Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Where is Raystonn

Tags:
Last response: in CPUs
Share
May 23, 2002 5:29:01 PM

haven't seen him for quite sometime... definitely a gr8 person.. and a least biased on the forum (this is my opinion, all copyright reserved by me..:) 

More about : raystonn

May 23, 2002 5:54:24 PM

Raystonn is working on a top-secret project for Intel, where he must dress up like a pink bunny and prance around Times Square screaming "I love Intel!" at the top of his lungs. But you didn't hear that from me.

<font color=blue>Hi mom!</font color=blue>
May 23, 2002 6:00:28 PM

HARR-HARR-hAHAHA!!! :lol: 

Incidentally, I'm just reading the book "Inside Intel: Andrew Grove and the Rise of the World's Most Powerful Chip Company." by Tim Jackson. That might sound kinda lame (except to you guys), but it's actually pretty neat. I'm saturated with literature from reading too much of it in my adolescence, and find biographies and commentary/documentary very entertaining. The book covers the company and its leaders more than technology, but it's still interesting to see how it all started (Intel, Zilog, AMD, Western Electric, etc.). Fun reading.

:lol:  <b><font color=blue>gnintsakgnirkskir ksron</font color=blue></b> :lol: 
Related resources
Can't find your answer ? Ask !
May 23, 2002 6:39:11 PM

Does he have to wear the suit with the huge white puff ball tail the size of a basketball or the other Pink Bunny suit?

<b>"Sometimes you can't hear me because I'm talking in parenthesis" - Steven Wright</b> :lol: 
May 23, 2002 7:36:18 PM

That's the part that's top-secret.

<font color=blue>Hi mom!</font color=blue>
May 23, 2002 7:37:54 PM

Why did Raystonn get banned from HardForum?

:wink: <b><i>"A penny saved is a penny earned!"</i></b> :wink:
May 24, 2002 12:46:38 AM

Maybe cause he is a walking intel advertisement whos sole posting motivation is the promotion of intel.


At least hes not a troll though.

:wink: The Cash Left In My Pocket,The BEST Benchmark :wink:
May 24, 2002 1:32:45 AM

It is odd he has not appeared yet. Last I saw a post was about a month ago, ONE ONLY.
Maybe he should return. He did have strong arguments, which I liked it when you two debated, despite the fact you often proved him wrong. Maybe he will return, who knows.

--
I can't beleive Dungeon Siege has a pitchfork weapon called "Hoe"! :lol: 
May 24, 2002 4:20:24 AM

On [H] Forums, all his posts now have a "circumventing banned links" note in the signature. I assume that's why he got banned--though I'm not sure what link he was circumventing.

The only link I know is banned on [H]Forums is any link to tomshardware.com--mainly due to the <A HREF="http://ftp://12.237.135.160/tomkyle_grease.jpg" target="_new">animosity</A> between Tom and Kyle

<pre>We now <b>return</b>(<font color=blue>-1</font color=blue>) to an irregular program scheduler.</pre><p>
May 24, 2002 5:45:09 AM

so your saying rayston has turned into amdmeltdown?

how do you shoot the devil in the back? what happens if you miss? -verbal
May 24, 2002 4:37:38 PM

Quote:
<i>Matisaro says:</i>
Maybe cause he is a walking intel advertisement whos sole posting motivation is the promotion of intel.


Which is why he also posted about things like new memory technology, right?

Quote:
<i>kelledin says:</i>
On [H] Forums, all his posts now have a "circumventing banned links" note in the signature.


Yeup, he posted a link to THG using the IP address, since you can't post a link to the website's URL. Kyle decided that was enough to ban him, even though lots of people had done it before. Methinks he just wanted to get rid of someone who actually spoke up for RDRAM.

<font color=blue>Hi mom!</font color=blue>
May 24, 2002 6:52:15 PM

<b><SARCASM MODE ON></b><font color=red>

Kyle sounds like a truely wonderful person who really deserves to get ahead in life. Maybe we should all get together and write up an excellent article about his humanitarian skills and open mind.

Remind me to visit [H] Forums for a great intellectual conversation some day. I just know that I'll be able to find intelligent and like-minded people there who are open to a good debate on the pros and cons of computer hardware. Why, I don't know why I'm even wasting my time here.

</font color=red><b><SARCASM MODE OFF></b>


Tech support said take a screen shot.
Putting it down with my .22 was the humane thing to do.
May 24, 2002 7:11:39 PM

There are some people there that are actually capable of rational, independant thought, but not many. The ratio is pretty much reversed from here.

<font color=blue>Hi mom!</font color=blue>
May 24, 2002 7:30:07 PM

Quote:
There are some people there that are actually capable of rational, independant thought, but not many. The ratio is pretty much reversed from here.


I agree with you that there are very few minds capable of rational and independent thinking in Tom's Hardware Guide Community.

Raystonn has been one of those few and that is why he was hated so much.

<b> Searching for the true, the beautiful, and the eternal </b>
May 24, 2002 7:33:33 PM

I meant the opposite, there are few people at the HardOCP forums and more here.

<font color=blue>Hi mom!</font color=blue>
May 24, 2002 7:51:30 PM

Quote:

Raystonn has been one of those few and that is why he was hated so much.

Raystonn is hated? Raystonn is admired by a lot of people at [H]ardForums, and Tom's Hardware Community. His only "problem" is that he overly supports RDRAM. I don't know, something smells fishy at [H]ardForums. :eek: 

:wink: <b><i>"A penny saved is a penny earned!"</i></b> :wink:
May 24, 2002 7:57:05 PM

Being hated does not necessarily mean not being admired by anyone.

<b> Searching for the true, the beautiful, and the eternal </b>
May 24, 2002 9:00:19 PM

Because I always hate the people I admire.

<font color=blue>Hi mom!</font color=blue>
May 24, 2002 9:03:42 PM

Quote:
Being hated does not necessarily mean not being admired by anyone.

Being an Intel fan in the middle of THGC does not necessarily mean being hated either, despite what you'd like to believe. Raystonn was generally well liked, though a few people got annoyed with him.

<pre>We now <b>return</b>(<font color=blue>-1</font color=blue>) to an irregular program scheduler.</pre><p>
May 24, 2002 9:07:50 PM

For some weird reason, sometimes his refutations were either too much filled with things that annoyed me, I dunno why. I guess he thinks everything works to his way, while in normal non-debating threads, he is very reasonable and cool. But in debates....annoying for some reason.

--
I can't beleive Dungeon Siege has a pitchfork weapon called "Hoe"! :lol: 
May 24, 2002 9:47:32 PM

I know what you mean, Matisaro can be the same way. But I like both of them.


In all seriousness, I suspect that Raystonn is just busy at work and doesn't have as much time to post.

<font color=blue>Hi mom!</font color=blue>
May 24, 2002 10:05:42 PM

Yeah, for all we know, he may be working on a complier for the Prescott at this very moment. :smile:

:wink: <b><i>"A penny saved is a penny earned!"</i></b> :wink:
May 25, 2002 1:48:14 AM

Actually the way I see Mat on Raystonn, I think more of his attitude being like me, he gets annoyed with Ray's answers, they somewhat not comply well, in an unexplainable way!

I do however also think he is busy working.

--
I can't beleive Dungeon Siege has a pitchfork weapon called "Hoe"! :lol: 
May 25, 2002 3:14:09 AM

Quote:
Which is why he also posted about things like new memory technology, right?


Neww rdram technology as a means for the p4 to further extend its lead over the inferior amd, then yes, he posted memory technology links.

:wink: The Cash Left In My Pocket,The BEST Benchmark :wink:
May 25, 2002 12:35:16 PM

the problem with raystonn is/was not that he was an Intel. it was that just evrything he usally posted was postively Intel oriantated.
I dont like ppl who cant give credit to the other side...


This post is best viewed with common sense enabled<P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by IIB on 05/25/02 03:39 PM.</EM></FONT></P>
May 25, 2002 9:05:43 PM

Atleast he was a nice person and a lot more logical, respectful than most of the remainings ..
May 25, 2002 9:05:56 PM

Atleast he was a nice person and a lot more logical, respectful than most of the remainings ..
wish to see him back soon
May 25, 2002 9:16:57 PM

Quote:

For some weird reason, sometimes his refutations were either too much filled with things that annoyed me, I dunno why. I guess he thinks everything works to his way, while in normal non-debating threads, he is very reasonable and cool. But in debates....annoying for some reason.

NOTE: i don;t want to criticize somebody
but just think over it that may be it was other ppl who were not ready to change their views...
just for an example.. in other thread i showed Matisaro wot Raystonn use to proclaim that at DDR 333 and RDRAM 1066 the latency will switch places in favor of RDRAM.. although it didn;t happened exactly that way but i showed him vr-zone cacheman latency test in which RDRAM 1066 has almost same latency as DDR 333... (as a side note if we use SIS 645DX solution than RDRAM has 17% lowe latency )but Matisaro started saying that RDRAM is dual channel and DDR is single channel.. i mean isn;t it stuped argument.. one should atleast gracefully admit ok i was wrong... DDR has 64 bit data path and RDRAM has 16 bit datapath and it is because to have it in dual and quad channel configuration...
atleast he was a lot more sensible person..

NOTE: no criticizing intended towards any person.. u r free to have ur opinion as do i..
May 26, 2002 12:00:44 AM

Quote:
but Matisaro started saying that RDRAM is dual channel and DDR is single channel.. i mean isn;t it stuped argument.. one should atleast gracefully admit ok i was wrong... DDR has 64 bit data path and RDRAM has 16 bit datapath and it is because to have it in dual and quad channel configuration...
atleast he was a lot more sensible person..

LoL, Raystonns comments on latency were in regards to rdram as a whole, and I think it says alot when not even dual channel pc1066 can overcome single channel ddr333 in latency tests.

I was not "man enough" to admit I was wrong, exactly how was I wrong, what exact claim of mine did your link prove wrong, even if you put the words in my mouth that I told ray he was wrong that pc1066 on a dual system would not have lower latency than ddr333, I was still right(while dual 1066 came close it did not infact beat the 333).


Furthermore you forget the nature of that debate I had with raystonn(which was months ago) His point was that ddr did not lower latency with clockspeed increases(which I utterly proved him wrong on). His flawwed example was comparing pc133 with 2100 showing some 4% lower latency for 2x the clockspeed increase, his issue was that pc2100 runs at the SAME core speed as pc133, the ddr circutry is a small part on the IO area of the die.

And btw, raystonn has NEVER admitted he was wrong on anything(except amd bus being ddr but even then he restated that 3 times and had to be corrected) everytime someone proves hes full of it, he dissapears untill the debate is over, I am not the only person who noticed this.


As for your statement raystonn is the least biased person on this forum, LOLOLOLOLOLOL, sure he is a nice guy, but hes about as biased as they come.

Raystonn isnt a troll, but he is most deffinatly biased, anyone who dosent see that is blind imo.


Quote:
... DDR has 64 bit data path and RDRAM has 16 bit datapath and it is because to have it in dual and quad channel configuration...
atleast he was a lot more sensible person..

A: rdrams 16bit datapath is INHERANT TO RDRAM, the dual channel nature of the i850 is NOT INHERANT TO RDRAM.
B: rdram does not have a 16 bit datapath to allow dual channel configurations, rdrams 16 bit datapath is to allow ultra high clockspeeds.


IMO when soemone uses a test based on a dual channel solution to claim that rdram as a memory technology is superior, that is invalid.

Single channel rdram systems suck, dual hides many of rdrams penalties, but rdram itself dosent give it a signifigant advantage or ability to go dual, so the fact there isnt a dual ddr system on the p4 to compare the rdram with dosent make rdram the defacto better solution IN TOTAL*.

* Note that in total refers to the sum of the technology type, and not the value of the memory on a specific platform, which is all I have been saying all along.
Note that not a week ago, I had a debate with amd_man in SUPPORT of rdram, for the p4 currently I feel rdram is the best way to go, however all in all, ddr versus rdram, I feel ddr is the better technology.

:wink: The Cash Left In My Pocket,The BEST Benchmark :wink:
May 26, 2002 12:25:18 AM

Quote:
And btw, raystonn has NEVER admitted he was wrong on anything(except amd bus being ddr but even then he restated that 3 times and had to be corrected) everytime someone proves hes full of it, he dissapears untill the debate is over, I am not the only person who noticed this.


As for your statement raystonn is the least biased person on this forum, LOLOLOLOLOLOL, sure he is a nice guy, but hes about as biased as they come.

Raystonn isnt a troll, but he is most deffinatly biased, anyone who dosent see that is blind imo.

I once had to correct Ray on the relationship between SSE and SSE2. Once I linked to the Intel PDFs proving my point, he took it like a man and admitted he was wrong. That's the one and only time I managed to get that much out of him.

He is definitely biased. He doesn't insult or flame or troll (although he's come close at times), but just about all his info has such a pro-Intel slant that it has to be taken with a generous grain of salt.

<pre>We now <b>return</b>(<font color=blue>-1</font color=blue>) to an irregular program scheduler.</pre><p>
May 26, 2002 9:24:55 PM

This thread reads like an obituary

lagger

<b><font color=blue>Checking under my North<font color=red> AND</font color=red> South bridges for <font color=green>Trolls</font color=green></font color=blue>
May 27, 2002 1:17:55 AM

I was thinking the same thing. LOL. He's not dead guys...

Raystonn is an advertisement for Intel. His knowledge related to Intel is impressive; his knowledge relating to AMD is embarrassing. His amazing ability to disappear for long periods of time after every thread that doesn't turn out the way he planned is also impressive. You either accept that or you don't. He's probably on an Intel road show right now waving his pom-poms and cheering for Intel.

<font color=red>I have a computer and it does weird stuff. please help.</font color=red>
May 27, 2002 2:34:17 AM

Quote:
I dont like ppl who cant give credit to the other side...


when was the last time <i>you</i> gave credit to the other side?

"<b>AMD/VIA!</b>...you are <i>still</i> the weakest link, good bye!"<P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by AmdMELTDOWN on 05/26/02 10:38 PM.</EM></FONT></P>
May 27, 2002 2:42:55 AM

Quote:
Raystonn is an advertisement for Intel. His knowledge related to Intel is impressive; his knowledge relating to AMD is embarrassing. His amazing ability to disappear for long periods of time after every thread that doesn't turn out the way he planned is also impressive. You either accept that or you don't. He's probably on an Intel road show right now waving his pom-poms and cheering for Intel.

oh, but it sure beats sitting in an overheated room with AMD crap system blaring er, I mean screaming along while checking yourself in the mirror while trying to hold your AMD flag between your butt cheeks.

"<b>AMD/VIA!</b>...you are <i>still</i> the weakest link, good bye!"
May 27, 2002 2:53:32 AM

Quote:
Actually the way I see Mat on Raystonn, I think more of his attitude being like me, he gets annoyed with Ray's answers, they somewhat not comply well, in an unexplainable way!

comply, wtf? are you the f'n AMDborg, who the f**k made you a god where we have to comply to your stupid standards?

"<b>AMD/VIA!</b>...you are <i>still</i> the weakest link, good bye!"
May 27, 2002 3:09:46 AM

Quote:
He is definitely biased. He doesn't insult or flame or troll (although he's come close at times), but just about all his info has such a pro-Intel slant that it has to be taken with a generous grain of salt.

wait a minute, are you saying that even though raystonn doesn't flame or troll-his posts are worthless because the postings regarding Intel are in fact "pro-intel" is this right?

so what does this do to all of your postings? f'n mongrel.

"<b>AMD/VIA!</b>...you are <i>still</i> the weakest link, good bye!"
May 27, 2002 4:46:56 AM

calm down dear *hugs melty*


<font color=red>MABACITISS</font color=red>: Movement Against Boasting About CPU Idle Temps & Idle System Stability!
May 27, 2002 7:40:11 AM

Quote:
wait a minute, are you saying that even though raystonn doesn't flame or troll-his posts are worthless because the postings regarding Intel are in fact "pro-intel" is this right?

As IIB stated, Ray doesn't dare give credit to AMD. When I advise someone on something as critical as a computer purchasing decision, I take the time to give credit to both sides.

You'd probably rather not believe me on this point, since you feel the need to grab every straw you can get to discredit AMD users. That's fine with me, since the proof shows up in my posting history.

Raystonn has to be driven into a corner before he'll concede a point of superiority to AMD, and he usually disappears to avoid such a concession.

So yes, I think I have the right to consider his extreme bias wrong. It's just nothing lame or pathetic enough to deserve the "forum pariah" status you've earned. :tongue:

Quote:
oh, but it sure beats sitting in an overheated room with AMD crap system blaring er

Funny, my computer room is actually cooler than the rest of my house.

Say, didn't FatBurger's P4 system end up running hotter than his T-bird? I guess you're still having trouble swallowing reality. :tongue:

<pre>We now <b>return</b>(<font color=blue>-1</font color=blue>) to an irregular program scheduler.</pre><p>
May 27, 2002 9:14:58 PM

They were just insisting on that their targets (?) are better than him/themselves.

<b> Searching for the true, the beautiful, and the eternal </b>
May 27, 2002 9:19:42 PM

That "unexplainable" thing is what I usually call immortal inferiority complex.

100 AMD fanatics against one Intel employee. Poor guys.

<b> Searching for the true, the beautiful, and the eternal </b>
May 28, 2002 8:27:57 AM

Raystonn is always welcome here. His insight and expertise with respect to Intel is welcome. He is biased though, very biased. One must read his posts with a grain of salt or one would be lead to believe that Intel is the perfect product for everyone no matter what situation they are in or what task they want to perform.

Amdmeltdown is at least funny sometimes.

You on the other hand contribute absolutely nothing to this forum. Your mother probably doesn't even like you.

<font color=red>I have a computer and it does weird stuff. please help.</font color=red>
May 28, 2002 10:22:51 AM

Quote:

when was the last time you gave credit to the other side?

many times...
I would buy a P4 today.
I recomand people to buy P4.
I argue with people that still thinks the P4 is a bad processor just becouse it has low IPC. (ie argued with Eden at the time).
I give credit to Intel on many of the design features in the P4 - the better l2 cache, the better brench prediction, the better instruction re-ordering Out of order execution and more...

you are the only troll around here.
AmdMELTDOWN, you are the weakest link, Goodbye!

This post is best viewed with common sense enabled
May 28, 2002 12:02:12 PM

It's a good thing you said "at the time", or else I'd come here yelling at you for saying I don't like the P4 processor, which was also false at the time, just that I wasn't as thrilled on the sub-non-OCed-2GHZ chips.

--
I can't beleive Dungeon Siege has a pitchfork weapon called "Hoe"! :lol: 
May 28, 2002 3:10:19 PM

hey, in South Korea, are there some problems as well?


<i>if <b>you know</b> <font color=white>you don't know<font color=black>, the way could be more easy ...
May 28, 2002 3:18:42 PM

best is "too much" than "too less" matter of discussion.
this can involve arguing, no? :cool:


<i>if <b>you know</b> <font color=white>you don't know<font color=black>, the way could be more easy ...
May 28, 2002 3:51:12 PM

Quote:
<i>Matisaro says</i>
rdrams 16bit datapath is INHERANT TO RDRAM


Is that why there are 32-bit RDRAM modules?

Quote:
<i>AmdMELTDOWN says:</i>
it sure beats sitting in an overheated room


Hey dumbass, you forget that the P4 runs hotter than the Athlon.

Quote:
<i>dhlucke says:</i>
Amdmeltdown is at least funny sometimes.


Come on, give him credit. He's ALWAYS funny. Just sometimes you're laughing with him, and sometimes you're laughing at him.

Quote:
<i>IIB says:</i>
I argue with people that still thinks the P4 is a bad processor just becouse it has low IPC.


I can't believe people actually use that argument, expecting it to hold water.

<font color=blue>Hi mom!</font color=blue>
May 28, 2002 11:00:11 PM

Quote:
Is that why there are 32-bit RDRAM modules?


Asdies from the fact a 32 bit rdram module is simply 2 16 bit channels on a single stick, which makes your counter wrong.

You know better than to use technology not out yet to counter peoples points burger, I dont go around saying ddr is better cause of qdr pc 5600 ram, now do I, shame.

:wink: The Cash Left In My Pocket,The BEST Benchmark :wink:
May 28, 2002 11:20:59 PM

32-bit modules exist, and saying that they're two 16-bit modules doesn't change the datapath. You're saying it would be impossible to do dual-channel 32-bit RDRAM?

And I suppose that the memory on video cards isn't really SDRAM, since it's 128-bit.

<font color=blue>Hi mom!</font color=blue>
May 28, 2002 11:25:16 PM

I am saying that 32 bit modules are ONLY 2x 16 bit rdram, and the 16 bit datapath IS INHERANT to rdram.


A 32 bit module is nothing more than 2 channels of 16 bit rdram in the same socket, thats all. It was a counter to you saying that 32 bit rdram makes my point that 16 bit datapaths are inherant to rdram incorrect.

Quote:
And I suppose that the memory on video cards isn't really SDRAM, since it's 128-bit.

No, it is sdram, it is 2x 64 sdram banks, your comment would be like saying.

Matt: sdram uses 64 bit datapaths inherantly
Burger: no it dosent, theres 128 bit sdram on videocards
Matt: yeah but thats just dual channel 64 bit ram.

Same argument.


The fact that there is 32 bit rdram(2x 16) does not change the fact that rdram itself is inherantly 16 bit.

:wink: The Cash Left In My Pocket,The BEST Benchmark :wink:
!