Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

UNFAIR BENCHMARKS

Last response: in CPUs
Share
a b à CPUs
March 8, 2006 10:26:49 PM

I hear everyone on the forums saying how unfair it was comparing conroe and AMD, and how AM2 benchmarks were "not final" and benchmark being rigged and what not, its amd fanboyism if you ask me! hear the other side of the story:

THE ONLY UNFAIR BENCHMARK WAS COMPARING A 2.66GHZ CONROE TO A HIGHER CLOCKED A64 X2 AT 2.8GHZ

Its unfair AMD has an Integrated Memory Controller

Its unfair AMD uses a better + faster "fsb" (HTT) taking on intels fsb thats twice as old.

The AM2 benchmarks shown here at THG were using DDR2-667 - so what, conroe was using DDR2-667, both when there out will use DDR2-800 so the advantage will be equal

Intel systems cheating benchmarks? Even if the amd system was (it wasnt) 5% slower or whatever conroe is still atleast 20% quicker and not even clock for clock.

Its unfair AMD's "extreme edition" equivilant the FX60 (overclocked) was taking on a stock conroe (FSB1066, not the EE at 1333mhz fsb)

All you amd fanboys, ah what the hell MadModMike - people buy what best suits them at the times, and now it seems Intel provides us with colder, cheaper and faster processors - there simply faster, and when/if (come on you say that about Intel so ill say it to amd) so IF AMD comes out with something better then yes we will buy the faster chip - its not the brands, its the performance.

And besides - were all Intel AND AMD fanboys - no one buys Transmetta and VIA products LOL

More about : unfair benchmarks

March 8, 2006 10:29:14 PM

Quote:
I hear everyone on the forums saying how unfair it was comparing conroe and AMD, and how AM2 benchmarks were "not final" and benchmark being rigged and what not, its amd fanboyism if you ask me! hear the other side of the story:

THE ONLY UNFAIR BENCHMARK WAS COMPARING A 2.66GHZ CONROE TO A HIGHER CLOCKED A64 X2 AT 2.8GHZ

Its unfair AMD has an Integrated Memory Controller

Its unfair AMD uses a better + faster "fsb" (HTT) taking on intels fsb thats twice as old.

The AM2 benchmarks shown here at THG were using DDR2-667 - so what, conroe was using DDR2-667, both when there out will use DDR2-800 so the advantage will be equal

Intel systems cheating benchmarks? Even if the amd system was (it wasnt) 5% slower or whatever conroe is still atleast 20% quicker and not even clock for clock.

Its unfair AMD's "extreme edition" equivilant the FX60 (overclocked) was taking on a stock conroe (FSB1066, not the EE at 1333mhz fsb)

All you amd fanboys, ah what the hell MadModMike - people buy what best suits them at the times, and now it seems Intel provides us with colder, cheaper and faster processors - there simply faster, and when/if (come on you say that about Intel so ill say it to amd) so IF AMD comes out with something better then yes we will buy the faster chip - its not the brands, its the performance.

And besides - were all Intel AND AMD fanboys - no one buys Transmetta and VIA products LOL


Intel Conroe Processor: $510

Motherboard and matching Memory: $435

Case, PSU, Vid Card, and accessories: $547

Creating 2 threads dedicated to flaming MadModMike and having 100 fanboy flamefests while report MMM because you're a baby: Priceless

lol Im probably gonna get banned for this, but it's hillarious lol

~~Mad Mod Mike, pimpin' the world 1 rig at a time
March 8, 2006 10:30:41 PM

Die and FFS we don't need another pointless thread.
Related resources
a b à CPUs
March 8, 2006 10:31:57 PM

Hey Action Man - You Live In Australia Too?
March 8, 2006 10:33:34 PM

No not a chance for this beauty!!! That is the spirit and right way to look at things! :wink:
March 8, 2006 10:38:13 PM

Quote:
I hear everyone on the forums saying how unfair it was comparing conroe and AMD, and how AM2 benchmarks were "not final" and benchmark being rigged and what not, its amd fanboyism if you ask me! hear the other side of the story:

THE ONLY UNFAIR BENCHMARK WAS COMPARING A 2.66GHZ CONROE TO A HIGHER CLOCKED A64 X2 AT 2.8GHZ

Its unfair AMD has an Integrated Memory Controller

Its unfair AMD uses a better + faster "fsb" (HTT) taking on intels fsb thats twice as old.

The AM2 benchmarks shown here at THG were using DDR2-667 - so what, conroe was using DDR2-667, both when there out will use DDR2-800 so the advantage will be equal

Intel systems cheating benchmarks? Even if the amd system was (it wasnt) 5% slower or whatever conroe is still atleast 20% quicker and not even clock for clock.

Its unfair AMD's "extreme edition" equivilant the FX60 (overclocked) was taking on a stock conroe (FSB1066, not the EE at 1333mhz fsb)

All you amd fanboys, ah what the hell MadModMike - people buy what best suits them at the times, and now it seems Intel provides us with colder, cheaper and faster processors - there simply faster, and when/if (come on you say that about Intel so ill say it to amd) so IF AMD comes out with something better then yes we will buy the faster chip - its not the brands, its the performance.

And besides - were all Intel AND AMD fanboys - no one buys Transmetta and VIA products LOL

Agreed, this is a pointless thread that will just end up having more and more people making pointless posts flaming other people.
March 9, 2006 12:19:43 PM

Yes, thats true.
You should be banned and assassinated afterwards :lol: 

Oh and in case youre gonna die, IT WASNT ME!
So dont sue me pl0x :o 
March 9, 2006 12:41:49 PM

thats it all you intel fanboys have pissed me off i am going to have to do something drastic! *slams fist on table*
March 9, 2006 12:49:21 PM

Die! :lol: 
March 9, 2006 12:56:09 PM

what? i was going to call my linux freind over but hes busy right now :cry: 
*slams fists on table agian*
March 9, 2006 1:02:26 PM

Well, you can call your imaginary girlfriend to console you...
Her number is 1-900-Hot-Sexx
March 9, 2006 1:09:02 PM

1.i dont have an imaginary girlfreind
2.hey rich why you pissin me off
March 9, 2006 1:10:54 PM

:?: :!: 8O :roll:
March 9, 2006 1:16:50 PM

*cursing at rich* **** ***
March 9, 2006 1:18:55 PM

Why would anyone consider those benchmarks anyway? Most people at some point have made it clear that ANY and ALL benchmarks are biased anyway. It doesn't matter what anyone says anymore period. You can rebuke and show facts but all that does is generate more propaganda.

In conclusion to all of this "mess" here in this forum, and I will admit I haven't been perfect either, I will continue to use Intel for all of my computing needs. Why do you ask? Because I for one do not want to be classified nor be a part of the AMD foolishness I've seen.

I think its rather disgusting that for years, we've been exposed to nothing but bashing and the ONE time, THE ONE TIME Intel comes back around with something new, its absolutely flamed to death and has caused nothing but havoc from the AMD camp that of which, I choose NOT to be any part of any longer.

I will still purchase and put together AMD machines only for my personal testing and if I choose to keep one or two around, I will do so.

You AMD guys can say what you want and do as you please, thanks to you, you've turned me away from AMD.
March 9, 2006 1:44:14 PM

Quote:
Hey Action Man - You Live In Australia Too?


I think all the non-biased people live outside of the USA (Intel) and Germany / Europe (AMD).

So anyone in the Asia Pacific / China region, is likely non-biased ;) 

If one only knows (or rather believes) that nForce4 + AMD = performance (even in 12 months time) then they can't possibly pimp the world one rig at a time, as not all the rigs are nForce4 + AMD based and they'll eventually hit a point requiring a very deep understanding of EFI and IA-64 (or at least 4-6 issue Intel EM64T) processors within 6 years.

Myslef,... well,... I am known as "The Itanium / IA-64 Fanboy" around here, even though my main system is a rather beefy 4 core/2 processor AMD Opteron 270.... all because I supported Intels move to IA-64 (and I still do, even though Microsoft 'offically' do not.... at least at the momment) once in an AMD dominated forum. :p 

Anyone that can figure out how a 65nm IA-64 Itanium would perform would dump everything (including Conroe) in a heartbeat.... however for now I am more than happy to (likely) recommend them come the Vista release.

Still by 2008 - 2012 IA-64 will make its debut, and likely on smaller than 65nm. The Itanium 2 manufacturing process is not even on 90nm yet, but at 90nm they kick the even Conroe (Since they will be 6-issue processors clocked above the Conroe, likely with another +40% IPC on top of Conroe - I mean duh 4-issue Conroe compared to 6-issue IA-64 with more cores per processor die).

PS: ACT, Australia here :)  - G'day mates - 8)
March 9, 2006 2:15:31 PM

Id say both the USA AND Germany are extremely AMD biased.

Germans like AMD cause its the only company that COMES INTO Germany and Americans like AMD because... err... dunno... they sock *roflz* theres actually no reason for Americans to like AMD :?:
March 9, 2006 2:18:10 PM

Quote:
Id say both the USA AND Germany are extremely AMD biased.

Germans like AMD cause its the only company that COMES INTO Germany and Americans like AMD because... err... dunno... they sock *roflz* theres actually no reason for Americans to like AMD :?:

Then what's your point? :?:
March 9, 2006 2:50:04 PM

His point is there is no economical point for USA residents to like AMD processors as they need to be imported, and thus Intel would be a cheaper choice.

Although as the Athlon 64 / Opteron is such a nice chip (for now) it may still be price / performance / TCO effective for them to support and use AMD processors in their gaming rigs.

AMD CPUs are not made in the USA, However enogh of Intels processors are made in Malaysia, etc anyway, so they both need to (re)import stock to sell (back) to Americans.

Just nice to know they keep the balance.
March 9, 2006 2:51:25 PM

This is T4 Forumz, a pre-requisite of which is there is no point!
!