Résultats de la recherche (Page 4) / Pilote-Virtuel.com - Forum de simulation aérienne

En tout cas cela montre que le commerce sera sauvé par les gens idiots et incultes, tout comme l'illustre les gogos qui ont acheté FSX alors que FS9 est une merveille.

Changement de politique ?
Cela fait longtemps qu'on sait que la barre des 4 Ghz sera difficile à passer pour les fabriquants.
Quand j'ai acheté mon P4 3Ghz Prescott on discutait deja des prochains CPU, dont les arguments seraient d'avoir plus de cache, une plus basse fréquence, et moins chauffer.

De la à dire que les programmeurs n'ont rien vu venir....... c'est un peu gros je trouve...

Q1 2004 review
http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.html?i=1948
no mention of cores

Q3 2004 review
http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=2233
cores are a "variant", as in "it would make sense if the FX-57 were to come with a dual core variant"

Q4 2004 review
http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=2303
It is only at the end of Dec 2004, with this review, that cores have been elevated somewhat in importance but note Ghz hasnt been deprecated hence quotes like this:
"There are other areas besides the high-end multi-core arena, and we haven't seen the end of increasing clock speeds yet"

Now move to 2005, and lets look at Toms' Hardware
http://www.tomshardware.com/2005/04/05/the_pentium_d/page2.html
and this review has a section "Sorry Guys, Clock Speed Does Matter" so the fact that the technology pony had jumped the tracks from Ghz to cores hadnt sunk it, even at sites whose job it was to keep up with this.

It isnt until 2006 that it has really sunk in and permeated the community. Mainstream sites have picked it up, like http://www.informationweek.com/shared/printableArticleSrc.jhtml?articleID=175802849.

Still enthusiast sites like http://www.guru3d.com/newsitem.php?id=3620 mention:
"Now through to the end of 2006, we will see Conroe taking up roughly 20% of Intel's shipments by then end of the year while the Pentium D processor will remain the largest bulk of Intel's desktop shipments."

So from a volume standpoint multicore wasnt seen as a majority in 2006 thru the entire 1st quarter and March IDF.

So while its easy to say "why didnt you see this coming" I think when you look at the available data it should be pretty clear that it wasn't that easy to see it coming.

Given where FSX was, by end of 2005 and early 2006, when this data started to sink in the project was so far past design the team couldnt react to rearchitect within the existing plan. It wasn't really an option to ditch the existing plan.

Even with that, we do have some multicore usage today and are working to get more. We reacted as we could within the original plan. So be careful with comments like "not once did they think" as that just isnt true.

La gestion des couleurs,l'ambiance et l'atmosphère FSX,c'est du "PIPO MARKETING" à la Microsoft & Aces Studio.