Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

MORE PROOF OF TOMS HARDWARE BIAS

Last response: in CPUs
Share
March 8, 2006 4:52:31 PM

Did you guys had a look at the front page?

Here's a quote:
Quote:
Visitors at IDF got a first taste of what Intel is capable of, once you wake it up. Thus far, its demos have left no doubt that Merom and its derivatives - Conroe on the desktop and Woodcrest on the server side - are monster systems that promise to beat every other processor on the market, in terms of both performance and efficiency.

This is clear proof of how these guys get excited at any little propaganda Intel throws at them.
link

Now, here's a quote about the Turion X2:
Quote:
It's worth noting that AMD apparently does not intend for Turion X2 to attain any sort of performance or power savings goal. Rooney confirmed that AMD's primary goal with the new processor is achieve more design wins, and get more OEMs on board to integrate the processor into product plans. AMD currently boasts of about 10.9% market share in the notebook space.

They asume this because they don't have the specs of the chip. I read the whole article and there's no sign of Rooney saying something like that (and I doubt he did since AMD would fire him immediately).
link
March 8, 2006 4:54:41 PM

Grow up.
March 8, 2006 4:55:57 PM

Dude, what's the big deal of that statement? They are just simply making a conclusion of what they saw at the IDF.

Nothing biased about that statement at all. Now, go to class and put on your dunce cap
Related resources
March 8, 2006 5:04:03 PM

THG is highly biased towards intel anyway...we all know that
March 8, 2006 5:07:39 PM

I FAILED to see the bias... I chose a past tense verb because I'm done with this post.
March 8, 2006 5:07:39 PM

Quote:
Dude, what's the big deal of that statement? They are just simply making a conclusion of what they saw at the IDF.

Nothing biased about that statement at all. Now, go to class and put on your dunce cap


It wouldn't surprise me if you didn't answer the way you did. Opps, I forgot you were an Intel fanboy that uses an Opteron to hide his fanboyism towards Intel. :wink:

Anyhow, it's Toms credibility in the tech community in risk here.
There will be a time when no one would ever read their biased articles.
March 8, 2006 5:16:57 PM

And what is so wrong with the fact that I happen to like Intel? Explain what the big deal is ...You bring absolutely nothing to the table with this thread at all as usual.

It doesn't matter who says what anymore, everything is always BIASED.
March 8, 2006 5:32:50 PM

Please stop crying.
March 8, 2006 5:34:42 PM

Quote:
Last edited by 9-inch on Wed Mar 08, 2006 2:04 pm; edited 4 times in total


What was wrong with the first post?
You should come visit the 'Other' section of the Forumz. It's a whole other lifestyle.
March 8, 2006 5:37:44 PM

Quote:
Dude, what's the big deal of that statement? They are just simply making a conclusion of what they saw at the IDF.

Nothing biased about that statement at all. Now, go to class and put on your dunce cap


It wouldn't surprise me if you didn't answer the way you did. Opps, I forgot you were an Intel fanboy that uses an Opteron to hide his fanboyism towards Intel. :wink:

Anyhow, it's Toms credibility in the tech community in risk here.
There will be a time when no one would ever read their biased articles.

9-inch,

Go get Dvdpiddy and have your self an AMD fanboys bitch session. Intel has finally coming out with something that is a strong product and now your thinking you might be on the wrong side. Get a life and more so go marry Dvdpiddy. Since he acts like a woman, you should be made for yourselves.
March 8, 2006 5:44:49 PM

I feel somehow responsible for this...

http://www.tgdaily.com/2006/03/08/turion64_x2/
Quote:
Among the other details Rooney was willing to confirm was that Turion X2's power consumption will be within the range of its current mobile processors, as the company plans to once again target the "thin-and-light" market segment.


^^ I think that may be what they were referring to.

Quote:
Conroe on the desktop and Woodcrest on the server side - are monster systems that promise to beat every other processor on the market


Even AMD fanboys will agree that Conroe and Woodcrest should beat out the current AMD lineup. When AMD's new processors come out, I'm sure they'll promise to beat out Conroe and Woodcrest. Promises are only that, though.

From an objective point, in theory, NGMA is still inferior to AMD's HyperTransport from a strictly architectural point of view, especially when it comes to multi-cores. Intel's 65nm and 45nm processes, the use of DDR2, as well as high clock rates may allow them to keep the pace or surpass AMD, but only time will tell. The problem with hypertransport is that it doesn't play nicely with the newer DDR2 yet, until the newer DD2 comes out.

Intel has planned to move thier Memory controller on-die by 2008 for server processors, if I'm not mistaken.
March 8, 2006 5:45:36 PM

What a ridiculous argument.

In the Intel coverage the author questions all of Intel's claims, and clearly states that, while it was impressive to attendees, it was hyperbole. Even a sly reference to the Steve Jobs PowerPC versus Intel demos makes it way into the article.

As for the AMD part, it was an actual discussion, and quite clearly a quote from conversations between the author and Rooney.

The clear bias is yours.

Now, testing an Intel system against an AMD system, as provided by Intel PR, that's an interesting approach :) 

http://www.anandtech.com/tradeshows/showdoc.aspx?i=2713

If you are going to trash THG, show some creativity.
March 8, 2006 5:45:44 PM

Quote:
Dude, what's the big deal of that statement? They are just simply making a conclusion of what they saw at the IDF.

Nothing biased about that statement at all. Now, go to class and put on your dunce cap


It wouldn't surprise me if you didn't answer the way you did. Opps, I forgot you were an Intel fanboy that uses an Opteron to hide his fanboyism towards Intel. :wink:

Anyhow, it's Toms credibility in the tech community in risk here.
There will be a time when no one would ever read their biased articles.

9-inch,

Go get Dvdpiddy and have your self an AMD fanboys bitch session. Intel has finally coming out with something that is a strong product and now your thinking you might be on the wrong side. Get a life and more so go marry Dvdpiddy. Since he acts like a woman, you should be made for yourselves.

Damn man, after Intel released those fake benchmarks, it seems every single Intel Troll has come outta the wood works to flame AMD, sheesh, and they tell us to grow up lol.

~~Mad Mod Mike, pimpin' the world 1 rig at a time
March 8, 2006 5:46:55 PM

If you feel this site is biased, why do you read it and why are you on the forums for the site?
March 8, 2006 5:47:11 PM

Also keep in mind that Technology is usually a game of leap frog, except Intel tripped a few years ago and has been struggling to keep up.

If things go back to normal, then this release intel will be faster, then AMD, then Intel again, much like nVidia and ATI right now...
March 8, 2006 5:57:01 PM

[qoute]Visitors at IDF got a first taste of what Intel is capable of, once you wake it up. Thus far, its demos have left no doubt that Merom and its derivatives - Conroe on the desktop and Woodcrest on the server side - are monster systems that promise to beat every other processor on the market, in terms of both performance and efficiency.[/quote]

you kinda expected him to write : Conroe on the desktop and Woodcrest on the server side - are monster systems that promise to beat every other processor on the market, in terms of both performance and efficiency. Which we think, are utter bullcrap.

is that wat u wanted to see?

seriously i dont see anything wrong with that article at all.
March 8, 2006 5:57:53 PM

ooooooui, you have problem with women? tsk tsk.
March 8, 2006 6:08:52 PM

Quote:
[qoute]Visitors at IDF got a first taste of what Intel is capable of, once you wake it up. Thus far, its demos have left no doubt that Merom and its derivatives - Conroe on the desktop and Woodcrest on the server side - are monster systems that promise to beat every other processor on the market, in terms of both performance and efficiency.


you kinda expected him to write : Conroe on the desktop and Woodcrest on the server side - are monster systems that promise to beat every other processor on the market, in terms of both performance and efficiency. Which we think, are utter bullcrap.

is that wat u wanted to see?

seriously i dont see anything wrong with that article at all.[/quote]


Intel has finally gotten it right.... for awhile. I'm sure it's NEVER GOING TO BE OVER, so AMD will probably do something extra for the Rev F - especially for the Opteron. They will probably still own 4 way servers because of HyperTransport and Direct Connect. Most sources give AM2 a 30% increase per clock when it releases. If they come through with the new low power transistors and gates the power consumption WILL go down 10%.

I am sure the big play will be when the FX and Opteron get L3 and more FP registers. AMD is a 30 year old chip company that got the guy who was responsible for 21164 Alpha and EV6 bus.

They are being really tightlipped so it seems like they are confiden that they will catch back up pretty easily. And that's without the new architecture.

I like both companies for what they do but Intel has been a real shit to AMD over the years and deserve any trouncing they get.


Like I said elsewhere this summer will be hot.
March 8, 2006 6:11:35 PM

Ok I don’t know how well you know English so this is one definition of biased

Favoring one person or side over another

Now for Toms to be any help at all they have to favor one product or another in the end to tell us anything about what to buy, otherwise they are completely useless.

Another thing, one key word in this article that you got so uptight about is promise if your more than 6 years old you know promise can be broken. And one more thing Intel made this promise not Tom's, Tom's is just saying "From what we have and can observe, we think that Intel’s promise looks to be true and if it is indeed true then we support it."

What I think you have mistaken bias for is prejudice. There is no reason to think Toms is prejudice, because all their decisions are grounded in tests, benchmarks, and most importantly, use of products. When they are not, they make no attempt to hide this from the reader they will say “this is what Intell or AMD has told us and we are telling you”. I would not ask any more of someone whom I come to for advice even if in the end that advice was wrong. They can’t possibly know all the little glitches and bugs that might crop up when using a particular product with all other products, it’s impossible and impractical.

Even in the recent 11 pound pencil all the guy was saying that in the specific situation that laptop is not a good choice, he just made a poor choice of words in the title, making the reader think that he was saying the laptop was crap, not the use of the laptop in that situation. If you take the time to read and not skim, you will see that most of the time mistakes like this one are easily seen as mistakes or just poor wording not conveying exactly the intent of what the author wants to convey.

I personally think you need to stop posting until you learn how to make a competent complaint. Everyone is entitled to their opinion, but your entitlement should be revoked until you can stop that b$ of yours from spewing onto this forum it is helping no one at all.

As for the rest of us I think we should pay no attention to what 9-inch has to say until you feel he has a valid question-comment-opinion that needs to be seen to, after all I will never not help someone if they ask me for help that I can provide because I too need help sometimes.
March 8, 2006 6:20:09 PM

Intel Troll? Hardly. I am just sick of the hardcore AMD rules all attitude of the mentioned fanboys. To them AMD will rule all no matter what. I have had both AMD and Intel systems way back since the 200mhz war was going on. Both have had issues. I currently have an Intel system and it is great. I will be building a new system in a year or so and I am excited that Intel is kicking it up a bit. Now in a year I will see what CPU I like best. I am not on either side at this point. I just am tired of in every thread about any topic people finding some way to bash intel. Dvdpiddy has over 1000 posts and he registered around the same time as me. I have posted on a few things, but dang he has alot to say. Look at 90% of his posts and you will see they are complete garbage written by what looks like a 12 year old. People like him are what makes online forums die. People get tired of seeing thier crap posted again and again. Finally they just leave. I have been there and done that with 3 other "Dell sucks, Intel sucks, Microsoft sucks" bashing forums full of people that just like to type the word suck.
March 8, 2006 6:37:04 PM

If those benchmarks are fake, Pam Anderson was born with that chest...

The whole world says those benchmarks are true, but youre the only one to say theyre not.
Oh wait, I forgot that noone cares what a mentally challenged idiot like you tries to think, my bad.
March 8, 2006 6:39:27 PM

If Pam was born with that chest, I feel sorry for her Mother at birth 8O
March 8, 2006 6:43:56 PM

I don't know about the youngsters in this forum, but I read Tomshardware since many years ago and I (and many others like me) have concluded that they're too biased towards Intel.

Since when THG gave credit to AMD for their K8 architecture and dual core approach?
AMD's Athlon 64 rocessor is far ahead than any Intel processor to date and still you read articles like, "AMD has launched the FX processor but it trails Intel EE".
"What about, AMD's manufacturing processing is good, but it lacks Intel resoruces".
That's the kind of sh!t I'm talking about. Every time AMD has something good to offer to the public and the media, these guys will always have something to counter them.
With Intel is a totally different story: "Intel's pentium 4 is more stable than Athlons", or "Intel is the best company in the world and it will finish put the coffin on the competition" or "The pentium-M: the most advanced microarchitecture in the world (and they give credit to it to almost prasing the thing)".
last year IDF they were so excited about Intle propaganda that they even said that Intel's "multicore" approach will leave AMD in the dust.

How many of you have watched the "performance test" that they did last year with the Athlon 64 4800+ and the EE840??
They didn't want to give up on it even after changing 3-4 motherboards and a million heatsinks.
They concluded that after running both system, the 840EE was the better performer no matter how hot and how poor it performed in the other tests when we all know it didn't.
They bashed the AMD system because it was not cappable of runing the 4th task, I believe it was DivX, but that was not the processor fault, it was windows scheduler that sucked. The intel rig did fine but it failed miserably in the other 3 tests.

The other thing is their reviews. they differ from ALL other sites. When you stack them against Anand's review or techreport or hexus or many other more, you come to the conclusion that AMD's processor are far away from the competition. Tom's review are something different and indeed it says the oposite. You'll never see a review of them that clearly shows the Athlons lead.

Their weblog is another story. They have some dumbass posting bullshit about AMD not being capable of beating Intel and how AMD sucks and they spread all this fud in the net misleading people with those statements.

Anyhow, as I said again, it's their website and they can post all the fud they want. The problem I have is that we as readers from this and other sites demand more respect and professionalism, not fanboyism or bias towards one company.
March 8, 2006 6:45:19 PM

lol true true each one has to be like a 9 lb kid
March 8, 2006 6:56:04 PM

Quote:
They asume this because they don't have the specs of the chip.

Do you have to be so blatantly uninformed with your accusations against THG. The specs for the Turion X2s have been out for more than a week now.

http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=30020

The fastest model will run at 2GHz and none of them will have 1MB of L2 cache. It seems to me that based on those specs, AMD's top 2GHz X2 won't be able to lead the 2.33GHz Core Duo in performance. In addition, the Turion X2s are basically regular X2s produced using lower powered transistors, they have not been modified architecturally for mobile use. Each core is directly tied to the other so that if 1 core is operating at 100% load in single-treaded operation, the unused core will still be running at full power. On the other hand, Core Duos have the ability to independantly clock and power their cores to save battery life. This will probably mean the Core Duo will have the advantage in battery life as well.

Now if the Core Duo architecture should compete quite nicely against the unreleased Turion X2s it's not unreasonable to assume Merom will do the same if not better. The Turion X2 will no doubt be able to scale higher so perhaps performance-wise the competition will be good, but without a truly mobile architecture forcing both cores to be powered equally regardless of load, Merom will lead in power consumption.

Based on the state of the Turion X2s being released, Rooney's statements don't seem out of line. I shouldn't have to remind you either that AMD's CEO has already publicly admitted that AMD dropped the ball on the mobile market. As well, the fact that AMD isn't paying as much attention to performance and power and is instead focused on marketing to OEMs is also nothing new. AMD's CEO has already announced that the commercial/corporate market is where their efforts are going to be. What Rooney has said and what THG is reporting is completely consistant with the information that is available right now.
March 8, 2006 6:58:39 PM

But AMD does not have the resources Intel has.
March 8, 2006 7:04:53 PM

i have too, been following THG for quite a while already, and already knew about the things that you've mentioned.

however, you're saying that that particular article is intel-biased.

i would say you're too quick to judge. you're probably affected by the fact that they have all along been intel-biased to give a neutral enough stand and look at the article.

i still dont see anything wrong with the article. it seems fair enough for me.
March 8, 2006 7:11:58 PM

Quote:
I shouldn't have to remind you either that AMD's CEO has already publicly admitted that AMD dropped the ball on the mobile market.


Yeah sure. Coming from Toms hardware guide, I wouldn't expect more from them to put words on AMD's CEO. 8)

Quote:
Microprocessor Solutions Sector, said AMD's 64-bit dual-core part will support DDR2 memory and include virtualization and multicore power management when it ships.

All of this fits in the socket 754 infrastructure and will also feature dual channel.
8)
http://www.crn.com/sections/breakingnews/dailyarchives.jhtml?articleId=181501433
March 8, 2006 7:18:23 PM

i feel the same exact way as u, he got his account a bit after me i think, and he has over double the posts. ive been in debates with him before... i took the side that dell makes decent computers at some of the lowest prices (dont even start to flame guys) and he said dell sucks because he took apart one, broke it, and tried to get a refund. i was argueing that the new conroe sound like theyll be faster than amd, and he refused to even take what i said as a valid opinion, hed come at me with how his life is hard? (dun ask me, thats pretty much what happened) and hed say how amd has always beat intel, but up until amd64 was released amd has been behind. the best thing to do is ignore him till he leaves, or have an admin ban him... :lol: 
March 8, 2006 7:21:17 PM

There you go, that is a nice post. I have not done any fact checking on what you have said which is not good on my part but if what you gave as an example with the mobo switching, hsf switching, is indeed true that is going a little too far out of the way to get the results that the testers wanted. However I haven’t read that article so I do not know the reasons Toms gave for the switching.

I am making huge assumptions about your facts giving you the benefit of doubt that I think everyone deserves. But the real point is you put up a good defense of your view and if you did this all the time people would have more respect for you and your opinions, be they right or wrong. It is that respect that helps everyone out because communication is improved and a solution can be found quicker. After all forums are places of problems that need solving.
March 8, 2006 7:37:33 PM

Quote:
Did you guys had a look at the front page?

Here's a quote:
Visitors at IDF got a first taste of what Intel is capable of, once you wake it up. Thus far, its demos have left no doubt that Merom and its derivatives - Conroe on the desktop and Woodcrest on the server side - are monster systems that promise to beat every other processor on the market, in terms of both performance and efficiency.

This is clear proof of how these guys get excited at any little propaganda Intel throws at them.
link

Now, here's a quote about the Turion X2:
Quote:
It's worth noting that AMD apparently does not intend for Turion X2 to attain any sort of performance or power savings goal. Rooney confirmed that AMD's primary goal with the new processor is achieve more design wins, and get more OEMs on board to integrate the processor into product plans. AMD currently boasts of about 10.9% market share in the notebook space.

They asume this because they don't have the specs of the chip. I read the whole article and there's no sign of Rooney saying something like that (and I doubt he did since AMD would fire him immediately).
link

go away
March 8, 2006 7:44:59 PM

Quote:
There you go, that is a nice post. I have not done any fact checking on what you have said which is not good on my part but if what you gave as an example with the mobo switching, hsf switching, is indeed true that is going a little too far out of the way to get the results that the testers wanted. However I haven’t read that article so I do not know the reasons Toms gave for the switching.

I am making huge assumptions about your facts giving you the benefit of doubt that I think everyone deserves. But the real point is you put up a good defense of your view and if you did this all the time people would have more respect for you and your opinions, be they right or wrong. It is that respect that helps everyone out because communication is improved and a solution can be found quicker. After all forums are places of problems that need solving.


You pointed out some good advice that would make the world a better place to co-exist! Good job! :wink:
March 8, 2006 8:17:53 PM

thanks at least I know one person read that
March 8, 2006 8:28:44 PM

In reading this little excerpt, it doesn’t sound like that mobo switching was an attempt to give the Intel the advantage. It seemed as un-prejudice as possible. Stating Intel did better here, here, and here and AMD did better here, here, and here. If you want this go with the Intel if you want that go with the AMD. Seems fine to me..
March 8, 2006 8:34:22 PM

I bet you had a hard time finding those. :wink:
I'll quote on of your findings:
Quote:
So, what to buy when you need a top system for a nice sum? For business use, the Intel system should be the better choice, especially in view of its availability as well as the already existing service from Intel partners and system vendors.

So, here they're promoting Intel for business. Where do they leave AMD??
This kind of assumptions makes "joe-sixpack" believes that AMD is not good for business environments and that's a blatant lie.

Quote:
"When looking at absolute computing power, or performance, different views are needed. When running multiple applications simultaneously on a system, the Intel system with the Pentium 840 EE surpasses the competition from AMD

After running the tests and seing Intel's EE840 failed in the other 3 tests but exceeds in video encoding, they conclude that the EE840 is better for multitasking????
yeah, sure. :wink:

Keep finding more of those, you make my life easier. 8)
March 8, 2006 8:39:30 PM

9-inch:

You know what they say about opinions: mine is always right.

We're all very happy to see that you have decided that TG is Intel-bias. For every point you make, and Intel fan will makean equally compelling counterpoint, and vise-versa.

You're just beating your head against a wall pushing this.
March 8, 2006 9:05:49 PM

Kind of strange to me that folks argue passionately which 'for profit' company is better than which 'for profit' company. I'm not against companies making a profit, but to have customers imagine they have joined the "team" of one or the other of these profit making firms is silly.

How does it happen that folks begin to personally identify with hardware enough to argue about it? It never occured to me to do that. Its hardware....not religion! It either does the job for you or it doesn't.

I read Toms and Anand's sites to learn about equipment, and then I buy, build, modify, overclock, etc. based on learning I get from these sites. Both sites serve a great purpose that I appreciate.

Bob
March 8, 2006 9:29:58 PM

Quote:
All quotes from Tom's articles. Now shut up.


Pwned, haha! Now go back to spamming us with more Inquirer articles, 9-Inch.
a b à CPUs
March 8, 2006 9:59:56 PM

Quote:
Dude, what's the big deal of that statement? They are just simply making a conclusion of what they saw at the IDF.

Nothing biased about that statement at all. Now, go to class and put on your dunce cap


It wouldn't surprise me if you didn't answer the way you did. Opps, I forgot you were an Intel fanboy that uses an Opteron to hide his fanboyism towards Intel. :wink:

Anyhow, it's Toms credibility in the tech community in risk here.
There will be a time when no one would ever read their biased articles.

9-inch,

Go get Dvdpiddy and have your self an AMD fanboys bitch session. Intel has finally coming out with something that is a strong product and now your thinking you might be on the wrong side. Get a life and more so go marry Dvdpiddy. Since he acts like a woman, you should be made for yourselves.

Damn man, after Intel released those fake benchmarks, it seems every single Intel Troll has come outta the wood works to flame AMD, sheesh, and they tell us to grow up lol.

~~Mad Mod Mike, pimpin' the world 1 rig at a time

Flame? your BS about how "good" your amd is and saying how crap intels are and now some real benchmarks come out your getting all shitted cause intel now leads - cant you take it?

geez man 90% of us want a faster system and intel has now provided the solution - doesnt matter what brand aslong as its fast, and when i say that you say im a fanboy? your the fanboy here.
March 8, 2006 11:35:28 PM

Quote:
You know what they say about opinions: mine is always right.

We're all very happy to see that you have decided that TG is Intel-bias. For every point you make, and Intel fan will makean equally compelling counterpoint, and vise-versa.

You're just beating your head against a wall pushing this


The problem I'm trying you guys to see is that Toms Hardware is a hardware review site which can influence peoples buying decissions.

The other day, a friend of mine told me that he was going to buy a Pentium D 820 processor because he read at Toms Hardware that the processor was cheaper and performed "better" than an Athlon 64 3800+. I told him it was OK for him to buy the processor if "cheapness" is what he wanted, but there's no way in the world a Pentium D performs better than any of AMD's dual core processors. This is the kind of information that pist me off since it misleads many people who comes to this site for some help on their buying decissions.

This is just a personal thought. Everyone has free of speech so I'm doing good use of it. maybe, some of the editors/reviewers are reading this and I hope they consider and rethink about all the damage they've done to everyone that wants an AMD rig or uses AMD.


Quote:
Flame? your BS about how "good" your amd is and saying how crap intels are and now some real benchmarks come out your getting all shitted cause intel now leads - cant you take it?

Lead in benchmarks made by Intel with a cherry-picked Conroe processor. Yeah, sure.

Once the thing comes out to market and EVERY one has a FULL review of it vs AM2, then I'll pay more attention to any benchmarks. Until now, everything is just Intel's way to do propaganda. :wink:
March 8, 2006 11:58:29 PM

You are right on all of your statements.

I was saying the same thing about them a while ago and instead of gratitude, I got banned. Just be careful.
March 9, 2006 3:34:55 AM

Quote:
Quote:

The fastest model will run at 2GHz and none of them will have 1MB of L2 cache. It seems to me that based on those specs, AMD's top 2GHz X2 won't be able to lead the 2.33GHz Core Duo in performance.

Hmm... This is a bunch of bologna... U know that AMD doesnt need clock speed and L2 cache to beat Intel's. May i direct you to a website, And compare the X2 4800, and the Pentium D 950.

http://www23.tomshardware.com/cpu.html?modelx=33&model1...

Now Tell me who has a higher Frequency? Also who has more L2 cache? Now once u answered those tell me who has the lead in all of the fields except 3 out of 28. As you can see your point which is in my quote serves no purpose in proving AMDs performance. So dont just say stuff cus thats what u think, dont just specualte. We will see which is better when they come out. Mabey the intel WILL win, or mabey the intel will lose... dont use information if u cant back it up. Also even the X2 4600, which has 1/4 L2 cache, and a lower frequency, Only loses to the PENTIUM D 950, in 4 out of 28. Not only that but both 4800 and 4600 are cheaper.

As for the bias part of our story. I do feel that THG is SLIGHTY leaning towards intel. But not enough to anger me and goto another websight.
March 9, 2006 3:41:45 AM

theres a huge difference between the old pentiums and the new ones, they are much better, as good as intel says? i doubt it. better than amd? probably, since intel really dont want to fall behind again and lose more market share there gonna try there best to stomp amd in the ground, cornoe may do this while using less power and making less heat. both platforms look promising though. but IMO... with the little info i know abotu the 2, intel seems to be taking a small lead... but theres no need to argue because neither are even released yet, so stop bitching and acting like u guys know it all, u know very very little about the processors, so saying that one is better and backing it up with basically beta processors is nothing but a fanboy comment. although i did say i think intel will pull ahead :roll: ... just because there using a mobile design in the new cores so they will use much less energy, produce less heat, and i hear they will be ocing gods. amd on the other hand, wont be able to break 3.0ghz on 90nm, at 65 though, who knows maybe 4ghz will be the ceiling, yes i know clock speeds dont matter anymore. i think since intel will be using 65nm and a mobile processor design they will win in the energy and heat sections, as for perforamnce..... lets wait instead of flaming.
March 9, 2006 2:23:45 PM

I remember a time not too long ago listening to the Intel fans complaining that THG is completely AMD bias, even going so far as to accuse Tom of [Sarcasm] *gasp* Taking AMD money for advertisement. [/Sarcasm]

That was during the early Athlon days, when THG was reporting that AMD had better architecture, better performance per clock, and that Intel's P4 series was destined for mediocrity due to a poor design being covered up by high clock speeds.

I would say there may be a few reviewers here that are biased toward AMD, some that are toward Intel, and even at least one that is about as unbiased as you can be in this type of comparison.

Regardless - sit back, grab a beverage of your choice, and enjoy the show - it's going to be an interesting year for the CPU battle, and I for one am looking forward to every minute.

I built systems for 11 years in various shops. Through those years, I've seen AMD come in with great chips, and come in with horrible chips (anyone remember the K6-2? *shudder*) I've seen Intel come in consistently strong in most areas, and charge so much for their chips it made me sick to use them. There was a time I REFUSED to own an Intel system for the simple reason that I could not justify paying 2-3x more for a chip that ran 95% as fast as the top of the line Intel (when they had the speed crown).

Now that AMD has that crown firmly on it's head (and I won't believe it's removed until I see 3rd party benchmarks claiming that the king is dead), we see the tables turn. No longer is AMD so worried about the value of their chips, and suddenly Intel is being force to price competitively, build more efficient chips, better architecture, etc.

This war has been GREAT for us - the users. Without it, where would the processor world be?

It used to be that AMD was saying "Our chip may not be faster in MHz, but it's faster PER MHz. And our fastest may not beat Intel's fastest, but it costs half as much and uses half the power!

Now, Intel is claiming the more efficient processor per clock cycle, the lowest power, and are planning on pricing it at half of AMD's current top offering.

Give it time... I have a feeling it will return full circle.

IDEV - Former hardcore AMD fanboy - still really like the chips, but long for the past when they were cheaper.
March 9, 2006 2:38:50 PM

Quote:
yes i know clock speeds dont matter anymore.

not true
http://www.tomshardware.com/2006/01/10/amd_athlon_fx_60...

As you overlook the performance increase during Over clocking. There is still improvement from a higher clock speed. So higher frequency isnt dead yet.

But plz lets stop the flaming
March 9, 2006 3:10:49 PM

Quote:
Did you guys had a look at the front page?

Here's a quote:
Visitors at IDF got a first taste of what Intel is capable of, once you wake it up. Thus far, its demos have left no doubt that Merom and its derivatives - Conroe on the desktop and Woodcrest on the server side - are monster systems that promise to beat every other processor on the market, in terms of both performance and efficiency.

This is clear proof of how these guys get excited at any little propaganda Intel throws at them.
link

Now, here's a quote about the Turion X2:
Quote:
It's worth noting that AMD apparently does not intend for Turion X2 to attain any sort of performance or power savings goal. Rooney confirmed that AMD's primary goal with the new processor is achieve more design wins, and get more OEMs on board to integrate the processor into product plans. AMD currently boasts of about 10.9% market share in the notebook space.

They asume this because they don't have the specs of the chip. I read the whole article and there's no sign of Rooney saying something like that (and I doubt he did since AMD would fire him immediately).
link maybe i think that all these hardware sites bias toward intel for their kickbacks well 9-inch it looks like its me you and mike to fight the good fight
March 9, 2006 3:24:03 PM

Quote:
maybe i think that all these hardware sites bias toward intel for their kickbacks well 9-inch it looks like its me you and mike to fight the good fight


What good fight? Trying to convince someone to never buy an Intel again? You are what I would call a hypocrite, you bash Intel fans about their undying loyalty to Intel, but what are you doing? Same thing, just replace the word Intel with AMD.

I will not fight to prove one chip better than the other. I always choose which processor will give the best performance, and sometimes it is Intel, othertimes AMD.
!