing to do with time; they had it up and running on the P4 and all they had to do was little more transferring it's instructions like they did with the rest. If this was true, we're lucky they had time to put SSE, SSE2 and SSE3 because they could just pack it with MMX :D 
I am not saying that HT brings no benefits at all but they will hardly go beyond 5% on a Core2, no way to get more.
February 14, 2007 11:13:07 PM


P4: wery good with HT


Core2: ask him if he could handle another thread :lol: 
February 14, 2007 11:45:08 PM

Quote:

That's a certainty. CRA Semiconductors. New, up and coming company that is going to make big news in the CPU field in the next few years. They have already announced that their first processor will be a 22nm, SpecialK, golden gate, 32 core monster that will achieve 1.7 TFlops while in power-saving mode at 5.5W. They have just released information that they have tested it against a QX6700 and achieved a benchmark 150,000% faster across the board on actual 32 bit popular apps. They haven't publicly demoed the CPU but they have promised that they will soon.

Hmm... you don't believe CRA, but you believe AMD? :wink: :lol: 


?!? surely you jest! no way...! you're kidding, right? omg. wow.
a b à CPUs
February 15, 2007 12:25:38 AM

Quote:
Ummm... it only gives a performance boost if you have multiple threads or processes, it only performs better in very special circumstances, especially if its on an already multicore processor, you would get better performance if you added more cores. In some cases hyperthreading can hurt performance.

http://news.zdnet.co.uk/hardware/0,1000000091,39237341,00.htm

One of the main reasons i dislike hyperthreading is the security risks involved. Cryptographic keys can be recovered by using special techniques on processors with hyperthreading enabled.

http://www.daemonology.net/hyperthreading-considered-harmful/


Sir, have you ever had a HT processor? :roll:
February 15, 2007 2:42:17 AM

Quote:

On The 20-stage, somehow more efficient Northwood, HT only managed to squeeze 20% compared to the ~30% it got from the stupid Netburst (to which it owns the fame of 'performance booster')
You mean Prescott? All P4's are Netburst architecture. :wink:
February 15, 2007 3:08:42 AM

Quote:


Sir, have you ever had a HT processor? :roll:



Umm... ok you asked... I currently have two boxes with single core HT processors, one dual core Intel box, 5 single core Intel boxes and 3 single core AMD boxes. Were you trying to make a point?

If you disagree with me that's fine, I would just prefer hearing your reasons for disagreeing with me instead of some sarcastic remark about how you think I don't own a HT processor. :roll: I respect people who have a different opinion than me and present a good argument. I have no respect for sarcastic b******* like yourself. :wink:
February 15, 2007 4:20:36 AM

Quote:
I'll bring these up once again; hoped so much I'd not need them any more:

Quoting myself; hoped so much I'd need not have to.

Quote:
You know very little about hyperthreading...do some research. Hyperthreading is much more suited for for an architecture such as Core.

What you are saying is only half truths. Much like when Intel said wonderful things about Prescott; it looks important on diagrams.

Partly off topic: Two reasons why I believe AMD didnot/isnot using smt:

1: They were too arrogant to use it in the past because Intel was using it and now it is too late.
2: They don't want to pay now for the technology and have other things to worry about. They could get it from IBM but they aren't flowing with cash as of right now.
February 15, 2007 4:26:16 AM

By the way, I'm a sarcastic person; So nobody take what I say personally.
February 15, 2007 4:41:56 AM

True...but those problems can be fixed. Arrogance and not having money are harder to fix :wink:
February 15, 2007 5:33:42 AM

Quote:
Ummm... it only gives a performance boost if you have multiple threads or processes, it only performs better in very special circumstances, especially if its on an already multicore processor, you would get better performance if you added more cores. In some cases hyperthreading can hurt performance.
It depends on the Apps your running as to weather you will get a performance increase... on my system I get between a 10% and 50% performance increase with HT and multi-threaded apps. What do you mean by "very special circumstances"... most of the apps I run that are multi-threaded are optimized for SMP systems, I wouldn't call that "very special circumstances".
February 15, 2007 6:33:44 AM

name 1. HT was one of intels last breaths to keep up with K8. HT was joke for most apps it actualy hurt it. Core duo in my mind with the efficient archetechure HT might help 5% . But i think it is just marketing to get people like you to buy one
February 15, 2007 6:43:31 AM

Quote:
name 1. HT was one of intels last breaths to keep up with K8. HT was joke for most apps it actualy hurt it. Core duo in my mind with the efficient archetechure HT might help 5% . But i think it is just marketing to get people like you to buy one

HT came out long before the K8. It rarely affected single-threaded performance, and almost always produced a 15%-25% increase in throughput when running two CPU intensive apps or threads. With the rise of dual-cores on the desktop, it's no longer so useful but in servers, with well-threaded applications and tasks that heavily utilize memory and hard drives, HT will probably be big gain.

Here's a thread of HT increasing throughput:

http://forums.anandtech.com/messageview.aspx?catid=28&t...

Core 2 Duo is efficient, in terms of work done per cycle compared to other processors, but how efficient is it in terms of using its considerable amount of resources available to it?
February 15, 2007 6:45:20 AM

Quote:
Ummm... it only gives a performance boost if you have multiple threads or processes, it only performs better in very special circumstances, especially if its on an already multicore processor, you would get better performance if you added more cores. In some cases hyperthreading can hurt performance.
It depends on the Apps your running as to weather you will get a performance increase... on my system I get between a 10% and 50% performance increase with HT and multi-threaded apps. What do you mean by "very special circumstances"... most of the apps I run that are multi-threaded are optimized for SMP systems, I wouldn't call that "very special circumstances".

Good point, perhaps i should have said certian circumstances, although i was really referring to a case where you already have multiple cores (i.e. core2). Perhpas my view of hyperthreading has been colored by the poor performance of two prescott boxes i own.
February 15, 2007 11:54:33 AM

So what is the performance gain of HT on a G5?!
At the end, I think you agree that HT on a Core2 will hardly bring more than 5%. I'm not saying it will bring nothing, abd if they arrange an implementation that won't harm performance on a singlethreaded app (like HT did on a P4) even 4-5% will be a nice improvement. The problem is that people write about HT like a 'feature' while it is more or less a patch, and many of them even dream of 30%+ on a core2 :roll:
February 15, 2007 3:58:04 PM

Quote:
Hmm... you don't believe CRA, but you believe AMD? :wink: :lol: 


?!? surely you jest! no way...! you're kidding, right? omg. wow.

No, serious! As a matter of fact we have openings for a select group of investors. Just send a large bundle of unmarked $100 bills to CRA Semiconductors... :lol: 
February 16, 2007 7:23:55 PM

Quote:

No, serious! As a matter of fact we have openings for a select group of investors. Just send a large bundle of unmarked $100 bills to CRA Semiconductors... :lol: 


...dammit. i love how the internet effectively disables all of my sarcasm sensors.

:lol: 
February 16, 2007 7:26:55 PM

Quote:

No, serious! As a matter of fact we have openings for a select group of investors. Just send a large bundle of unmarked $100 bills to CRA Semiconductors... :lol: 


...dammit. i love how the internet effectively disables all of my sarcasm sensors.

:lol: 

Just call Lt. Cmdr. Data. He'll realign the EPS conduits to the deflector dish and get your sensors back up to Starfleet spec in no time. :lol: 
February 16, 2007 7:34:15 PM

Quote:

Just call Lt. Cmdr. Data. He'll realign the EPS conduits to the deflector dish and get your sensors back up to Starfleet spec in no time. :lol: 


AH! double-pwned! i think that your ownage-mometer is operating with Hyper Threading, for sure. JEEZE! heh. :lol: 
February 16, 2007 7:39:07 PM

Quote:

Just call Lt. Cmdr. Data. He'll realign the EPS conduits to the deflector dish and get your sensors back up to Starfleet spec in no time. :lol: 


AH! double-pwned! i think that your ownage-mometer is operating with Hyper Threading, for sure. JEEZE! heh. :lol: 

It's a CRA Semiconductor 22nm, SpecialK, golden gate, 32 core ownage-mometer! :wink:
February 16, 2007 7:56:57 PM

Quote:

It's a CRA Semiconductor 22nm, SpecialK, golden gate, 32 core ownage-mometer! :wink:


:evil:  :evil:  :evil:  CRA= CaptRobertApril! OMG i was so stupid. damn you got me so so so good. ugh.

:trophy: :trophy: :trophy:
February 16, 2007 8:01:41 PM

Quote:
you got me so so so good.


That's what all the chicks say. :lol: 
!