Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×

Comment Re:Unlikely (Score 1) 148

Processors nowadays are limited by the thermal dissipation limits, instead of how many transistors they can fit on a chip. Transistor scaling was supposed to keep power usage the same while increasing density, but supply voltages have stopped decreasing, so the power efficiency gains are very low. Thus it is now important to think about power efficiency: http://hardware.slashdot.org/story/11/09/13/2148202/whither-moores-law-introducing-koomeys-law

Comment Re:Audio quality must suffer (Score 1) 369

Seriously? Less surface area on an already huge connector is going to magically attenuate the signal? I really don't think you know what you're talking about... We're talking about milliohms of resistance here. Nothing your ears can detect.

Now if there were intermittent contact rubbing issues, then sure, you'd hear scratching as it makes and breaks connection. But if there's enough constant contact then it's negligible.

Comment Re:Obvious? (Score 1) 369

Are you seriously advocating that companies like Apple stop innovating in making their products smaller than ever? A one-third reduction in thickness would be great. If you don't want something so thin, then you can purchase larger MP3 players which become lower in price once the new fancy thin ones come out.

Comment Re:iPad (Score 1) 172

Foxconn's factories are a mini-city. I'm sure if you compare US city suicide rates to Foxconn mini-city suicide rates, they'd be comparable. It's only really an outrage if their suicide rate was 3x or more higher than US suicide rates.

I dislike Apple software but as an electrical engineer, I'm a huge fan of their hardware.

Comment Re:iPad (Score 1) 172

You do realize that all computer companies outsource their manufacturing work to the likes of Foxconn, not just Apple right?

On the suicide note from your other troll post: the suicide rate at the Foxconn factories are less than the suicide rate at US universities.

Comment Re:Factoring in energy costs... (Score 1) 403

No comment about that. I was just pointing out that profitability should theoretically be the same as time goes on. Of course, whether it does will have a huge effect on the long-time viability of bitcoin mining for profit. Even if it only lasts a few more years, you can still make 100% returns on investment in only a year which is pretty good.

Comment Factoring in energy costs... (Score 2, Interesting) 403

I've always thought Bitcoin was stupid, but let's do some more analysis on the energy costs here, which this site really should have included.

The best GPU perf/watt was the 5870x2 (Ares OC) at 1.584 (Mhash/s)/watt. Not sure where they got their total watt figures from, but from a review site, it is 500W, unoverclocked. This site says it's 50W more overclocked. I'll be generous and not include this since the CPU isn't being taxed as much. So 500W power consumption.

So, typing 500 watts * 1 year * (10 cents / (kilowatt*hour)) into Google: about $482. Taking their $1,666 one year profit figure (mining profits - cost of card), it is now really a cost of $1,184. Which isn't as bad as I thought it'd be.

They didn't include the effect of increasing difficulty on decreased mining speed, but theoretically the currency should become more valuable as it goes on.

Slashdot Top Deals

The cost of feathers has risen, even down is up!

Working...