nice figures....but the equating of k10 to real figures is....purely hypothetical.
how is the k8=100% (@1900) and k10=132% (@1900) derived? - does this assume a 32% gain for k10 over k8 baseline?
and does it also assume identical scaling for k10 versus an old p4?



nice figures....but the equating of k10 to real figures is....purely hypothetical.
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks