pimg src="http://cache.gawker.com/assets/images/lifehacker/2008/12/benchmarks.jpg" width="562" height="297"/The team at the Phoronix site benchmark tested the a href="http://lifehacker.com/5099393/fedora-10-officially-released-ready-for-download"newly-released/a a href="http://docs.fedoraproject.org/release-notes/f10/en_US/"Fedora 10/a Linux distribution against a href="http://ubuntu.com"Ubuntu 8.10/a on 32 and 64-bit machines, and a href="http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=articleitem=ubuntu_810_vs_fedora_10num=1"found the results nearly identical/a. Interesting find, and nice to know it's really the features and interface that sets most Linux distros apart these days./p br style="clear: both;"/ a href="http://www.pheedo.com/click.phdo?s=c5d22cb7883e73ca46aa097167a8b853p=1"img alt="" style="border: 0;" border="0" src="http://www.pheedo.com/img.phdo?s=c5d22cb7883e73ca46aa097167a8b853p=1"//a img src="http://www.pheedo.com/feeds/tracker.php?i=c5d22cb7883e73ca46aa097167a8b853" style="display: none;" border="0" height="1" width="1" alt=""/div class="feedflare" a href="http://feeds.gawker.com/~f/lifehacker/full?a=mKLyokWU"img src="http://feedproxy.google.com/~f/lifehacker/full?d=120" border="0"/img/a a href="http://feeds.gawker.com/~f/lifehacker/full?a=WH1qhTtA"img src="http://feedproxy.google.com/~f/lifehacker/full?d=41" border="0"/img/a a href="http://feeds.gawker.com/~f/lifehacker/full?a=ezPPA4hx"img src="http://feedproxy.google.com/~f/lifehacker/full?i=ezPPA4hx" border="0"/img/a a href="http://feeds.gawker.com/~f/lifehacker/full?a=QeVbuKgb"img src="http://feedproxy.google.com/~f/lifehacker/full?i=QeVbuKgb" border="0"/img/a /divimg src="http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/lifehacker/full/~4/hISCnrZ_tro" height="1" width="1"/

The team at the Phoronix site benchmark tested the newly-released Fedora 10 Linux distribution against Ubuntu 8.10 on 32 and 64-bit machines, and found the results nearly identical. Interesting find,...

mine is: 16356 in 3Dmark06

Intel Core 2 Duo E8500 3.16ghz overclocked to 3.8ghz
4gb PC2-6400 800mhz DDR2 ram
Nvidia Geforce GTX 260 896mb GDDR3 OCed to 700mhz
550W cooolermaster Realpower PSU
320gb western digital 7200rpm harddrive =(
rAIDMAX SAGITTA 2 gaming case
Gigabyte P35 motherboard
some light scribe dvd rom lol

Windows experience index:
Processor :5.8
RAM: 5.9
graphics: 5.9
gaming graphics: 5.9
Primary hard disk: 5.4

Crysis Benchmark: "GPU BENCHMARK TEST FILE"
ALL SETTINGS ON VERY HIGH EXCEPT SHADER QUALITY ON HIGH
4XAA 1440X900
min: 28fps Average: 39.43fps max: 50~fps

Processor temp: IDLE: 43degrees
LOAD: 64degrees
DOES NOT PASS ANY PRIME95 TESTS BUT PERSONALLY I HAVENT HAD PROBLEMS WITH IT SO SCREW PRIME 95

Gpu temp: idle: 44 degrees
Crysis Ultra high: 74 degrees lol

Publication Date: 2008 Nov 27 PMID: 19038021br/Authors: de Souto, M. C. - Costa, I. G. - de Araujo, D. S. - Ludermir, T. B. - Schliep, A.br/Journal: BMC Bioinformaticsbr/br/ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND: The use of clustering methods for the discovery of cancer subtypes has drawn a great deal of attention in the scientific community. While bioinformaticians have proposed new clustering methods that take advantage of characteristics of the gene expression data, the medical community has a preference for using classic clustering methods. There have been no studies thus far performing a large-scale evaluation of different clustering methods in this context. Results/Conclusions We present the first large-scale analysis of seven different clustering methods and four proximity measures for the analysis of 35 cancer gene expression data sets. Our results reveal that the finite mixture of Gaussians, followed closely by k-means, exhibited the best performance in terms of recovering the true structure of the data sets. These methods also exhibited, on average, the smallest difference between the actual number of classes in the data sets and the best number of clusters as indicated by our validation criteria. Furthermore, hierarchical methods, which have been widely used by the medical community, exhibited a poorer recovery performance than that of the other methods evaluated. Moreover, as a stable basis for the assessment and comparison of different clustering methods for cancer gene expression data, this study provides a common group of data sets (benchmark data sets) to be shared among researchers and used for comparisons with new methods. The data sets analyzed in this study are available at http://algorithmics.molgen.mpg.de/Supplements/CompCancer/.br/br/post to: a href = http://www.citeulike.org/posturl?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov%2Fentrez%2Fquery.fcgi%3Fcmd%3DRetrieve%26db%3DPubMed%26dopt%3DAbstract%26list_uids%3D19038021title=Entrez+PubmedCiteULike/a

i played with a little device called '' kill a watts '' that you can learn about it right here. Basically , it's a device that calculate power consumption of any appliance. just FYI .. this device was mentioned a few times in the maximum pc magazine.

now .. i just wanted to know how my system consume and check if its really true that you need at least a 800 Watts PSU to run a 4870x2 like ATI recommend on their website ...


ok folks .. just check this ... , i tested my entire setup in my computer room which is :

One 24'' LCD samsung Monitor ( primary )
One 17'' CRT Daytek monitor ( secondary )
One Laptop Thinkpad R31 ( idling )
One Dell Axim X51 in his cradle while charging
A Dlink wireless router + DSL modem

My computer :
E8400 3Ghz at 4GHz
4 Gig memory 800Mhz at 900Mhz
Asus maximus formula
Xfi sound blaster falality pro series
4870X2 video card ( stock spped )
4 SATA hard drive ( 320 GB , 500 Gb , 200 Gb and 750 Gb )
one DVD writer
700 Watts OCZ PSU

all this stuff is plugged in a power bar .. all this stuff powered on while my computer running a 3dMark 06 run gave me a maximum peak of 583 Watts from the wall power outlet .....

now just the computer alone while doing 5 loop of crysis island benchmark at maximun setting possible ( 1920x1200 8aa 16af dx10 64 bit ) gave me a maximum peak of 480 Watts ....while idling it use 210 watts.


see ?? the PSU recommandation are a bit too much ....;)