Thank you for your interest in TATA Consultancy Services! | ||
| We have received your application for an employment opportunity in our organization. TCS is conducting its selection process for trainees on 02-SEP-2007. | ||
| If you do not satisfy the following eligibility criteria, you may ignore this mail. | ||
Eligibility Criteria:
You may have two rounds of Aptitude test. Request you to plan your schedule accordingly. PLEASE FOLLOW THE INSTRUCTIONS GIVEN BELOW TO PARTICIPATE IN THE SELECTION PROCESS FOR TRAINEE POSITIONS IN TCS | ||
IMPORTANT: Please fill your personal details as soon as possible to get your Hall Ticket generated before the drive capacity gets exhausted as the Hall Ticket would be generated on a first come first serve basis. | ||
| | ||
(1) Two printed copies of your Hall Ticket. (2) A printed copy of this mail. (3) Your CV/Resume. (4) A photo Identity Proof. (5) Two recent passport size photographs. (6) Two HB Pencils, Sharpeners and Erasers. | ||
| In case you are unable to generate and print out your hall ticket, you may connect to Toll Free No : 1800-22-01-00 or e-mail at : ilp.support@tcs.com . | ||
| Venue Details: | ||
| Tata Consultancy Services B Block, | ||
| 2nd Floor No.1 Jawaharlal Nehru Road,Vadapalani, | ||
| ||
| ||
Labels: Chennai, Freshers, September2 2007 fresher, TCS
Read more!
Gunfight at the 64-Bit Corral
When it looked like AMD was going to render Intel's multibillion dollar IA64 effort (aka Itanium) irrelevant with its brassy push into 64-bit computing using an extended x86 architecture, Intel responded with EM64T. When it was first revealed that Intel had an x86-64 project in the works, codenamed Yamhill, the company at first denied the project's existence. Eventually, though, EM64T surfaced, and it proved to be a near-clone of AMD's x86-64. There are some subtle differences in calling conventions between the two processors, but the differences are slight enough that compatibility isn't usually a worry.
Last week in Part I, we took a look at the AMD dual-core Athlon 64 X2 4800's performance on 64-bit Windows. As it turned out, Windows XP Pro X64 ran most 32-bit applications just fine on the X2 4800, and 64-bit code showed a few modest performance gains.
ADVERTISEMENT
Our article generated considerable interest in the community at large. We received several interesting emails on the topic. One of the most salient was from Joe Landman of Scalable Informatics. Scalable ran a variety of 32-bit-vs-64-bit tests on Opteron CPUs. Although somewhat synthetic, the tasks run were applicable to certain types of scientific computing. SI found that 64-bit code was almost always faster than 32-bit code, when properly written.
David Wren of Passmark Software, an Australian utility software company, echoed those findings, and allowed us to use Passmark's Performance Test, which is available in both 32-bit and 64-bit versions. PPT is synthetic in nature, but can yield interesting results that point to potential theoretical gains with 64-bit code.
Given Intel's renewed focus on both 64-bit x86, coupled with its rapid, if somewhat improvisational, push into dual-core processing, we wanted to see just how well Intel's dual-core processors fared with 64-bit Windows relative to AMD's best. So we loaded up a system with an Intel Pentium Extreme Edition 840 and took it for a spin. Intel is nothing if not a fierce competitor, so let's see how the dust settles.
Read more!
When it looked like AMD was going to render Intel's multibillion dollar IA64 effort (aka Itanium) irrelevant with its brassy push into 64-bit computing using an extended x86 architecture, Intel responded with EM64T. When it was first revealed that Intel had an x86-64 project in the works, codenamed Yamhill, the company at first denied the project's existence. Eventually, though, EM64T surfaced, and it proved to be a near-clone of AMD's x86-64. There are some subtle differences in calling conventions between the two processors, but the differences are slight enough that compatibility isn't usually a worry.
Last week in Part I, we took a look at the AMD dual-core Athlon 64 X2 4800's performance on 64-bit Windows. As it turned out, Windows XP Pro X64 ran most 32-bit applications just fine on the X2 4800, and 64-bit code showed a few modest performance gains.
ADVERTISEMENT
Our article generated considerable interest in the community at large. We received several interesting emails on the topic. One of the most salient was from Joe Landman of Scalable Informatics. Scalable ran a variety of 32-bit-vs-64-bit tests on Opteron CPUs. Although somewhat synthetic, the tasks run were applicable to certain types of scientific computing. SI found that 64-bit code was almost always faster than 32-bit code, when properly written.
David Wren of Passmark Software, an Australian utility software company, echoed those findings, and allowed us to use Passmark's Performance Test, which is available in both 32-bit and 64-bit versions. PPT is synthetic in nature, but can yield interesting results that point to potential theoretical gains with 64-bit code.
Given Intel's renewed focus on both 64-bit x86, coupled with its rapid, if somewhat improvisational, push into dual-core processing, we wanted to see just how well Intel's dual-core processors fared with 64-bit Windows relative to AMD's best. So we loaded up a system with an Intel Pentium Extreme Edition 840 and took it for a spin. Intel is nothing if not a fierce competitor, so let's see how the dust settles.
Read more!
Top 10 Reasons Intel did not Participate in the Dual-Core Duel
10.Tried to follow their own roadmap to get to the duel
9.Decided to take the "front-side bus" to the duel; got stuck in a bottleneck
8.The "Intel Inside" stickers they used to package the cores together keep melting
7.Too busy rearranging the deck chairs on the Itanic
6."Hey, we don't expect anyone to actually buy these things!“
5.Didn't want to compete when they realized that the duel would involve actual "rules" of fair competition
4.They couldn't get a permit from the fire department to emit thatmuch heat
3.No systems available yet --protective clothing used by manufacturers only safe for up to 149 watts
2. Dell told them they weren't allowed to participate
And the number one reason Intel didn’t accept the dual-core duel:
1. Moore's Law has been replaced by "Paul's Paradox": the number of canceled products per year at Intel will double every year after the introduction of the AMD Opteron™processor.
Source: AMD Website.
Read more!
10.Tried to follow their own roadmap to get to the duel
9.Decided to take the "front-side bus" to the duel; got stuck in a bottleneck
8.The "Intel Inside" stickers they used to package the cores together keep melting
7.Too busy rearranging the deck chairs on the Itanic
6."Hey, we don't expect anyone to actually buy these things!“
5.Didn't want to compete when they realized that the duel would involve actual "rules" of fair competition
4.They couldn't get a permit from the fire department to emit thatmuch heat
3.No systems available yet --protective clothing used by manufacturers only safe for up to 149 watts
2. Dell told them they weren't allowed to participate
And the number one reason Intel didn’t accept the dual-core duel:
1. Moore's Law has been replaced by "Paul's Paradox": the number of canceled products per year at Intel will double every year after the introduction of the AMD Opteron™processor.
Source: AMD Website.
Read more!
