It's been a little while since we've had a Puget Systems desktop in, and so far we haven't yet tested any of their big dog gaming machines. Everything else we've tested, we've liked, but what happens when the fine folks over at Puget Systems pull out all the stops and put together a high end gaming machine? The answer: the Deluge, an X79-based rig in a modified Antec P183, employing a custom liquid-cooling loop. It's big, powerful, and expensive. Read on to find out if Puget Systems hit one out of the park, and if Sandy Bridge-E is the enthusiast platform we've been waiting for.

I have to hand it to OCZ's CEO, Ryan Petersen, I never thought he'd turn the company around in the way that he did. When I first met Ryan around a decade ago, he wanted to know why I wouldn't allow him to advertise OCZ on AnandTech. The company at that time had an extremely bad reputation. It was among the worst I'd ever seen. It was so bad that not only would we not review their products (memory, at the time) but I wouldn't allow OCZ ads to run on the site. Although all advertising on AnandTech is handled through a third party, I still have the ultimate say on what ends up on the site. Back then, OCZ wasn't allowed.

Having just taken over the company, Ryan was eager to know what he had to change to fix OCZ's reputation. I gave him a long list of issues to address. Most of my suggestions were obvious, just to go above and beyond the call of duty in taking care of his customers and our readers. He agreed to do everything on the list, with one exception. I told him that if he really wanted to succeed, he needed to abandon the OCZ name and start fresh. He told me that he didn't believe it was necessary. We agreed to disagree.

I remember leaving that meeting thinking that Ryan didn't stand a chance. Memory companies were a dime a dozen. Differentiation was bordering on impossible. Having to overcome a bad reputation on top of that didn't make things any easier.

Ryan is headstrong. He'll sow a bunch of seed with the hopes of seeing just one blade of grass grow. I consider myself an optimist, but he's a different breed of one. He's had his share of failures over the years. Remember the OCZ brain mouse? The foray into notebook PCs? No one ever succeeded without trying.

Since then OCZ has abandoned memory altogether. It focuses on two product lines: power supplies and SSDs, the latter making up the bulk of its revenue. And earlier this year, OCZ bought one of the first high-performance SSD controller manufacturers - Indilinx.

OCZ's strategy there didn't make sense to me. I knew Ryan wanted to buy SandForce, but SF was too expensive. I asked Ryan why bother with Indilinx if what he really wanted was SandForce? He told me that the best way to drive the price down on SF was to buy Indilinx. It didn't add up until now.

Ryan took a big risk on Indilinx. They had a promising controller in 2009 and he bought up the bulk of what they could make in exchange for exclusivity rights. OCZ made Indilinx, and Indilinx made OCZ. As Indilinx began courting more vendors, OCZ went after SandForce. As soon as a first generation controller was ready, OCZ began shifting its volume from Indilinx to SandForce. More partners stepped up to fill the gap left by OCZ, but by then no one wanted Indilinx - they wanted SandForce based drives.

Simultaneously (perhaps a result?) Indilinx's execution suffered, the stumble was irrecoverable. The value of Indilinx went down, and Ryan got the company for cheap.

I can only assume the strategy was to rinse and repeat. I had heard rumors of OCZ working on its own controller for the past two years. The Indilinx acquisition sped things up considerably. If the Indilinx solution was good enough, OCZ would shift its volume away from SandForce to its own controller. Starve SandForce and swoop back in later to buy them at a more reasonable price. Competition makes for competitive prices on both sides of the fence it seems.

Things of course didn't work out that way. OCZ took a while to get its own controller design done and it was still very dependent on SandForce. At the same time, SandForce had diversified its portfolio. Since the announcement of the Indilinx acquisition, SandForce brought on a number of new partners to sell its drives. Even Kingston signed up. Finally, LSI agreed to purchase SandForce at a number well in the range of what SF was looking to sell for.

The situation didn't play out exactly how Ryan had hoped, I'm sure. But the result actually isn't all that bad. LSI has no intentions of stopping its supply of SandForce controllers to OCZ (or other partners), and all of the work OCZ put into its own controller finally paid off. Personally, it's hard to believe that I'm writing about the company I once advised to completely abandon their brand. Furthermore, I'm not just writing about them, but I'm writing about their first in-house SSD controller. This is our review of the Indilinx Everest based OCZ Octane, read on!

Way back in the dark ages of CES 2011, we were able to lay hands on and play with some interesting new technology from Toshiba. They had a prototype notebook on hand that was capable of glasses-free 3D similar to the Nintendo 3DS, but with a bigger screen and the ability to track head movement and adjust viewing angles accordingly. Yet the release of this 3D notebook has been an unusually quiet one. Is the 15-inch Qosmio F755 a sound design, or is there a reason why it's been unceremoniously dropped into the marketplace? Let's find out.

So far we've tested HP's TouchSmart 610 all-in-one and Dell's Inspiron One all-in-one, and in both cases we've found things to like along with aspects that left us wanting. Today we have on hand Toshiba's DX735 in its least expensive configuration. Starting at under a grand, the DX735 at least superficially suggests a design that's more focused, more streamlined, and less schizophrenic than the competition. Did Toshiba do right where the others stumbled, or is the DX735 just another case of too many compromises?

Minecraft, the world building game from independent developer Mojang, finally came out of a lengthy beta last week. It's difficult to adequately review a game that has been playable for so long—sales passed four million recently—but this is an important game, not least because it demonstrates the continued health of the PC as a gaming platform. Read on for our thoughts on Minecraft 1.0.

We've been working on our Kindle Fire review over the weekend but I thought I'd break out a particularly interesting section of the review for release a bit early. At its launch Amazon introduced a new web browser called Silk.

Silk is yet-another-webkit based browser with all of the usual features: tabbed browsing, Flash support, integrated search/URL bar, etc... What makes Silk unique is its ability to funnel your web requests through Amazon's Web Services (AWS) cloud. A typical load of AnandTech.com pulls content from thirteen different hosts. Each host is contacted, the request acknowledged and then data is exchanged between it and your browser.

Amazon believes that this is an inefficient way of loading a web page. With Silk, the request is sent to Amazon's cloud, where Amazon's servers retrieve (and cache) all of the elements of the web page and deliver the result to you directly.

Amazon claims the cloud-side caching can improve performance, however I was skeptical of this claim. A huge portion of web page loading on smartphone platforms is actually CPU bound. It's why you notice a performance difference when you upgrade from a two year old smartphone to a modern day model, even if both were running the same OS. The parts of the loading process that aren't CPU bound are typically limited by the speed of the cellular network you're on. AT&T's 3G at my house tops out at 3Mbps, but more frequently than not it's down in the 1 - 2Mbps range. Things are even worse on Verizon's EVDO network where I get sub 1Mbps speeds. Consolidating network access on a cellular network seems to make sense, there's just one problem: the Kindle Fire was launched as a WiFi only model.

Curious to measure the impact of Amazon's cloud-side caching, I did a bunch of benchmarking on the Kindle Fire. Read on for the results...

Let me pose a hypothetical situation: say you bought an iPhone or iPad, but cheaped out and got a 16GB model. You’ve got around 10GB worth of music, a few gigs in photos and applications, and you lose the rest to formatting and the OS itself. Basically, you’re maxed on capacity. Day-to-day, this isn’t a huge issue, but let’s say you’re going on vacation and want to have some movies to watch so that you can avoid the customary in-flight chick flick [or replace with whatever type of movies you dislike]. HD movies aren’t storage friendly, they take a solid chunk of storage space, and you don’t want gut your portable music library for the sake of watching a couple of decent movies on the plane. So what do you do?

Fret not, there is now a solution to that dilemma by way of Kingston and Seagate, among others. Both have recently launched wireless storage devices, streaming your media files to your mobile device via WiFi. Now, both of these are non-ideal solutions to a relatively marginal problem, but that’s to be expected in any newly conceived market. With the shift to cloud-based data and media streaming for mobile devices, there is going to be a gradual de-emphasizing of local device storage. We’re already seeing that in a big way with Google’s Cloud OS and Apple’s iCloud service, so wireless storage technologies are going to play an important role in handling media streaming for the future. The two devices we’re looking at today are pricey and aren’t perfect by any means, but they point the way to what the future of local media storage might look like. Interested? Keep reading to find out more.

In the last year or so, three major SoC manufacturers vied for market share in the media streamer market. While Intel's CE41xx took the high end path with design wins in the Logitech Revue and Boxee Box, Sigma Designs and Realtek continued to retain design wins with their existing customers. Sigma's customers used SMP 8642/8643/8655 while Realtek customers migrated from RTD 1073 / RTD 1283 to RTD 1185. We have had media streamers based on these SoCs in-house for quite some time now. Almost all of them have been touched upon in one piece or the other. However, a comprehensive comparison piece was never published.

Read on for our comprehensive comparison of the Boxee Box (Intel CE4100), the A.C.Ryan PlayOn!HD2 (Realtek 1185) and the Netgear NTV550 (SMP 8642).

Reviews of Intel manufactured boards are something of a rarity.  They are not marketed in the same way other motherboards are – almost not at all in comparison.  It could be argued that reviews are only seen coming at the start of a chipset release, coinciding with what we as reviewers get in our media kits from Intel itself.  However, to an enthusiast, it is strange to say that they sell well – consumers or system builders wanting to pair a processor with a board without hassle can go straight in at an Intel motherboard/processor combo.  The question is with an enthusiast platform such as X79, would you really want to deal with an Intel board?  Read on for the full review.

The early 2011 MacBook Pro is honestly Apple's best effort to date. Only using quad-core CPUs on the 15 and 17-inch models, and offering an optional Thunderbolt Display that can act as a modern day dock makes this platform, particularly the 15-inch model, the perfect candidate for users who want the power and flexibility of a desktop with the portability of a notebook. Apple gets the mobile revolution in more ways than one, and its MacBook Pro/Thunderbolt Display combo is the perfect example of that.

It's this very combination that I've been using, partially since the introduction of the Sandy Bridge MacBook Pro earlier this year (the Thunderbolt Display didn't arrive until later). I've been quite happy with the setup. With the exception of lackluster Quick Sync adoption by Apple and obviously limited GPU options, I have very few major complaints.

Late last month, Apple updated its 2011 MacBook Pro lineup - likely the first and last update before Apple adopts Ivy Bridge in Q2 next year. We got our hands on the new base 15-inch MacBook Pro configuration, which received one of the more substantial upgrades over the previous model.

Read on for our review of the updated MacBook Pro!

Our last Windows all-in-one review was for HP's TouchSmart 610, an interesting if slightly pricey piece of desktop kit. HP brought a lot of innovation to the table but they couldn't quite patch over the underlying problems with the hardware and software ecosystems that keep a touch-based all-in-one from really achieving all it can. Today we have on hand the Dell Inspiron One 2320, complete with Dell's own touch-based software interface and its own bells and whistles. Is Dell able to smooth over those issues better than HP could, or did they stumble on to some new ones?

For a while now we've been keeping track of mobile browser performance using two relatively popular JavaScript heavy benchmarks that are a regular fixation in our smartphone reviews. If you've read any of those reviews, you should immediately be able to name them - SunSpider and RightWare's BrowserMark. Tracking JavaScript performance thus far has helped us codify and track SoC performance, but really understanding and quantifying overall browsing smoothness has remained a more challenging task.

Real web browsing performance is a unique combination of system performance, the Android browser itself, and what contributions or customizations (if any) the OEM has made in the shipping software build. Qualcomm's Innovation Center recently made public a tool for gauging overall browser performance that it's used for a while both in house and in collaboration with OEMs that is geared at present to Android. We've used a subtest from it it a few times, and it's named Vellamo. Read on for more about Vellamo.

Intel's ultrabook initiative is a curious one, one that's very gradually picking up interest among vendors. We've already had a chance to take a look at the smaller of the two units from the typically early-out-of-the-gate ASUS, and we know there are other ultrabooks out there from Lenovo and Acer, with only Dell opting to sit out of this round, unconvinced of the viability of Intel's plan. Today, in true Toshiba fashion, we get a chance to look at a more budget-oriented (or at least as budget-oriented as an ultrabook can be) unit: Toshiba's entry-level Portege Z835-P330.

Last month, AMD launched their Bulldozer architecture on desktops, and the result was rather underwhelming; however, there are plenty of indications that Bulldozer simply wasn't architected to excel at desktop use models. AMD's "Interlagos" Opteron is now available, doubling the core count of the desktop part and placing its sights firmly on the enterprise server market.

The massive Multi Chip Module (MCM) contains eight processor cores (“modules” as AMD likes to call them) and can process 16 integer and 16 floating point threads per cycle. Each of the 16 integer threads gets their own integer cluster, complete with integer executions units, a load/store unit, and an L1-data cache. The Cluster Multi-Threading (CMT) architecture of Bulldozer should be perfectly suited for server applications that are mostly limited by memory accesses and integer processing. The 16 floating point threads have to share eight clusters of two 128-bit FP units, but those units can process FMAC and AVX instructions; recompile your HPC application with an FMAC and/or AVX capable compiler and the chip could become an HPC monster as well.

Server applications also like large caches, and Interlagos has plenty of SRAM cells. The Interlagos package has 32MB cache onboard (L2 and exclusive L3 combined). If all caching fails, it can access four memory channels of DDR3-1600, good for 51.2GB/s of theoretical bandwidth per chip. AMD also added power gating to the cores, so inactive cores can enter a very deep (C6) sleep state and save quite a bit power. This should significantly reduce power in idle and light loads.

With all of that potential, the initial clock speeds that AMD could be fit inside a 115W TDP envelope are a bit underwhelming. The fastest 115W Interlagos part right now, the Opteron 6276, has a 2.3GHz base clock. The current Opteron 6276 reaches the same clock speed at the same TDP using a less advanced 45nm SOI process. However, the longer pipeline of the new Bulldozer architecture allows the chip to use Turbo Core to boost to 2.6GHz when running most server workloads, and if only half of the cores are active, the chip is capable of 3.2GHz.

The initial desktop launch of Zembezi may have left us wanting more, and Interlagos might offer that. For server workloads at least, this all looks very promising. Let's see what the first "Bulldozer" based Opterons can do.

Earlier today Dustin reviewed Antec's new P280 chassis, but now we've got two of these cases to give away to a couple of lucky readers. In our review, Dustin felt that the P280 brought some of the ease of assembly features that were missing from Antec's lineup without sacrificing much of what made the P180 series so great. Be sure to read his full take on the P280 here, and then leave a comment below (please only leave one comment!) to enter.

Read on for full entry details including eligibility requirements. Good luck!

Antec's existing Performance One series, peaking with the P183 and P190, has become a standard for silent, high performance computing. These enclosures have been extremely popular from the word "go," and for a long time the P180 and its descendants have been easy recommendations. But you could argue the designs are starting to feel a little outdated, and while Antec's recent Solo II was an interesting step forward, it felt like a tentative one.

The new P280, on the other hand, is a major evolution. Intended not as a refresh of the P183 but to exist alongside it, the P280 features some radical changes for Antec in terms of design while lowering the cost of entry for the entire line. Is it a smart evolution, or did Antec's engineers split too many decisions in trying to appeal to both silent computing and high performance markets?

Back at SIGGRAPH 2011 NVIDIA announced Project Maximus, an interesting technology initiative to allow customers to combine Tesla and Quadro products together in a single workstation and to use their respective strengths. At the time NVIDIA didn’t have a launch date to announce, but as this is a software technology rather than a hardware product, the assumption has always been that it would be a quick turnaround. And a quick turnaround it has been: just over 3 months later NVIDIA is officially launching Project Maximus as NVIDIA Maximus Technology.

If you look carefully enough, you may notice that things are changing. It first became apparent shortly after the release of Nehalem. Intel bifurcated the performance desktop space by embracing a two-socket strategy, something we'd never seen from Intel and only once from AMD in the early Athlon 64 days (Socket-940 and Socket-754).

LGA-1366 came first, but by the time LGA-1156 arrived a year later it no longer made sense to recommend Intel's high-end Nehalem platform. Lynnfield was nearly as fast and the entire platform was more affordable.

When Sandy Bridge launched earlier this year, all we got was the mainstream desktop version. No one complained because it was fast enough, but we all knew an ultra high-end desktop part was in the works. A true successor to Nehalem's LGA-1366 platform for those who waited all this time.

Left to right: Sandy Bridge E, Gulftown, Sandy Bridge

After some delays, Sandy Bridge E is finally here. The platform is actually pretty simple to talk about. There's a new socket: LGA-2011, a new chipset Intel's X79 and of course the Sandy Bridge E CPU itself. Read on for our review!

In the pursuit of sheer performance, a user should aim to combine the ultimate CPU with the ultimate everything else – motherboard, memory, and so on. The latest enthusiast platform to hit our streets is Intel’s Sandy Bridge-E and X79 chipset, released today.

So to start a series of X79 reviews, we are going to have a look at what the X79 chipset brings to the table over other Intel chipsets, and the first motherboard under our microscope is the ASUS P9X79 Pro, coming in at an RRP of $329.99. Needless to say, this is fairly expensive in the land of motherboards, even when pairing it with a $1000 CPU. However, if previous Intel chipsets are anything to go by, ASUS PRO boards get a lot of attention. So the question becomes ‘Is it worth it?’ Read on for the full review.