User talk:Zzzplayer/Archive 1

This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archive 1

Welcome!

Welcome to Wikipedia, Zzzplayer! Thank you for your contributions. I am TheSpecialUser and I have been editing Wikipedia for some time, so if you have any questions feel free to leave me a message on my talk page. You can also check out Wikipedia:Questions or type {{helpme}} at the bottom of this page. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

Also, when you post on talk pages you should sign your name using four tildes (~~~~); that will automatically produce your username and the date. I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! TheSpecialUser ^TSU 14:45, 16 August 2012 (UTC)

This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

A bowl of strawberries for you!

Some strawberries for you :) I was doing nothing but was just trying to convey my thoughts. Despite of me being an editor for long, I can be wrong and my views may not be like others think. We may have difference of opinion and I may have annoyed you. It was never my intention to do so so my apologies if I caused you trouble. Hope you'll go a long way on the community and all the best! TheSpecialUser ^TSU 10:32, 23 August 2012 (UTC)

PlayStation 4: x86 vs RISC

I do like your most recent edit better than the first, since x86-64 is still mentioned, but there are still issues. When you get a chance, read these articles:

The focus here should be on the instruction set architecture. Your comment that it's possible to design a Cell processor with the x86-64 architecture further highlights the point I'm trying to make. It wasn't the Cell's overall design that made it obsolete. It was its reliance on one specific component, the RISC (Reduced Instruction Set Computing) CPU architecture specifically called Power or PowerPC in the Cell. RISC greatly contrasts with x86, as the articles explain, and therefore should be the focus of this statement in the article's lead. There's really no reason to mention AMD's APU. If Sony had gone with an Intel x86-64 processor, the difference would have still been the same. --GoneIn60 (talk) 18:28, 11 February 2014 (UTC)

The articles you posted did mentioned x86-64 being a major factor, which I agree, the x86-64 eco system (the dev tools and compilers) are far more mature than PowerPC for the last decade. I like x86-64 and I've to say x86-64 is the best among the four potential candidates (x86-64, MIPS, ARM, PowerPC).

However, the reason to choose x86-64 is not because CISC vs RISC, but because of the specfic processor architecture implementation.

The Forbes article you cited are just his own thoughts and what likely happened and is not based on any direct source (and Forbes is a bad source for hardware analysis and information). Though I agree with his reasoning that x86-64 being the best of the four other candidates.

I think based on your previous comments, you're confusing between "instruction set" and "processor architecture"; these two are seperate things.

Here is a direct quote from Dominic Mallinson (VP, U.S. Research and Development, Sony Computer Entertainment America) at AMD Developer Summit (APU13):

i) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z5tBolPan8U

"We made our decision based around what the developer needs and what the gamer wants so we chose a best in class APU" (and the first item they listed in the graph is a "supercharged PC like architecture". The second being x86 CPU and the third is an enhanced PC GPU).

ii) http://www.slideshare.net/DevCentralAMD/keynote-dominic-mallinson

In the slides, it mentioned "...Cost and complexity rose sharply". Is the PowerPC instruction set that's costy and comlex? NO. It's the Cell processor and the processor R&D that went into making the Cell that's costing Sony. By basing the PS4 processor on an already made APU, Sony gets everythings it wants and saves a ton of processor hardware R&D.

This fact is further evident from the other two consoles of the last generation, Xbox 360 and Wii. Both consoles used a processor based on the PowerPC instruction set, but you barely hear as much criticism about development difficulty of these two compared to the Cell.

The old Apple Macs processor uses PowerPC too, you don't hear such criticism either.

You also mentioned "If Sony had gone with an Intel x86-64 processor, the difference would have still been the same". I disagree. It would not because Intel has no mature integrated graphic solution and their graphics drivers typically has more issues compared to either Nvidia or AMD. If Sony would have gone with Intel, which they won't, then they would definitly need a seperate discrete graphics chip solution. Essential two seperete chips would be needed, which would make the console cost more. That's the technical aspect. For the economic aspect, it's even a bigger no. Game consoles are low margin business, Intel have no interest for the type of margin that Sony is willing to pay.

The original sentecne did not state "Moving away from complicated PowerPC instruction set...", it states "Moving away from complicated Cell processor..." because what bugs game developers the MOST is not the PowerPC instruction set, but the Cell processor itself (a specific ASIC implementation of PowerPC instruction set) which features custom SPE cores that are powerful, but requires additional custom coding work in order to unlock the performance.

It was processor architecture implementation, the Cell processor, with custom specialized cores that's costing BOTH Sony and game developers from the last generation. --Zzzplayer (talk) 07:47, 13 February 2014 (UTC)

I don't disagree with many of the points you've made, but regarding one item, I do. x86 and other instruction sets are a type of architecture. Have you ever heard of the term ISA? It stands for Instruction Set Architecture. In this old article from 2002, Ars Technica uses the term frequently to discuss x86 and x86-64. Also taken straight from Microsoft:

"The Intel x86 processor uses complex instruction set computer (CISC) architecture, which means there is a modest number of special-purpose registers instead of large quantities of general-purpose registers."

While I do appreciate getting into all the aspects of why Sony went with AMD's APU (e.g. lower cost, SoC, etc.), the sentence in the lead paragraph specifically focuses on what made it easier for developers. Developers aren't concerned about Sony's bottom line. They want a platform that is easy to code for. The Cell relied on RISC, as did the Xbox 360, but the difference was that the 360 had a tri-core processor capable of 6 simultaneous threads as opposed the Cell's limited 2 threads. To make up for it, the Cell employed SPE's that developers could farm some of the workload to, but of course, this added a lot more code. Hence the reason you always heard about the PS3 being more difficult to program for, not the 360.

An x86 CPU uses CISC, which has "branch prediction" among other advantages, making it the most defining difference between the Cell and the Jaguar. You can talk about the processor's architecture all day – unified memory, SoC, and GPGPU – but what really makes it easier to program for is the x86-64 instruction set architecture. Non-technical readers understand CPU more than APU. It's a widely recognized term. We should keep it simple in the lead and keep the more technical stuff in the body of the article. --GoneIn60 (talk) 09:16, 13 February 2014 (UTC)

First of all, I don't disagree x86-64 instruction set architecture being a major reason, but to write changing from the Cell architecture to the x86-64 instruction set, as the other guy did originally is awkward because the Cell microprocessor itself is not an instruction set, it's a processor microarchitecture. You can't compile your high level C/C++ code to Cell instruction sets, but to PowerPC. There is no Cell compiler, there is only PowerPC compiler. You don't move "processor microarchitecture" to an "instruction set architecture". Hence we have a revised version.

The comparison between the PS3 and Xbox360 processor just shows it's not sufficient to only say "instruction set architecture" because both processors utilize the PowerPC instruction set architecture, but depending on how the designers implement the processor microarchitecture, you can get very different results in terms of easy of programmability.

As for APU not a recognized term for the public, I disagree. The first part of the sentence uses "Cell architecture". So what is "Cell architecture" to most people? are people more familiar with "Cell architecture" than with APU? I doubt. If one can mention "Cell architecture", then another can mention "APU". The APUs to this day, have gone on to sold more than 100 Mil units since its introduction in 2011, that's more units than the PS3.--Zzzplayer (talk) 04:38, 14 February 2014 (UTC)

August 2015

Hello, I'm ScrapIronIV. I noticed that you recently removed some content from List of libertarians in the United States without explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an accurate edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry; I restored the removed content. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. Scr★pIron^IV 12:54, 10 August 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:57, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Zzzplayer. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, Zzzplayer. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, Zzzplayer. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)

ArbCom 2019 election voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2019 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:11, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

ArbCom 2020 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2020 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:24, 24 November 2020 (UTC)

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:39, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:35, 28 November 2023 (UTC)