Elon Musk's company, Space X, has reached another milestone. After recovering a total of 8 rockets after launch, now they re-launched and re-landed the first of the 8. BUT that's not all, they also recovered the nose cone, which protects the rocket's cargo and costs millions of dollars.
Although there's a long way to go until they achieve full re-usability in 24 hours, this is a very important step, as they practically doubled the life of the Falcon 9 rocket (1 launch vs. 2, at this moment). The end goal is indefinite re-usability, just like with airplanes.
This is the rocket they've re-launched and re-landed:
Despite all the pessimistic critics and stock market analysts, who can't keep their mouths shut, Tesla is on track to deliver its first cheap electric car, the Model 3, before the end of this year (2017).
Elon Musk, the CEO and (co-)founder of Tesla, is already driving daily in the most promising release candidate, in order to catch the biggest problems before they start mass production.
The production of the Model 3 will start soon, but not for average civilians - only Tesla and Space X employees will receive the first few thousand cars, so they'll be able to catch even the smallest problems and provide engineer-level feedback as fast as possible.
Theoretically the Model 3 production line is already functional, but it still needs some fine-tuning, before mass production starts. First they'll produce the simplest orders, as the first months of any production line is about quality. When everything works well, they'll add options like sunroof, second motor, special seats...etc... just like they did with the Model S/X production line, but without many of the mistakes they made in the past. Things are going so well, that they simply skipped a step in the preparations for production, as precision is much better than expected.
The first Model 3 configurations will include Autopilot Hardware V2 (probably with minimal software functionality at first), rear motor (probably without Insane/Ludicrous modes), battery packs up to 75kWh, one 15" touchscreen in the middle, basic seats, basic steering wheel, folding mirrors, tow bar, fast DC charging ...etc.
The biggest competitor against Tesla Model 3 is the Chevy Bolt, which has a rated range of 235 miles (EPA) with its 60kWh battery pack, but it's also slightly more expensive at 36,600 USD MSRP.
(Un)fortunately these two pure electric cars have almost nothing in common, as they look different, feel different, accelerate differently and have very different built-in features. In my opinion, most buyers won't have any problems deciding which one they want, as Model 3 is clearly high/superior tech, and the Bolt is more like an uglier/practical traditional car.
It seems that in the battery department, which should be the most important in any EV, Tesla has no competition, as they make the cheapest, safest and best managed (cooled/heated) battery packs. Owners of Model S/X cars report about a 10-15% range loss in very hot and very cold climates, where the Nissan Leaf, Chevy Volt, eGolf and others lose up to 50% of their rated range, as they use different battery packs and less/no thermal management.
In this picture you see a part of the Tesla Model S battery pack. It's built using thousands of cylindrical Li-ion cells (more or less like in laptops) and yes, those flat metal tubes contain the
circulating liquid coolant and touch every cell (through a non-conductive thermal pad, for safety reasons) in the pack. This relatively simple thermal management system can also use the heat generated by the battery pack to heat the cabin, which in most EVs is lost energy and/or additional stress on the batteries.
The Model 3 battery pack will be very similar, but will use slightly fewer and bigger cells, in order to cut down cost. These new battery cells are already produced in the Gigafactory on a large scale, but most of them go into stationary storage called Power Wall 2 (home use) and Power Pack (industrial use).
In the gaming desktop market, Intel shouldn't be too worried yet, as 8core/16thread RyZen processors aren't good at high FPS (75+ FPS) games in 1080p, while Intel's Kaby Lake Core i7-7700K processors have a better IPC, higher frequency and about 30% more FPS in most games at 1080p.
The answer is Kaby Lake X, with a twist. So Intel Core i5-7640K and Core i7-7740K will be launched on a new socket type called LGA 2066, with Intel X299 chipset. This new platform will support up to 44 PCI-Express 3.0 lanes and 4 memory channels, but these Quad Core Kaby Lake X processors will only be able to use half of that (2 memory channels and 20-28 PCI-Express lanes).
Another interesting move, made by Intel, is the introduction of a new server platform with a huge LGA 3647 socket, which will run Xeons with many many cores.
It's a bit odd, that the press didn't really report on these platform, as everyone was focused on AMD RyZen. Speaking of which, AMD is also preparing 12-32 core processors for the workstation and server markets. These new processors will offer a far better value for the price, but won't fit in AM4 sockets, unfortunately. These new chips will require AM44 socket motherboards with X390 or X399 chipset (presumably the first is single socket and second is multi socket), so it seems that AMD is also going in that direction, with larger sockets.
This diagram was obtained from unknown sources. Presumably it's an ASUS motherboard, but nobody can confirm or deny it, as usual ...
This is the chipset diagram, and it looks extremely promising, as it features 44 PCI-Express 3.0 lanes and 4 memory channels, although they are marked in a strange way: MC1, MC2, MC1, MC2 ... that should mean 4 channels.
Since I first saw the MAC 'trashcan' PRO, I always wondered how an actual PC would look like in that form factor. There have been attempts from different manufacturers, but most of them were ugly and/or extremely underpowered, so it was a pleasant surprise to see the Corsair ONE with a remarkably simple architecture, yet powerful enough for the average gamer:
As you can see it uses a standard mini-ITX motherboard, 400W SFX power supply, two slimmed down (but considered standard) water cooling systems for the desktop CPU and desktop video card. The Corsair One has one larger fan on the top, which pulls air through the side mounted radiators, but there's also a smaller fan in the SFX power supply.
The way the video card is installed it needs a relatively long riser cable/slot extension, but this is the only compromise they needed to make, in order to fit everything inside this form factor case. Theoretically they could have rotated the mainboard 90 degrees so the video card's PCI-Express connector would be right next to the mainboard's PCI-Expres slot, but then the mainboard's ports would face down or up.
The size of the Corsair One is 380 x 176 x 200mm, basically half of an average gaming mini-ITX case. To the dimensions you have to add a few centimeters in each direction, as the cooling system needs to breathe on the sides, but that matters less, because you'd most likely put it on the desk, next to the monitor, with lots of space around it.
1799.99 USD SPECIFICATIONS:
Intel Core i7-7700, liquid cooled
nVidia GTX 1070 (air cooled)
16GB 2400MHz DDR4
240GB SSD + 1TB HDD
400W SFX 80 PLUS Gold
Windows 10 Home
2199.99 USD SPECIFICATIONS:
Intel Core i7-7700K, liquid cooled
nVidia GTX 1080, liquid cooled
16GB 2400MHz DDR4
480GB SSD + 2TB HDD
400W SFX 80 PLUS Gold
Windows 10 Home
2299.99 USD SPECIFICATIONS:
Intel Core i7-7700K, liquid cooled
nVidia GTX 1080, liquid cooled
16GB 2400MHz DDR4
960GB SSD
400W SFX 80 PLUS Gold
Windows 10 Home
2599.99 USD SPECIFICATIONS:
Intel Core i7-7700K, liquid cooled
nVidia GTX 1080Ti, liquid cooled
16GB 2400MHz DDR4
960GB SSD
400W SFX 80 PLUS Gold
Windows 10 Home
Find out if the Corsair One is already available on amazon.com.
Although I live in the EU, my country is far from being green, although a significant part of the electricity we use, comes from renewables like hydro, wind... a bit of solar and nuclear. We still use wood and natural gas for heating - diesel and gas cars for transport...
Last week something unexpected happened, I saw and photographed a Tesla Model S. It was parked in front of an expensive glass office building, between two gas-guzzlers.
Unfortunately my phone's camera is awful (5MP, autofocus only when it wants to), so I took these pictures with my girlfriend's Allview E4 Lite, which has a 13MP back camera ... but in low light they didn't turn out that well either ...
The license plate said "B", meaning our capital, so it traveled from Bucharest and/or was bought/leased by a large company, with mandatory offices in the capital.
I didn't look at the exact model, but it's a pre-facelift model, with Autopilot hardware 1.0, as far as I can tell, because the front windshield had the triangular plastic in the middle for the camera.
Unfortunately we still have a very poor charging infrastructure in Romania. As far as I know, only one hipermarket chain (Kaufland) made 3 charging spots in their parking lots, but only in big cities (such as Cluj-Napoca, Bucharest...etc.). Using these 22kW chargers you can travel from the western border right across to the Black Sea, assuming that your EV has at least 150km range and none of the chargers are broken.
Our national grid (for households) is on 220V and the standard circuit breaker can deliver 25A to one home, so for charging you'd need a separate meter and breaker ... or a direct connection to the 400V grid (available only in specific parts of the city). SO in theory you can charge at about 5kW on a standard Schuko wall socket, or at a lower rate if someone else in the house is also using some electricity. In a best case scenario this means a full charge in about 15 hours for a 70-85kWh Tesla, which is still perfectly OK for the average driver, who doesn't use one full charge in less than a week.
Even though the Tesla Model 3 is around the corner, it won't be for everyone with its 35.000 USD price tag, BUT even today you can get a good electric city car for under 20.000 USD, with a 100 mile range. I think these cheap cars will be the most popular and will replace taxis and average gas powered cars used in cities.
These cheap ForTwo and ForFour SMARTs are third generation electric cars, so most of the bugs have been fixed, but the original power train was significantly weakened, as it was based on the Tesla Roadster, which was a sports car. So you won't be racing in Electric SMARTs, but they are safe and extremely efficient with an average consumption of ~100Wh/km vs. 170Wh/km of a Tesla Model S.
The page file (aka. swap file or swap partition) is present in most operating systems today, including Windows, Linux, Android, MAC ...etc. It is used automatically by the OS to write out "unnecessary data" from the memory to the hard disk or SSD, thus freeing up some RAM.
In the early days, when you probably didn't do much multi-tasking, you could only notice this procedure in application loading - and unloading times, BUT on a modern multi-tasking system it can play with your nerves, as it may add significant loading time to each ALT+TAB you press.
In this picture you can see the average speed of the three hardware components. Without a doubt the RAM is the best place for currently used data, as it can be read and written at above 20GB/s, while the SSD is about 40 times slower at sequential read/write and 700 times slower at random (4KB block) read/write. The classic hard drive is even slower, as it can read/write at around 200MB/s sequential and around 2MB/s random (4K blocks).
So let's you have a Windows 10 PC with 4GB RAM and a 500GB hard drive, on which you have a 3GB Page File. When enough RAM is free, starting an application means loading app files and some windows files from the hard drive to RAM at the hard drive's maximum speed (usually close to its maximum sequential read speed).
When there's not enough free RAM, Windows will move some of its resident files and parts of the loaded app(s) to the page file, while at the same time loads the new app you clicked into RAM. In this case, the loading speed will be closer to the hard drive's random read/write speed, as Windows is doing more things at once.
When you switch between apps, the procedure is almost the same, it may take the same time as loading the second app.
If you have an SSD instead of the hard drive, load times will be about 5-10 times faster, BUT still far from the full potential of the PC.
The real speed increase happens when you disable the page file, assuming you have enough RAM (otherwise you'll be unable to load the app).
With the page file disabled, switching between apps is instantaneous, as both apps are in the RAM, so nothing needs to be loaded/unloaded.
CONCLUSIONS:
RAM is the first component you upgrade if you're dissatisfied with loading and multi tasking speeds
even if you have enough RAM, Windows will still use the page file (though not as much as when you don't have enough RAM), until you disable it.
some apps don't run without the page file. In such cases, if you know you have enough RAM, try to reduce the page file size as much as you can.
the page file adds a significant amount of wear to you SSD or HDD (at least 30GB writes per day in my experience)
The page file can be set/disabled in Control Panel - System - Advanced System Settings - Performance Settings - Advanced - Change
NOTE: I have over simplified things. Operating systems have much more complicated virtual memory (page file, swap file, swap partition ...etc.) management, but the basic concepts I described are valid in most situations.
Network switch prices have come down significantly, so most businesses and homes are likely to have a new or used replacement switch (or even router) somewhere in a box or drawer, which can be used in case of emergency, if the network fails. There is however a simpler solution, which doesn't require power and costs something like 0.30 USD.
This one dollar accessory can be used to connect two network cables temporarily, until the switch is fixed or replaced. In most cases you have to rethink the connections a bit, so you connect the two most important parts of the network, which cannot be down for more than a few minutes. In some cases you can even use a few of these connectors to completely take the place of a switch, if you have more cables coming from other parts of the network.
I wouldn't recommend using such connectors as a permanent solution, as most of them can affect signal strength.
This is how it looks on the inside. As you can see the two connectors are wired together using multi-strand wires, which can reduce signal quality, also reducing the maximum cable length or network speed. This is why I don't recommend using them as a permanent solution, but if you do the necessary bandwidth and cable test, and they look OK, then there's no reason not to use them long term.
In my recent article I illustrated the different core structures of high end AMD and Intel processors, but left out the more popular low end processors and APUs, so it's time to complete the lineup:
Lower end processors are based on the same cores, but have less of them, and run at lower frequencies. NOTE: I'm not including the graphics part of the processors, because they are irrelevant in most desktops.
As you can see, the AMD A4 APUs and Intel Celeron/Pentium processors offer the least value/price, although they are cheaper than the other processors and can handle typical office/home tasks with their respective integrated graphics. They can also play most types of video files and streams, so they are perfect for quiet and cheap HTPCs.
The new Kaby Lake Pentium G4560 with HyperThreading offers Core i3 level performance for a Pentium price, as it can run most new games, which require four processor threads. Coupled with a mid-range video card like GTX 750Ti/1050 or Radeon RX 460/470 it offers quite impressive FPS even in 1080p (Full HD) resolution.
The quad core and hexa core AMD processors and APUs are less desirable at this point, because the new generation of AMD processors is just months, maybe weeks away. Right now only the high end AMD RyZen processors are released, but the upcoming quad core and hexa core models (with SMT) will offer Core i5/i7 level performance in games, for a much lower price. Until then maybe the A8/A10 APUs are worth buying for HTPCs and casual gaming, as they have quite good integrated graphics.
I dare to say that the Intel Core i3-7100 makes no sense. It costs twice as much as the Pentium G4560 and offers only slightly higher performance at 3.7GHz vs. 3.5GHz.
I predict that Core i5 processors will also become less and less desirable, as they are quite inefficient, lacking HyperThreading, and cost almost as much as Core i7 processors, which are ~40% faster and more efficient. Just as the Pentiums got HyperThreading enabled, Core i3 and i5 processors also have to offer more features and/or performance, if Intel is expecting to sell them at the same price as before.
AMD lost almost all of its server market share, but now with the new Zen architecture it may have a fighting chance to fight again.
The new platform is called AMD "Naples" and it offers about 2x the performance of Intel Xeons at the same price. Even though these server processors are based on Zen architecture, they will go into a new socket type, not AM4, because they'll have 4x more memory channels and PCI-Express lanes, so they need a lot more contacts in the socket.
As you can see in the illustration above, one Naples CPU will have 4 dual channel memory controllers, which can handle two or more modules each. It seems like AMD is optimizing for single and dual socket servers, as the exact same platform will also be a perfect workstation, if you put it in a larger case with standard expansion slot space, for professional graphics cards, network cards ...etc.
Enthusiasts will probably be interested in the Naples platform as well, because of the 64 PCIe lanes per processor, which could mean up to 4 high end video cards working at full speed in a single system.
Unfortunately most applications and games still work best on 4-8 threads, so the PC industry needs to tackle this problem, before such "multi-core multi-GPU beast" systems can be fully utilized. This process could take years, as Intel won't be launching even just 6-core mainstream products until 2018.
First we have to look at the structure of different types of processors, in order to understand what the released benchmark results mean:
I made this graphical representation of CPU cores, used in different types of AMD and Intel processors, taking into account only the base frequency, which we can count on under any circumstances, while Turbo Boost only kicks in only in certain situations.
The old FX-8350 processor with Bulldozer design has 8 integer cores, but only 4 float cores, one for each pair of integer cores.
Intel Core i5-7600K has 4 integer cores + 4 float cores. This is the best structure for running 4 threads.
Intel Core i7-7700K has 4 integer cores + 4 float cores, which are split in 8 threads by HyperThreading. This increases overall performance, but applications and games optimized for only 1-4 threads may run slower than on a Core i5-7600K.
Intel Core i7-6800K has 6 integer cores + 6 float cores, which are split in 12 threads by HyperThreading. The same rules apply for applications and games optimized for only 1-6 threads.
Ryzen 7 1700 and 1800X both have 8 integer cores + 8 float cores, split in 16 threads by AMD SMT (Simultaneous Multi Threading ~= Intel HyperThreading). Applications and games optimized for 1-8 threads may run slower that on a pure 8-core processor (at this point only some Xeons have 8 cores without HT).
Intel Core i7-6950X has 10 integer cores + 10 float cores, which are split in 20 threads by HyperThreading.
Preliminary conclusions:
as most applications and games are optimized for 1-4 threads, they may run slower on 6-8-12-16-20 threaded processors
even though the old FX-8350 processor has a lot of power, developers didn't optimize their apps and games for this strange (8 integer + 4 float) configuration. If they had optimized, then these old processors would have been on par with Intel Core i7 processors and would have been improved each year since their launch. Instead the AM3+ platform was practically left to die of natural causes ...
HT and SMT don't require additional components within the CPU. These technologies are enabled through the BIOS/CPU microcode and change the way the CPU handles threaded workloads. With some high end overclocking mainboards you can enable HT on a Core i5-4690K processor.
Gamers Nexus did one of the best RyZen reviews, concluding that in gaming the RyZen 7 1800X is like an Intel Core i5, while in workstation/production apps it's like an Intel Core i7.
FINAL CONCLUSIONS:
AMD RyZen 7 processors are as expected, competing with Intel Core i7 processors, but they still need a lot of BIOS/driver optimization in the next few months.
the new AMD architecture offers best performance/price, if you only use one fast video card (RX 460/470/480 or GTX 1060/1070/1080), up to two M.2 SSDs, 3000MHz DDR4 RAM (currently limited to 2666MHz, needs BIOS optimization).
there's a lot of room to improve, as some specs are clearly better than Intel's: double the L2 cache size, 2 x faster cache access, lower TDP (65-95W vs. 88-140W)
RyZen 7 is meant for heavy multi-tasking like: video editing/encoding, gaming+streaming, virtualization...etc.
you should buy RyZen now, as is, if you don't mind minor problems (which may limit performance) and relatively frequent BIOS updates in the next few months. You'll also have an upgrade path to Zen 2/3 through 2020, without buying a new motherboard and RAM.
is 380 x 176 x 200mm, basically half of an average gaming mini-ITX case. To the dimensions you have to add a few centimeters in each direction, as the cooling system needs to breathe on the sides, but that matters less, because you'd most likely put it on the desk, next to the monitor, with lots of space around it.
.
, thus freeing up some RAM
.
with 4GB RAM and a 500GB hard drive
, on which you have a 3GB Page File. When enough RAM is free, starting an application means loading app files and some windows files from the hard drive to RAM at the hard drive's maximum speed (usually close to its maximum sequential read speed).
.
with HyperThreading offers Core i3 level performance for a Pentium price, as it can run most new games, which require four processor threads. Coupled with a mid-range video card like GTX 750Ti
/1050
or Radeon RX 460
/470
it offers quite impressive FPS even in 1080p (Full HD) resolution.
makes no sense. It costs twice as much as the Pentium G4560 and offers only slightly higher performance at 3.7GHz vs. 3.5GHz.
at the same price. Even though these server processors are based on Zen architecture, they will go into a new socket type, not AM4
, because they'll have 4x more memory channels and PCI-Express lanes, so they need a lot more contacts in the socket.
working at full speed in a single system.
processor with Bulldozer design has 8 integer cores, but only 4 float cores, one for each pair of integer cores.
has 4 integer cores + 4 float cores. This is the best structure for running 4 threads.
has 4 integer cores + 4 float cores, which are split in 8 threads by HyperThreading. This increases overall performance, but applications and games optimized for only 1-4 threads may run slower than on a Core i5-7600K.
has 6 integer cores + 6 float cores, which are split in 12 threads by HyperThreading. The same rules apply for applications and games optimized for only 1-6 threads.
and 1800X
both have 8 integer cores + 8 float cores, split in 16 threads by AMD SMT (Simultaneous Multi Threading ~= Intel HyperThreading). Applications and games optimized for 1-8 threads may run slower that on a pure 8-core processor (at this point only some Xeons have 8 cores without HT).
has 10 integer cores + 10 float cores, which are split in 20 threads by HyperThreading.
processor.
now from 
!!!