B
Bob I
No, this is a pointless thread, and is OT.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
G
Guest
Bob,
What makes you think this thread is pointless? I think this thread makes
good debate. This is a public forum addressing XP related hardware. And the
CPU is the heart of a computer. How can that be pointless?
Explain yourself.
What makes you think this thread is pointless? I think this thread makes
good debate. This is a public forum addressing XP related hardware. And the
CPU is the heart of a computer. How can that be pointless?
Explain yourself.
N
NoNoBadDog!
Intel inflated some numbers. They have no meaning. They tested a prototype
chip that wont even go into production for at least 6 months. They built a
special mobo for the test. They used a 2 generations old AMD motherboard,
and due to the BIOS only one of the two cores was recognized. The Intel had
DDR2. The AMD had DDR. Every test, except for the DivX 6.1 Encoding test,
was written by Intel and was optimized for the Intel processor.
You have no clue what you are talking about. You act like Intel just got
back on top.
*WHEN* the chip is released, it may be on par with the AM2 X2s, but it won't
be what Intel claims...Of course you will deny that Paul Ortellini himself
stated this in his closing comments.
You need to take a deep breath and come back to reality.
Bobby
chip that wont even go into production for at least 6 months. They built a
special mobo for the test. They used a 2 generations old AMD motherboard,
and due to the BIOS only one of the two cores was recognized. The Intel had
DDR2. The AMD had DDR. Every test, except for the DivX 6.1 Encoding test,
was written by Intel and was optimized for the Intel processor.
You have no clue what you are talking about. You act like Intel just got
back on top.
*WHEN* the chip is released, it may be on par with the AM2 X2s, but it won't
be what Intel claims...Of course you will deny that Paul Ortellini himself
stated this in his closing comments.
You need to take a deep breath and come back to reality.
Bobby
C
Chuck
A combination of preformance and price determines the success or failure of
a chip. Not speed alone.!
If an X brand chip exceeds the preformance of Y brand by 50%, and costs
twice as much, how big is it's market?
a chip. Not speed alone.!
If an X brand chip exceeds the preformance of Y brand by 50%, and costs
twice as much, how big is it's market?
G
Guest
I don't know your problem, but it obviously appears I struck a nerve with
you. I think I must have really offended you. What type of AMD chip are you
running?
You are probably running some low end Sempron or XP Athlon and put the high
end chips on a pedestal because you have high hopes that some day you could
afford one of those dual core AMD chips. Then you get all riled and ticked
off when someone like me bashes those chips.
I'm sure that's why you're all upset.
you. I think I must have really offended you. What type of AMD chip are you
running?
You are probably running some low end Sempron or XP Athlon and put the high
end chips on a pedestal because you have high hopes that some day you could
afford one of those dual core AMD chips. Then you get all riled and ticked
off when someone like me bashes those chips.
I'm sure that's why you're all upset.
N
NoNoBadDog!
I am not upset. Just hate to see mindless knee-jerks like you jump on
something like this and start claiming victory. It was a publicity stunt.
You just don't have enough cognitive power to see that.
It's really none of your business, but I am running two machines based on X2
processors, one is a 4200+ and one is 4800+. I am running two Athlon 64s,
one is a 3200+ ()the original 754 pin) and a 3500+. I am running them
because they are the best bang for the buck. The X2s outperform *ANY* of
the current crop of Intel chips, and are cheaper. They are true dual
core,instead of the multicore of the Pentium "Core Duo".
If you would stop your rant long enough to read what I wrote, I am not
claiming that the Conroe and Merom are not good chips. I merely claimed
that the synthetic and inflated numbers that Intel posted do not and will
never have any validity.
You need to get off your soapbox. You'll have to wait until the chip is in
production, and there are valid third party tests. I have no doubt that the
Intel will be very competitive. No one in their right mind would believe
that Intel suddenly found a way to double or triple the power of their
chips. But then again, they were hoping for a few narrow minded zealots
like you to jump on the bandwagon.
I have owned Intel in the past, when Intel was the performance leader. I am
intelligent enough to research available product and make my purchase
decisions based on testing and suitability to my needs. With those
criteria, Intel has not made a competitive chip for at least 3 years.
You can now go back and put your blinders back on and continue to hang on to
your fantasy; that is all the numbers are. Sadly, you just cannot see that.
Bobby
something like this and start claiming victory. It was a publicity stunt.
You just don't have enough cognitive power to see that.
It's really none of your business, but I am running two machines based on X2
processors, one is a 4200+ and one is 4800+. I am running two Athlon 64s,
one is a 3200+ ()the original 754 pin) and a 3500+. I am running them
because they are the best bang for the buck. The X2s outperform *ANY* of
the current crop of Intel chips, and are cheaper. They are true dual
core,instead of the multicore of the Pentium "Core Duo".
If you would stop your rant long enough to read what I wrote, I am not
claiming that the Conroe and Merom are not good chips. I merely claimed
that the synthetic and inflated numbers that Intel posted do not and will
never have any validity.
You need to get off your soapbox. You'll have to wait until the chip is in
production, and there are valid third party tests. I have no doubt that the
Intel will be very competitive. No one in their right mind would believe
that Intel suddenly found a way to double or triple the power of their
chips. But then again, they were hoping for a few narrow minded zealots
like you to jump on the bandwagon.
I have owned Intel in the past, when Intel was the performance leader. I am
intelligent enough to research available product and make my purchase
decisions based on testing and suitability to my needs. With those
criteria, Intel has not made a competitive chip for at least 3 years.
You can now go back and put your blinders back on and continue to hang on to
your fantasy; that is all the numbers are. Sadly, you just cannot see that.
Bobby
G
Guest
With your recent comments regarding your "intelligent enough to to research
available product(s) and make my purchase decisions based on testing and
suitability to my needs," my prediction is that will you end up buying a
Conroe chip simply because you will ultimately recognize after 3rd party
benchmarks it is clearly the performance leader.
Of course this will be after the chip has been released and you have had
adequate time to do your research and understand that Conroe is a winner.
By then, your precious X2 machines will be at the landfill.
available product(s) and make my purchase decisions based on testing and
suitability to my needs," my prediction is that will you end up buying a
Conroe chip simply because you will ultimately recognize after 3rd party
benchmarks it is clearly the performance leader.
Of course this will be after the chip has been released and you have had
adequate time to do your research and understand that Conroe is a winner.
By then, your precious X2 machines will be at the landfill.
G
Guest
Enjoying that job at Intel?
Ryan said:With your recent comments regarding your "intelligent enough to to research
available product(s) and make my purchase decisions based on testing and
suitability to my needs," my prediction is that will you end up buying a
Conroe chip simply because you will ultimately recognize after 3rd party
benchmarks it is clearly the performance leader.
Of course this will be after the chip has been released and you have had
adequate time to do your research and understand that Conroe is a winner.
By then, your precious X2 machines will be at the landfill.
M
Mike Hall \(MS-MVP\)
Ryan
Performance leader in benchmarks means nothing as both companies only run
tests that make their own product look best.. people will buy what gives
them the best bang for the buck unless, of course, they have more money than
sense..
Performance leader in benchmarks means nothing as both companies only run
tests that make their own product look best.. people will buy what gives
them the best bang for the buck unless, of course, they have more money than
sense..
L
Leythos
Performance leader in benchmarks means nothing as both companies only run
tests that make their own product look best..
I thought people learned about faking benchmarks when PC Mag started
doing it - the company that provided the most advertising revenue to PC
Mag would get the best ratings.
We all know that vendors tweak their products to the current
benchmarking programs, why would you expect anything less?
Benchmarks are like Political Polls - you can form the test/question for
the result that you want.
J
John O
I think this thread makes
A debate about *what*? Are there two points of view that can be explored?
No, just two businesses in a continuation of a competition that began many
years ago, and will likely continue for many more. What's to debate? I like
blue. You like green. Blue is better. Gaaaaaaaahhhhhhhhhh!
-John O
good debate.
A debate about *what*? Are there two points of view that can be explored?
No, just two businesses in a continuation of a competition that began many
years ago, and will likely continue for many more. What's to debate? I like
blue. You like green. Blue is better. Gaaaaaaaahhhhhhhhhh!
-John O
B
Bob I
Explain myself?!?!
1. You apparently haven't the first clue about what comprises a debate.
and
2. It has as much to do with XP as the mains power cord.
and
3. Just because its a CPU doesn't make it an XP issue.
1. You apparently haven't the first clue about what comprises a debate.
and
2. It has as much to do with XP as the mains power cord.
and
3. Just because its a CPU doesn't make it an XP issue.
K
Kerry Brown
Leythos said:I thought people learned about faking benchmarks when PC Mag started
doing it - the company that provided the most advertising revenue to
PC Mag would get the best ratings.
We all know that vendors tweak their products to the current
benchmarking programs, why would you expect anything less?
Benchmarks are like Political Polls - you can form the test/question
for the result that you want.
The only mag I've ever seen that had reasonably unbiased benchmarks was
Byte. They went into great depth about how they tested so you could make up
your own mind about if the results may be skewed. Alas they no longer have a
print edition. They are still available online at www.byte.com You do have
to register but it's free. This bothers me somewhat so I've never
registered. Nothing is for free so I'm wondering what the catch is? Anyone
here registered?
Kerry
L
Leythos
kerry@kdbNOSPAMsys- said:The only mag I've ever seen that had reasonably unbiased benchmarks was
Byte. They went into great depth about how they tested so you could make up
your own mind about if the results may be skewed. Alas they no longer have a
print edition. They are still available online at www.byte.com You do have
to register but it's free. This bothers me somewhat so I've never
registered. Nothing is for free so I'm wondering what the catch is? Anyone
here registered?
Back in the early 90's I watched a company called Zeos, I wanted one of
the brand-new P90 systems. These were the fastest on the market at the
time, were in all the PC Mag reviews rated as #1 or #2 for months. Zeos
was always mentioned as being a Quality company with Quality
parts/systems. Zeos had LARGE GLOSSY ADs in the mag, same in other mags
at the time - always favorable reviews....
I bought one for about $4000, to make a long story short, wire-wrap on
the motherbaord, IRQ5 & 7 tied to each other, was sent 3 motherboards
during the first 8 months, all had problems, etc.... After about a year
I replaced the motherboard with a different vendors board, problems
gone.
K
Kerry Brown
Leythos said:Back in the early 90's I watched a company called Zeos, I wanted one
of the brand-new P90 systems. These were the fastest on the market at
the time, were in all the PC Mag reviews rated as #1 or #2 for
months. Zeos was always mentioned as being a Quality company with
Quality parts/systems. Zeos had LARGE GLOSSY ADs in the mag, same in
other mags at the time - always favorable reviews....
I bought one for about $4000, to make a long story short, wire-wrap on
the motherbaord, IRQ5 & 7 tied to each other, was sent 3 motherboards
during the first 8 months, all had problems, etc.... After about a
year I replaced the motherboard with a different vendors board,
problems gone.
I quit reading PC Mag at least 10 years ago. I read a review where I knew
two of the laptops reviewed were almost identical inside. They had vastly
different ratings in the review. The one with the glossy ads a few pages
later was one of the top rated laptops despite the fact that careful reading
of the results showed the two had almost identical results. The lower rated
one was cheaper and came with better software. It was a much better buy for
the money.
Kerry
F
FG
As for me, I thought I was reading messages from one
of the MAC sect member discussing advantages
of MAC versus PC, Windows...
of the MAC sect member discussing advantages
of MAC versus PC, Windows...
G
Guest
Bob,
Just give it up. You are completely lost. No one mentioned anything remotely
about an "issue" in this thread.
We are merely exchanging opinions regarding XP related hardware.
If you can't see that, as you have already shown, you need to get your head
out of your rear end.
Just give it up. You are completely lost. No one mentioned anything remotely
about an "issue" in this thread.
We are merely exchanging opinions regarding XP related hardware.
If you can't see that, as you have already shown, you need to get your head
out of your rear end.
B
Bob I
Obviously my first impression of your awareness was right on the money,
and you certainly haven't learned a thing since then.
and you certainly haven't learned a thing since then.
G
Guest
Your first impression proved nothing. Just nothing but wasted space on this
thread.
thread.
B
Bob I
You got the wording slightly jumbled, correct phrasing would be. "This
thread is nothing but wasted space."
thread is nothing but wasted space."