|WikiProject Computing / Hardware|
Move I want to move the article to the VIA C3 page. Each version of the Athlon is covered on the same page. You can't create a newpage every time VIA update their processor range. Timharwoodx 15:26, 11 Jan 2005 (UTC)
- This nomination was accidentally set up in a way that made it appear to be a comment at the bottom of the previous discussion thread. I've fixed the header. I also moved it down a day so it can get the full 5 day discussion now that it's visible. (no vote.) Rossami (talk) 21:35, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)
- Move it. Wyss 22:43, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)
- Move. Thryduulf 22:59, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC).
- Move as directed. --Deathphoenix 01:15, 13 Jan 2005 (UTC)
Comment: if you just want to merge the two articles together, you can go ahead and do it - there's no need to bring it to VfD. Just copy and paste the text from one into the other, and turn VIA C7 into a redirect. Also, I notice there's a VIA C4 article, which should presumably be dealt with the same way. sjorford 21:18, 13 Jan 2005 (UTC)
Okay, thanks guys, still learning the trade. I really wanted to fill out the write up on VIA's approach to chip architecture, as their low power low cost approach, may well shortly become the way to do it. I think its noteworthy. I have now cut and pasted the content. Just trying not to be rude. Timharwoodx 00:11, 16 Jan 2005 (UTC)
end moved discussion
Why is this highly informative text being constantly removed? On what grounds? Please post and explain your reasons. Timharwoodx 23:09, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
The VIA C7 soldiers on.
The entirely VIA C7-M based HP 2133 ultraportable subnotebook has just debuted and ZDNet, PCMag, etc. are all praising it. HP choose VIA C for unbeatable price-value balance, even though Intel's Atom is available since 2nd of April. This is a victory for VIA CPU team. 18.104.22.168 (talk) 13:46, 10 April 2008 (UTC)
^That just sound like a bunch of marketing mumble jumble. The CPU is hot and power hungry. It may be faster than the underclocked celeron in the eeePC, but that isn't saying much. read the following link: http://crave.cnet.com/8301-1_105-9914927-1.html Explanation straight from horse's mouth. It may be a victory for Via because of the circumstances, but not because of they had a superior CPU for the price. It is just acceptable in performance for basic computing needs. --22.214.171.124 (talk) 11:23, 25 April 2008 (UTC)
- Then what? This tiny little machine is really unsuitable for creative professional work or hardcore gaming, no matter how much horsepower the CPU has, due to obvious lack of LCD screen space. Besides web browsing, word and excel work, video chat and movie playback the only thing it needs is to be able to run modern antivirus without bogging down the system too much (Windows is too fragile to browse the web without defences). I recommend testing with Symantec-Norton or F-Secure protection suites, because those are famous for their high system burden. If the HP2133 survives daily workload chore on WinXP SP3 with antivirus protection on then is it OK for general school use. Don't be a maximalist! 126.96.36.199 (talk) 14:19, 21 May 2008 (UTC)
HP Mini-note info seems unnecessary
This would be appropriate on the page for that computer, or maybe for a processor that is specifically tied to a system - but this is not. It is not relevant to people looking for information on the VIA C7 itself, unless it were part of a list of computers/parts that use the processor. Richalex2010 (talk) 02:54, 10 July 2009 (UTC)
Contradiction: Is VIA allowed to use Intel sockets or not?
The article mentions that VIA is not allowed to use the socket 370 anymore, which is correct. But is VIA allowed to use other Intel sockets? If not, how they made the C7 processor for an Intel socket? I think this needs clarification. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.8.131.52 (talk) 21:29, 22 February 2010 (UTC)