<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article09_06_01_0734202</id>
	<title>Looking at Intel's New-ish Desktop Socket, LGA 1366</title>
	<author>timothy</author>
	<datestamp>1243852260000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>Slatterz writes <i>"LGA 1366 is Intel's <a href="http://www.pcauthority.com.au/News/146515,lga-1366-explained-intels-first-new-desktop-socket-in-four-years.aspx">first new desktop socket in four years</a>. It uses the same ZIF design as the familiar LGA 775 architecture, but it incorporates many more contacts. These big architectural changes are backed up by some less visible advances. Until now, Intel's quad-core processors have been constructed from two dual-core dies, but now Core i7 brings together four cores on a single die. It's also Intel's first processor design to use an L3 cache, shared between all four cores."</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>Slatterz writes " LGA 1366 is Intel 's first new desktop socket in four years .
It uses the same ZIF design as the familiar LGA 775 architecture , but it incorporates many more contacts .
These big architectural changes are backed up by some less visible advances .
Until now , Intel 's quad-core processors have been constructed from two dual-core dies , but now Core i7 brings together four cores on a single die .
It 's also Intel 's first processor design to use an L3 cache , shared between all four cores .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Slatterz writes "LGA 1366 is Intel's first new desktop socket in four years.
It uses the same ZIF design as the familiar LGA 775 architecture, but it incorporates many more contacts.
These big architectural changes are backed up by some less visible advances.
Until now, Intel's quad-core processors have been constructed from two dual-core dies, but now Core i7 brings together four cores on a single die.
It's also Intel's first processor design to use an L3 cache, shared between all four cores.
"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_01_0734202.28169587</id>
	<title>Re:Did you TRY going back to fewer blades?</title>
	<author>Chris Burke</author>
	<datestamp>1243877640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>I thought myself, "what the fuck, why am I paying 32 euro for a couple of razor blades!" and I bought the cheap generic brand 2 blade stuff.</i></p><p><i>OUCH! Not saying it cut my face, it didn't but there really is a HUGE difference between the "quality" 5 blade razors and the cheap 2 blade kind. It is a smooth shave versus having the hair torn from your face. </i></p><p>I had the exact same experience when I tried to buy cheap generic 2-blade razors to replace my expensive name brand 2-blade razors.  Because it's about the quality of the individual razors, not the quantity of them.  You can buy crappy 5-blade razors that will also feel like you're shaving with 60 grit sandpaper.</p><p>Frankly having used 2, 3, 4 and 5 blade quality razors I think about the only difference is that more razors means less pressure with the same amount of force so you're less likely to nick yourself when you wake up late and have to shave in 2 minutes before having any coffee.  Otherwise, the extra blades seem practically worthless...  if the first 3 blades didn't cut the hair, then it's too low for the last two to cut either.  The blade that's right behind the allegedly-hair-raising rubber bumper thingie is where all the action is (and will cause you to replace the blade when it, not the 5th, blade wears out).</p><p>I guess you get a slightly cleaner shave in one pass, so if speed is of the essence... why aren't you using an electric?  Anyway, two passes of a two-blade razor gets me a better shave than one pass of a 5-blade, so I'm pretty satisfied.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I thought myself , " what the fuck , why am I paying 32 euro for a couple of razor blades !
" and I bought the cheap generic brand 2 blade stuff.OUCH !
Not saying it cut my face , it did n't but there really is a HUGE difference between the " quality " 5 blade razors and the cheap 2 blade kind .
It is a smooth shave versus having the hair torn from your face .
I had the exact same experience when I tried to buy cheap generic 2-blade razors to replace my expensive name brand 2-blade razors .
Because it 's about the quality of the individual razors , not the quantity of them .
You can buy crappy 5-blade razors that will also feel like you 're shaving with 60 grit sandpaper.Frankly having used 2 , 3 , 4 and 5 blade quality razors I think about the only difference is that more razors means less pressure with the same amount of force so you 're less likely to nick yourself when you wake up late and have to shave in 2 minutes before having any coffee .
Otherwise , the extra blades seem practically worthless... if the first 3 blades did n't cut the hair , then it 's too low for the last two to cut either .
The blade that 's right behind the allegedly-hair-raising rubber bumper thingie is where all the action is ( and will cause you to replace the blade when it , not the 5th , blade wears out ) .I guess you get a slightly cleaner shave in one pass , so if speed is of the essence... why are n't you using an electric ?
Anyway , two passes of a two-blade razor gets me a better shave than one pass of a 5-blade , so I 'm pretty satisfied .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I thought myself, "what the fuck, why am I paying 32 euro for a couple of razor blades!
" and I bought the cheap generic brand 2 blade stuff.OUCH!
Not saying it cut my face, it didn't but there really is a HUGE difference between the "quality" 5 blade razors and the cheap 2 blade kind.
It is a smooth shave versus having the hair torn from your face.
I had the exact same experience when I tried to buy cheap generic 2-blade razors to replace my expensive name brand 2-blade razors.
Because it's about the quality of the individual razors, not the quantity of them.
You can buy crappy 5-blade razors that will also feel like you're shaving with 60 grit sandpaper.Frankly having used 2, 3, 4 and 5 blade quality razors I think about the only difference is that more razors means less pressure with the same amount of force so you're less likely to nick yourself when you wake up late and have to shave in 2 minutes before having any coffee.
Otherwise, the extra blades seem practically worthless...  if the first 3 blades didn't cut the hair, then it's too low for the last two to cut either.
The blade that's right behind the allegedly-hair-raising rubber bumper thingie is where all the action is (and will cause you to replace the blade when it, not the 5th, blade wears out).I guess you get a slightly cleaner shave in one pass, so if speed is of the essence... why aren't you using an electric?
Anyway, two passes of a two-blade razor gets me a better shave than one pass of a 5-blade, so I'm pretty satisfied.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_01_0734202.28166395</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_01_0734202.28165973</id>
	<title>Read More... link broken?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243858200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Is it just in my browser of is the "Read More..." link broken?</p><p>Every time I click on one using Firefox, I get the same error:</p><p>Connection Interrupted</p><p>The document contains no data.</p><p>The network link was interrupted while negotiating a connection. Please try again.</p><p>This has been happening for days, maybe weeks now.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Is it just in my browser of is the " Read More... " link broken ? Every time I click on one using Firefox , I get the same error : Connection InterruptedThe document contains no data.The network link was interrupted while negotiating a connection .
Please try again.This has been happening for days , maybe weeks now .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Is it just in my browser of is the "Read More..." link broken?Every time I click on one using Firefox, I get the same error:Connection InterruptedThe document contains no data.The network link was interrupted while negotiating a connection.
Please try again.This has been happening for days, maybe weeks now.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_01_0734202.28165851</id>
	<title>Metaphor</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243856820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><i>"LGA 1366 is Intel's first new desktop socket in four years. It uses the same ZIF design as the familiar LGA 775 architecture, but it incorporates many more contacts</i> <br>
<br>
Bigger number! Woo-hoo! With the POWER of MATHS I can tell you<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...1366 over 775 = 76\% better!<br>
<br>
Reminds me of when I upgraded my disposable razor from one with 3 blades to 4 FREAKING BLADES!!!11!1<br>
<br>
I get 33\% more hot babes now.. FUCK YEAH<br>
<br>
(Yeah, yeah, 33\% of 0....)</htmltext>
<tokenext>" LGA 1366 is Intel 's first new desktop socket in four years .
It uses the same ZIF design as the familiar LGA 775 architecture , but it incorporates many more contacts Bigger number !
Woo-hoo ! With the POWER of MATHS I can tell you ...1366 over 775 = 76 \ % better !
Reminds me of when I upgraded my disposable razor from one with 3 blades to 4 FREAKING BLADES ! !
! 11 ! 1 I get 33 \ % more hot babes now.. FUCK YEAH ( Yeah , yeah , 33 \ % of 0.... )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"LGA 1366 is Intel's first new desktop socket in four years.
It uses the same ZIF design as the familiar LGA 775 architecture, but it incorporates many more contacts 

Bigger number!
Woo-hoo! With the POWER of MATHS I can tell you ...1366 over 775 = 76\% better!
Reminds me of when I upgraded my disposable razor from one with 3 blades to 4 FREAKING BLADES!!
!11!1

I get 33\% more hot babes now.. FUCK YEAH

(Yeah, yeah, 33\% of 0....)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_01_0734202.28165963</id>
	<title>About time!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243858080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>About time they copied HyperTransport! If I remember correctly AMD had a leg up on Intel for a few quarters in the multi-core war because of HyperTransport.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>About time they copied HyperTransport !
If I remember correctly AMD had a leg up on Intel for a few quarters in the multi-core war because of HyperTransport .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>About time they copied HyperTransport!
If I remember correctly AMD had a leg up on Intel for a few quarters in the multi-core war because of HyperTransport.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_01_0734202.28167471</id>
	<title>Re:Did you TRY going back to fewer blades?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243868640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>That is funny.  You paid 32 euros for a disposable razor, when about the same amount of money could have gotten you a quality straight razor.  Once you've learned how to use a straight razor, you'll never want to use any other kind.  Close shave, but unlike the (dear god are we actually up to five blades?  That was a joke I saw in a cartoon years back) disposable razors, you won't have any ingrown hairs.</htmltext>
<tokenext>That is funny .
You paid 32 euros for a disposable razor , when about the same amount of money could have gotten you a quality straight razor .
Once you 've learned how to use a straight razor , you 'll never want to use any other kind .
Close shave , but unlike the ( dear god are we actually up to five blades ?
That was a joke I saw in a cartoon years back ) disposable razors , you wo n't have any ingrown hairs .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That is funny.
You paid 32 euros for a disposable razor, when about the same amount of money could have gotten you a quality straight razor.
Once you've learned how to use a straight razor, you'll never want to use any other kind.
Close shave, but unlike the (dear god are we actually up to five blades?
That was a joke I saw in a cartoon years back) disposable razors, you won't have any ingrown hairs.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_01_0734202.28166395</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_01_0734202.28166429</id>
	<title>Re:Metaphor</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243862880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>4 blades? That's for pussies:

<a href="http://www.theonion.com/content/node/33930" title="theonion.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.theonion.com/content/node/33930</a> [theonion.com]</htmltext>
<tokenext>4 blades ?
That 's for pussies : http : //www.theonion.com/content/node/33930 [ theonion.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>4 blades?
That's for pussies:

http://www.theonion.com/content/node/33930 [theonion.com]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_01_0734202.28165851</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_01_0734202.28166169</id>
	<title>Pictures?</title>
	<author>AltGrendel</author>
	<datestamp>1243860420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>A picture of the <b>socket</b> instead of the chip would have been helpful.</htmltext>
<tokenext>A picture of the socket instead of the chip would have been helpful .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>A picture of the socket instead of the chip would have been helpful.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_01_0734202.28169703</id>
	<title>Re:Metaphor</title>
	<author>Chris Burke</author>
	<datestamp>1243878120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>Bigger number! Woo-hoo! With the POWER of MATHS I can tell you<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...1366 over 775 = 76\% better!</i></p><p>I'm certain the number is just the pin count which is a typical way to name sockets.  More pins isn't necessarily better but since in this particular case the explosion in pin count is due to adding three DDR3 channels on-chip I'm willing to bet it is.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Bigger number !
Woo-hoo ! With the POWER of MATHS I can tell you ...1366 over 775 = 76 \ % better ! I 'm certain the number is just the pin count which is a typical way to name sockets .
More pins is n't necessarily better but since in this particular case the explosion in pin count is due to adding three DDR3 channels on-chip I 'm willing to bet it is .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Bigger number!
Woo-hoo! With the POWER of MATHS I can tell you ...1366 over 775 = 76\% better!I'm certain the number is just the pin count which is a typical way to name sockets.
More pins isn't necessarily better but since in this particular case the explosion in pin count is due to adding three DDR3 channels on-chip I'm willing to bet it is.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_01_0734202.28165851</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_01_0734202.28165823</id>
	<title>I realised /. was slow sometimes...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243856400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>...but c'mon.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>...but c'mon .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...but c'mon.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_01_0734202.28165913</id>
	<title>Slow news day</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243857420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Since there isn't going to be many comments, I am taking this opportunity to come out.</p><p>I'm a Mac user. An iphone owner. A friend of Dorothy. In short, I'm gay.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Since there is n't going to be many comments , I am taking this opportunity to come out.I 'm a Mac user .
An iphone owner .
A friend of Dorothy .
In short , I 'm gay .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Since there isn't going to be many comments, I am taking this opportunity to come out.I'm a Mac user.
An iphone owner.
A friend of Dorothy.
In short, I'm gay.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_01_0734202.28166159</id>
	<title>Just a bit behind</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243860300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Everyone thinks this article is announcing news that's 6+ months old, but really it's just an April Fool's joke that's 2 months old.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Everyone thinks this article is announcing news that 's 6 + months old , but really it 's just an April Fool 's joke that 's 2 months old .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Everyone thinks this article is announcing news that's 6+ months old, but really it's just an April Fool's joke that's 2 months old.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_01_0734202.28166281</id>
	<title>Re:Not the new desktop socket</title>
	<author>asc99c</author>
	<datestamp>1243861560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The socket for Core i7 equivalent Xeons is the same LGA-1366, but the standard Core i7 only has one QPI link, so you can't use them in dual CPU configs.</p><p>I hadn't heard about LGA-1156, but I'm a bit suspicious whether it will really take off.  I don't really understand now that Intel have launched LGA-1366 where is the room for a slightly lower spec socket.  I wouldn't have thought a few extra pins in the socket is that expensive, and buying RAM in packs of 3 isn't that much of a problem - and it's optional anyway.</p><p>By Q3 when LGA-1156 is due, Core i7 will be already heading down into the mainstream.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The socket for Core i7 equivalent Xeons is the same LGA-1366 , but the standard Core i7 only has one QPI link , so you ca n't use them in dual CPU configs.I had n't heard about LGA-1156 , but I 'm a bit suspicious whether it will really take off .
I do n't really understand now that Intel have launched LGA-1366 where is the room for a slightly lower spec socket .
I would n't have thought a few extra pins in the socket is that expensive , and buying RAM in packs of 3 is n't that much of a problem - and it 's optional anyway.By Q3 when LGA-1156 is due , Core i7 will be already heading down into the mainstream .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The socket for Core i7 equivalent Xeons is the same LGA-1366, but the standard Core i7 only has one QPI link, so you can't use them in dual CPU configs.I hadn't heard about LGA-1156, but I'm a bit suspicious whether it will really take off.
I don't really understand now that Intel have launched LGA-1366 where is the room for a slightly lower spec socket.
I wouldn't have thought a few extra pins in the socket is that expensive, and buying RAM in packs of 3 isn't that much of a problem - and it's optional anyway.By Q3 when LGA-1156 is due, Core i7 will be already heading down into the mainstream.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_01_0734202.28165991</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_01_0734202.28166077</id>
	<title>Re:Uh, what?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243859460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Flick the switch and it turns on!</p></div></blockquote><p> I've heard some of the newer designs are using pushbuttons instead of switches. I know....it sounds absurd, but apparently it's true.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Flick the switch and it turns on !
I 've heard some of the newer designs are using pushbuttons instead of switches .
I know....it sounds absurd , but apparently it 's true .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Flick the switch and it turns on!
I've heard some of the newer designs are using pushbuttons instead of switches.
I know....it sounds absurd, but apparently it's true.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_01_0734202.28165841</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_01_0734202.28165785</id>
	<title>Yawn</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243855920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Wake me up with there is something worth posting to Slashdot</htmltext>
<tokenext>Wake me up with there is something worth posting to Slashdot</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Wake me up with there is something worth posting to Slashdot</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_01_0734202.28166625</id>
	<title>Re:Not the new desktop socket</title>
	<author>313373\_bot</author>
	<datestamp>1243864140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>For what it is worth, looks like artificial market segmentation = bad for upgraders. AMD is guilty of that, too.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>For what it is worth , looks like artificial market segmentation = bad for upgraders .
AMD is guilty of that , too .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>For what it is worth, looks like artificial market segmentation = bad for upgraders.
AMD is guilty of that, too.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_01_0734202.28165991</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_01_0734202.28167013</id>
	<title>Re:Metaphor</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243866480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I get 33\% more hot babes now.. FUCK YEAH</p></div><p> <a href="http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/earthnews/3345796/Women-prefer-men-with-stubble-for-love-sex-and-marriage.html" title="telegraph.co.uk" rel="nofollow">Some study</a> [telegraph.co.uk] disagrees.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I get 33 \ % more hot babes now.. FUCK YEAH Some study [ telegraph.co.uk ] disagrees .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I get 33\% more hot babes now.. FUCK YEAH Some study [telegraph.co.uk] disagrees.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_01_0734202.28165851</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_01_0734202.28175443</id>
	<title>Dammit it's something to bitch about!</title>
	<author>mrmeval</author>
	<datestamp>1243858500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So quit your whining already.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So quit your whining already .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So quit your whining already.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_01_0734202.28165823</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_01_0734202.28166877</id>
	<title>just one x16 link and a slow dmi link is too small</title>
	<author>Joe The Dragon</author>
	<datestamp>1243865760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>just one x16 link and a slow dmi link is too small</p><p>as 1 / 2 video cards cards will eat up the x16 link. Making sound / ide / sata / network / system and bios IO / other pci-e slots / firewire / usb all share the slow DMI link or force MB makers to put pci-e switches (driving costs up) one the x16 link.</p><p>AMD wins aging all cpus use HT driving MB costs down as well letting the same MB run low and high end cpus.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>just one x16 link and a slow dmi link is too smallas 1 / 2 video cards cards will eat up the x16 link .
Making sound / ide / sata / network / system and bios IO / other pci-e slots / firewire / usb all share the slow DMI link or force MB makers to put pci-e switches ( driving costs up ) one the x16 link.AMD wins aging all cpus use HT driving MB costs down as well letting the same MB run low and high end cpus .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>just one x16 link and a slow dmi link is too smallas 1 / 2 video cards cards will eat up the x16 link.
Making sound / ide / sata / network / system and bios IO / other pci-e slots / firewire / usb all share the slow DMI link or force MB makers to put pci-e switches (driving costs up) one the x16 link.AMD wins aging all cpus use HT driving MB costs down as well letting the same MB run low and high end cpus.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_01_0734202.28166259</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_01_0734202.28166297</id>
	<title>Re:Not the new desktop socket</title>
	<author>niteshifter</author>
	<datestamp>1243861860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>&gt; </p><p>.... IIRC, LGA 1366 has a <b>tripe</b>-channel memory controller<nobr> <wbr></nobr>....</p></div><p>So<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... it's optimized for WIndows Server?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>&gt; .... IIRC , LGA 1366 has a tripe-channel memory controller ....So ... it 's optimized for WIndows Server ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>&gt; .... IIRC, LGA 1366 has a tripe-channel memory controller ....So ... it's optimized for WIndows Server?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_01_0734202.28165991</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_01_0734202.28166075</id>
	<title>Re:Metaphor</title>
	<author>kestasjk</author>
	<datestamp>1243859400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>More contacts -&gt; more data transfer at same clock rate.

More blades on a razor -&gt; not much difference.

(Also re:title: "Metaphor"? Don't you mean "analogy"?)</htmltext>
<tokenext>More contacts - &gt; more data transfer at same clock rate .
More blades on a razor - &gt; not much difference .
( Also re : title : " Metaphor " ?
Do n't you mean " analogy " ?
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>More contacts -&gt; more data transfer at same clock rate.
More blades on a razor -&gt; not much difference.
(Also re:title: "Metaphor"?
Don't you mean "analogy"?
)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_01_0734202.28165851</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_01_0734202.28168365</id>
	<title>MB prices</title>
	<author>m.dillon</author>
	<datestamp>1243872420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I have noticed that motherboard prices for higher-end AMD Phenom systems seem to be a lot lower then MB prices for Intel I7 systems.  AMD's high integration approach seems to be paying off there.  The only real issue seems to be AMDs lack of support for larger 16G memory configurations in its desktop line.</p><p>The whole-system price for a Phenom X4 system (using e.g. A Shuttle SN78SH7 as a base) is less then $600.  Every year it seems I can buy a cheap off-the-shelf barebones system and completely replace several of the previous year's servers, if not for the HD performance requirements.  The biggest constraint for ALL of my machines, these days, is HD performance.</p><p>On the storage and performance front I think the addition of external ESATA connectors to base motherboards may actually be the more important change.  Manufacturers made the same mistake with direct, native NAS that they made with SCSI... they blew it by keeping prices ridiculously high.  It is the same thing that allowed SATA to take over much of the consumer and mid-sized business markets from SCSI over the last few years.  Now NAS has been relegated to having to compete directly with high-level protocols like NFS and is getting squeezed into a smaller niche.  Firewire has become standardized too but could never break into the HD market as a native connection standard.  The end result is that ESATA is likely to consolidate and become *THE* connect standard of choice for external storage subsystems.</p><p>-Matt</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I have noticed that motherboard prices for higher-end AMD Phenom systems seem to be a lot lower then MB prices for Intel I7 systems .
AMD 's high integration approach seems to be paying off there .
The only real issue seems to be AMDs lack of support for larger 16G memory configurations in its desktop line.The whole-system price for a Phenom X4 system ( using e.g .
A Shuttle SN78SH7 as a base ) is less then $ 600 .
Every year it seems I can buy a cheap off-the-shelf barebones system and completely replace several of the previous year 's servers , if not for the HD performance requirements .
The biggest constraint for ALL of my machines , these days , is HD performance.On the storage and performance front I think the addition of external ESATA connectors to base motherboards may actually be the more important change .
Manufacturers made the same mistake with direct , native NAS that they made with SCSI... they blew it by keeping prices ridiculously high .
It is the same thing that allowed SATA to take over much of the consumer and mid-sized business markets from SCSI over the last few years .
Now NAS has been relegated to having to compete directly with high-level protocols like NFS and is getting squeezed into a smaller niche .
Firewire has become standardized too but could never break into the HD market as a native connection standard .
The end result is that ESATA is likely to consolidate and become * THE * connect standard of choice for external storage subsystems.-Matt</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I have noticed that motherboard prices for higher-end AMD Phenom systems seem to be a lot lower then MB prices for Intel I7 systems.
AMD's high integration approach seems to be paying off there.
The only real issue seems to be AMDs lack of support for larger 16G memory configurations in its desktop line.The whole-system price for a Phenom X4 system (using e.g.
A Shuttle SN78SH7 as a base) is less then $600.
Every year it seems I can buy a cheap off-the-shelf barebones system and completely replace several of the previous year's servers, if not for the HD performance requirements.
The biggest constraint for ALL of my machines, these days, is HD performance.On the storage and performance front I think the addition of external ESATA connectors to base motherboards may actually be the more important change.
Manufacturers made the same mistake with direct, native NAS that they made with SCSI... they blew it by keeping prices ridiculously high.
It is the same thing that allowed SATA to take over much of the consumer and mid-sized business markets from SCSI over the last few years.
Now NAS has been relegated to having to compete directly with high-level protocols like NFS and is getting squeezed into a smaller niche.
Firewire has become standardized too but could never break into the HD market as a native connection standard.
The end result is that ESATA is likely to consolidate and become *THE* connect standard of choice for external storage subsystems.-Matt</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_01_0734202.28166399</id>
	<title>Re:Uh, what?</title>
	<author>nih</author>
	<datestamp>1243862700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>ATX?, pah! BTX is all the rage now!</htmltext>
<tokenext>ATX ? , pah !
BTX is all the rage now !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>ATX?, pah!
BTX is all the rage now!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_01_0734202.28165841</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_01_0734202.28166187</id>
	<title>Oblig. Comic Reference</title>
	<author>L4t3r4lu5</author>
	<datestamp>1243860540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>I'm afraid ATX supplies won't be needed when the <a href="http://www.penny-arcade.com/comic/2009/3/9/" title="penny-arcade.com">new wireless platform that never needs to be charged</a> [penny-arcade.com] is released.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm afraid ATX supplies wo n't be needed when the new wireless platform that never needs to be charged [ penny-arcade.com ] is released .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm afraid ATX supplies won't be needed when the new wireless platform that never needs to be charged [penny-arcade.com] is released.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_01_0734202.28165841</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_01_0734202.28165991</id>
	<title>Not the new desktop socket</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243858500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>LGA 1366 is intended for servers, workstations, and high-end gaming PCs.  LGA 1156 will be the mainstream<br>
&nbsp; desktop socket.</p><p>What's the difference? IIRC, LGA 1366 has a tripe-channel memory controller and support for dual CPUs (via another QuickPath link).  LGA 1156 has dual-channel memory support with support for only one CPU.</p><p>The desktop CPU for LGA 1156 will be called Core i5.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>LGA 1366 is intended for servers , workstations , and high-end gaming PCs .
LGA 1156 will be the mainstream   desktop socket.What 's the difference ?
IIRC , LGA 1366 has a tripe-channel memory controller and support for dual CPUs ( via another QuickPath link ) .
LGA 1156 has dual-channel memory support with support for only one CPU.The desktop CPU for LGA 1156 will be called Core i5 .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>LGA 1366 is intended for servers, workstations, and high-end gaming PCs.
LGA 1156 will be the mainstream
  desktop socket.What's the difference?
IIRC, LGA 1366 has a tripe-channel memory controller and support for dual CPUs (via another QuickPath link).
LGA 1156 has dual-channel memory support with support for only one CPU.The desktop CPU for LGA 1156 will be called Core i5.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_01_0734202.28166205</id>
	<title>wooohooo!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243860720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Duz it haz poniez and lolcatz? 'N iz it pink? Gimme, wan' it now!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Duz it haz poniez and lolcatz ?
'N iz it pink ?
Gim me , wan ' it now !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Duz it haz poniez and lolcatz?
'N iz it pink?
Gimme, wan' it now!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_01_0734202.28170605</id>
	<title>Re:I realised /. was slow sometimes...</title>
	<author>James Skarzinskas</author>
	<datestamp>1243882560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Examining Intel's Latest Offering: Socket 5!</p><p>You heard it first on Slashdot!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Examining Intel 's Latest Offering : Socket 5 ! You heard it first on Slashdot !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Examining Intel's Latest Offering: Socket 5!You heard it first on Slashdot!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_01_0734202.28165823</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_01_0734202.28165945</id>
	<title>Re:Slow news day</title>
	<author>Tenebrousedge</author>
	<datestamp>1243857720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Uh...Regard that, I suck cocks?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Uh...Regard that , I suck cocks ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Uh...Regard that, I suck cocks?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_01_0734202.28165913</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_01_0734202.28168791</id>
	<title>Why?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243874340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Why are we looking at it?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Why are we looking at it ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why are we looking at it?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_01_0734202.28166151</id>
	<title>Re:Not the new desktop socket</title>
	<author>vyvepe</author>
	<datestamp>1243860300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>LGA 1156: Also, there is 16 PCIe links on the processor die directly and there is only 2 GB/s connection from CPU to P55 PCH. No QPI. More information is here:
<a href="http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=3570&amp;p=2" title="anandtech.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=3570&amp;p=2</a> [anandtech.com]</htmltext>
<tokenext>LGA 1156 : Also , there is 16 PCIe links on the processor die directly and there is only 2 GB/s connection from CPU to P55 PCH .
No QPI .
More information is here : http : //www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx ? i = 3570&amp;p = 2 [ anandtech.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>LGA 1156: Also, there is 16 PCIe links on the processor die directly and there is only 2 GB/s connection from CPU to P55 PCH.
No QPI.
More information is here:
http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=3570&amp;p=2 [anandtech.com]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_01_0734202.28165991</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_01_0734202.28165841</id>
	<title>Uh, what?</title>
	<author>pathological liar</author>
	<datestamp>1243856640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This might have been news 7 or 8 months ago when the chips were released.</p><p>What's next? ATX Power Supplies Explained? "Plugs into any ordinary wall socket! Flick the switch and it turns on! Use it to power your computer! You'll see them turning up in shops any day now!"</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This might have been news 7 or 8 months ago when the chips were released.What 's next ?
ATX Power Supplies Explained ?
" Plugs into any ordinary wall socket !
Flick the switch and it turns on !
Use it to power your computer !
You 'll see them turning up in shops any day now !
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This might have been news 7 or 8 months ago when the chips were released.What's next?
ATX Power Supplies Explained?
"Plugs into any ordinary wall socket!
Flick the switch and it turns on!
Use it to power your computer!
You'll see them turning up in shops any day now!
"</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_01_0734202.28165977</id>
	<title>Re:Slow news day</title>
	<author>TeknoHog</author>
	<datestamp>1243858200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eric\_Allman#Personal\_life" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow">"it's basically impossible to send a piece of hate mail through the Internet without its being touched by a gay program."</a> [wikipedia.org]</htmltext>
<tokenext>" it 's basically impossible to send a piece of hate mail through the Internet without its being touched by a gay program .
" [ wikipedia.org ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"it's basically impossible to send a piece of hate mail through the Internet without its being touched by a gay program.
" [wikipedia.org]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_01_0734202.28165913</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_01_0734202.28166873</id>
	<title>Re:I realised /. was slow sometimes...</title>
	<author>Z00L00K</author>
	<datestamp>1243865700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The 1366 socket has been around for almost a year now, so I also wonder why it appeared now.</p><p>Did someone mistype the year to 2009 this time last year?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The 1366 socket has been around for almost a year now , so I also wonder why it appeared now.Did someone mistype the year to 2009 this time last year ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The 1366 socket has been around for almost a year now, so I also wonder why it appeared now.Did someone mistype the year to 2009 this time last year?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_01_0734202.28165823</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_01_0734202.28166107</id>
	<title>Kittens</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243859880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Kittens are kinda awesome.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Kittens are kinda awesome .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Kittens are kinda awesome.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_01_0734202.28170251</id>
	<title>Re:Did you TRY going back to fewer blades?</title>
	<author>piojo</author>
	<datestamp>1243880940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>After using a 3-blade Gilette razor for a couple years, I tried the older 2-blade version and liked it a lot better. I can't really say why, but it seemed to give a cleaner shave and have less irritation. I consequently believe that all this "now with even more blades" nonsense is just marketing.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>After using a 3-blade Gilette razor for a couple years , I tried the older 2-blade version and liked it a lot better .
I ca n't really say why , but it seemed to give a cleaner shave and have less irritation .
I consequently believe that all this " now with even more blades " nonsense is just marketing .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>After using a 3-blade Gilette razor for a couple years, I tried the older 2-blade version and liked it a lot better.
I can't really say why, but it seemed to give a cleaner shave and have less irritation.
I consequently believe that all this "now with even more blades" nonsense is just marketing.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_01_0734202.28166395</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_01_0734202.28165805</id>
	<title>Why are they making more silicon chips</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243856160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Priorities, people! There are like 500 trillion starving people out there and all everybody's talking about is Intel this, microwsoft that, googel et setira. I say there should be no computers until after lunch. "Die" that, nerds!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Priorities , people !
There are like 500 trillion starving people out there and all everybody 's talking about is Intel this , microwsoft that , googel et setira .
I say there should be no computers until after lunch .
" Die " that , nerds !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Priorities, people!
There are like 500 trillion starving people out there and all everybody's talking about is Intel this, microwsoft that, googel et setira.
I say there should be no computers until after lunch.
"Die" that, nerds!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_01_0734202.28166395</id>
	<title>Did you TRY going back to fewer blades?</title>
	<author>SmallFurryCreature</author>
	<datestamp>1243862700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I thought myself, "what the fuck, why am I paying 32 euro for a couple of razor blades!" and I bought the cheap generic brand 2 blade stuff.
</p><p>OUCH! Not saying it cut my face, it didn't but there really is a HUGE difference between the "quality" 5 blade razors and the cheap 2 blade kind. It is a smooth shave versus having the hair torn from your face.
</p><p>Crybaby you might say, or I might just have had a really bad 2 blade razor but still. I ain't going back again.
</p><p>So if you got a baby soft skin and a 5 o'clock shadow, then more blades are actually a good thing. Or maybe just really sharp blades.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I thought myself , " what the fuck , why am I paying 32 euro for a couple of razor blades !
" and I bought the cheap generic brand 2 blade stuff .
OUCH ! Not saying it cut my face , it did n't but there really is a HUGE difference between the " quality " 5 blade razors and the cheap 2 blade kind .
It is a smooth shave versus having the hair torn from your face .
Crybaby you might say , or I might just have had a really bad 2 blade razor but still .
I ai n't going back again .
So if you got a baby soft skin and a 5 o'clock shadow , then more blades are actually a good thing .
Or maybe just really sharp blades .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I thought myself, "what the fuck, why am I paying 32 euro for a couple of razor blades!
" and I bought the cheap generic brand 2 blade stuff.
OUCH! Not saying it cut my face, it didn't but there really is a HUGE difference between the "quality" 5 blade razors and the cheap 2 blade kind.
It is a smooth shave versus having the hair torn from your face.
Crybaby you might say, or I might just have had a really bad 2 blade razor but still.
I ain't going back again.
So if you got a baby soft skin and a 5 o'clock shadow, then more blades are actually a good thing.
Or maybe just really sharp blades.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_01_0734202.28165851</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_01_0734202.28166011</id>
	<title>Re:Metaphor</title>
	<author>cripkd</author>
	<datestamp>1243858740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>4 blades?
Why are you leaving in the stone age? Why don't you use a knife instead?
We have upgraded to 6 (yes, SIX) blades like for... months!!!
Best sell your flintstone car and buy an SUV. They will be the next big thing.</htmltext>
<tokenext>4 blades ?
Why are you leaving in the stone age ?
Why do n't you use a knife instead ?
We have upgraded to 6 ( yes , SIX ) blades like for.. .
months ! ! ! Best sell your flintstone car and buy an SUV .
They will be the next big thing .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>4 blades?
Why are you leaving in the stone age?
Why don't you use a knife instead?
We have upgraded to 6 (yes, SIX) blades like for...
months!!!
Best sell your flintstone car and buy an SUV.
They will be the next big thing.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_01_0734202.28165851</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_01_0734202.28165951</id>
	<title>Re:Metaphor</title>
	<author>TeknoHog</author>
	<datestamp>1243857780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>
Reminds me of when I upgraded my disposable razor from one with 3 blades to 4 FREAKING BLADES!!!11!1
</p><p>
I get 33\% more hot babes now.. FUCK YEAH
</p><p>
(Yeah, yeah, 33\% of 0....)
</p></div><p>
And that's why they call it "machturbo".
</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Reminds me of when I upgraded my disposable razor from one with 3 blades to 4 FREAKING BLADES ! !
! 11 ! 1 I get 33 \ % more hot babes now.. FUCK YEAH ( Yeah , yeah , 33 \ % of 0.... ) And that 's why they call it " machturbo " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>
Reminds me of when I upgraded my disposable razor from one with 3 blades to 4 FREAKING BLADES!!
!11!1

I get 33\% more hot babes now.. FUCK YEAH

(Yeah, yeah, 33\% of 0....)

And that's why they call it "machturbo".

	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_01_0734202.28165851</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_01_0734202.28166105</id>
	<title>2008's news again...</title>
	<author>ricky-road-flats</author>
	<datestamp>1243859820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>And I thought Australia was 12 hours ahead of us!</htmltext>
<tokenext>And I thought Australia was 12 hours ahead of us !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And I thought Australia was 12 hours ahead of us!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_01_0734202.28166201</id>
	<title>Re:Metaphor</title>
	<author>L4t3r4lu5</author>
	<datestamp>1243860720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>I can shave so quickly with my new <a href="http://www.shave.com/azor/" title="shave.com">R^hAzor</a> [shave.com] that the last four letters of the name accelerate faster than the first one!<br> <br> <b>Whooosh!</b></htmltext>
<tokenext>I can shave so quickly with my new R ^ hAzor [ shave.com ] that the last four letters of the name accelerate faster than the first one !
Whooosh !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I can shave so quickly with my new R^hAzor [shave.com] that the last four letters of the name accelerate faster than the first one!
Whooosh!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_01_0734202.28165851</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_01_0734202.28166259</id>
	<title>Re:Not the new desktop socket</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243861140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Please refer to the excellent Anandtech <a href="http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=3570&amp;p=2" title="anandtech.com">preview article on Lynnfield</a> [anandtech.com] that will be the first family of CPUs to use LGA 1156. Lynnfield has uses a dual-channel DDR3 controller instead of using triple-channel integrated memory controller in its uncore like Nehalem does. However, the dual-channel controller should still provide enough bandwidth for most desktop apps (the Nehalem architecture is not bandwidth constrained at all, unlike all previous generation CPUs including Core2 that used massive L2 caches to offset the memory bandwidth bottleneck due to the FSB). </p><p>However, the main difference between Lynnfield/LGA 1156 and LGA 1366 used in servers is the fact that it doesn't use QuickPath at all. Instead, it uses a combination of integrated PCIe 2.0 x16 controller (to talk to the graphics subsystem) and a (much slower) DMI controller to talk to everything else. Its an interesting alternative to QuickPath which is frankly expensive overkill for desktops anyway. The key advantage of the new socket will be significantly lower prices of motherboards and CPUs, which will allow Intel to provide some credible alternatives to AMD's current offerings that may be slower than Nehalem but are also much cheaper.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Please refer to the excellent Anandtech preview article on Lynnfield [ anandtech.com ] that will be the first family of CPUs to use LGA 1156 .
Lynnfield has uses a dual-channel DDR3 controller instead of using triple-channel integrated memory controller in its uncore like Nehalem does .
However , the dual-channel controller should still provide enough bandwidth for most desktop apps ( the Nehalem architecture is not bandwidth constrained at all , unlike all previous generation CPUs including Core2 that used massive L2 caches to offset the memory bandwidth bottleneck due to the FSB ) .
However , the main difference between Lynnfield/LGA 1156 and LGA 1366 used in servers is the fact that it does n't use QuickPath at all .
Instead , it uses a combination of integrated PCIe 2.0 x16 controller ( to talk to the graphics subsystem ) and a ( much slower ) DMI controller to talk to everything else .
Its an interesting alternative to QuickPath which is frankly expensive overkill for desktops anyway .
The key advantage of the new socket will be significantly lower prices of motherboards and CPUs , which will allow Intel to provide some credible alternatives to AMD 's current offerings that may be slower than Nehalem but are also much cheaper .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Please refer to the excellent Anandtech preview article on Lynnfield [anandtech.com] that will be the first family of CPUs to use LGA 1156.
Lynnfield has uses a dual-channel DDR3 controller instead of using triple-channel integrated memory controller in its uncore like Nehalem does.
However, the dual-channel controller should still provide enough bandwidth for most desktop apps (the Nehalem architecture is not bandwidth constrained at all, unlike all previous generation CPUs including Core2 that used massive L2 caches to offset the memory bandwidth bottleneck due to the FSB).
However, the main difference between Lynnfield/LGA 1156 and LGA 1366 used in servers is the fact that it doesn't use QuickPath at all.
Instead, it uses a combination of integrated PCIe 2.0 x16 controller (to talk to the graphics subsystem) and a (much slower) DMI controller to talk to everything else.
Its an interesting alternative to QuickPath which is frankly expensive overkill for desktops anyway.
The key advantage of the new socket will be significantly lower prices of motherboards and CPUs, which will allow Intel to provide some credible alternatives to AMD's current offerings that may be slower than Nehalem but are also much cheaper.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_01_0734202.28165991</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_01_0734202.28166245</id>
	<title>Re:Pictures?</title>
	<author>VampireByte</author>
	<datestamp>1243860960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Maybe a picture of that many pins would be too scary.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Maybe a picture of that many pins would be too scary .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Maybe a picture of that many pins would be too scary.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_01_0734202.28166169</parent>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_01_0734202_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_01_0734202.28165977
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_01_0734202.28165913
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_01_0734202_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_01_0734202.28166625
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_01_0734202.28165991
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_01_0734202_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_01_0734202.28175443
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_01_0734202.28165823
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_01_0734202_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_01_0734202.28166011
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_01_0734202.28165851
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_01_0734202_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_01_0734202.28166245
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_01_0734202.28166169
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_01_0734202_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_01_0734202.28167013
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_01_0734202.28165851
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_01_0734202_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_01_0734202.28167471
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_01_0734202.28166395
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_01_0734202.28165851
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_01_0734202_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_01_0734202.28166873
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_01_0734202.28165823
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_01_0734202_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_01_0734202.28166077
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_01_0734202.28165841
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_01_0734202_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_01_0734202.28166877
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_01_0734202.28166259
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_01_0734202.28165991
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_01_0734202_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_01_0734202.28169587
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_01_0734202.28166395
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_01_0734202.28165851
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_01_0734202_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_01_0734202.28165945
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_01_0734202.28165913
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_01_0734202_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_01_0734202.28169703
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_01_0734202.28165851
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_01_0734202_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_01_0734202.28166281
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_01_0734202.28165991
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_01_0734202_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_01_0734202.28166429
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_01_0734202.28165851
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_01_0734202_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_01_0734202.28165951
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_01_0734202.28165851
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_01_0734202_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_01_0734202.28166297
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_01_0734202.28165991
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_01_0734202_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_01_0734202.28166075
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_01_0734202.28165851
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_01_0734202_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_01_0734202.28166151
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_01_0734202.28165991
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_01_0734202_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_01_0734202.28166399
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_01_0734202.28165841
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_01_0734202_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_01_0734202.28166187
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_01_0734202.28165841
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_01_0734202_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_01_0734202.28166201
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_01_0734202.28165851
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_01_0734202_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_01_0734202.28170251
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_01_0734202.28166395
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_01_0734202.28165851
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_01_0734202_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_01_0734202.28170605
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_01_0734202.28165823
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_01_0734202.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_01_0734202.28168365
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_01_0734202.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_01_0734202.28166105
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_01_0734202.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_01_0734202.28165785
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_01_0734202.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_01_0734202.28165991
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_01_0734202.28166151
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_01_0734202.28166281
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_01_0734202.28166297
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_01_0734202.28166259
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_01_0734202.28166877
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_01_0734202.28166625
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_01_0734202.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_01_0734202.28165851
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_01_0734202.28166075
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_01_0734202.28166429
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_01_0734202.28167013
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_01_0734202.28166011
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_01_0734202.28166395
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_01_0734202.28167471
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_01_0734202.28170251
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_01_0734202.28169587
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_01_0734202.28165951
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_01_0734202.28169703
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_01_0734202.28166201
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_01_0734202.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_01_0734202.28165963
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_01_0734202.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_01_0734202.28165913
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_01_0734202.28165977
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_01_0734202.28165945
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_01_0734202.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_01_0734202.28165841
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_01_0734202.28166187
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_01_0734202.28166077
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_01_0734202.28166399
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_01_0734202.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_01_0734202.28166169
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_01_0734202.28166245
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_01_0734202.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_01_0734202.28165823
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_01_0734202.28175443
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_01_0734202.28170605
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_01_0734202.28166873
</commentlist>
</conversation>
