Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Is there a Lag in Tom's Hardware re new processors?

Last response: in CPUs
Share
February 19, 2007 11:33:22 AM

I don't find the biweekly update to the price/performance for processors. Of course, it's missing the e6300, and the AMD processors 5200 thru 6000, and should also have the new intel 4300. These updates were weekly last year, then bi-weekly this year, and now...? I wonder simply because since the graphs would now favor AMD even more dramatically, and they aren't updated?

It's similar to the sticky processor guide at the top of this forum, Nov6 2006. Very out of date now. Clearly the AM2 5200 would belong in the mid range recomendation.

etc.

I have *never* thought that THG itself might be connected to Intel, even though Paul O., Intel CEO says it's his favorite site....

Does anyone have information about this?
a b à CPUs
February 19, 2007 12:46:01 PM

It does seem that some updates are getting fewer and farther between.

But hey, we have a great new web site to look at, that more than makes up for it, right? :wink:
February 19, 2007 12:51:16 PM

Well, I do consider THG *invaluable*. While it's great THG helped us learn (way back) about the superior performance of the C2duos, we'd hope they'd be prompt enough to compare the AM2 5600, etc. to the C2duos! After all, that was the whole point of any of those reviews -- to compare to current chips.

But....even if THG would always be slow to send kudos towards AMD, *even then*, it would still be invaluable, IMO.

And, I don't yet presume that THG has such a tendency. I'm just beginning to monitor it now.

Again, THG is a top site, and my favorite, myself, for quite a while now.
Related resources
February 19, 2007 12:57:26 PM

Quote:
I don't find the biweekly update to the price/performance for processors. Of course, it's missing the e6300, and the AMD processors 5200 thru 6000, and should also have the new intel 4300. These updates were weekly last year, then bi-weekly this year, and now...? I wonder simply because since the graphs would now favor AMD even more dramatically, and they aren't updated?

It's similar to the sticky processor guide at the top of this forum, Nov6 2006. Very out of date now. Clearly the AM2 5200 would belong in the mid range recomendation.

etc.

I have *never* thought that THG itself might be connected to Intel, even though Paul O., Intel CEO says it's his favorite site....

Does anyone have information about this?

Not Really.
IMHO since they haven't included the E4300-E6300 it seems fair enough that they don't include AM2 5200-6000 which for now are all midrange processors. OR:
Maybe they are holding the info hostage, waiting for AMD to cough up a payment like Dell received from Intel . :lol: 

Yes they are lagging behind on the charts.
seems to me they quit when core 2 took the lead.

____________________

One day, someone showed me a glass of water that was half full. And he said, "Is it half full or half empty?" So I drank the water. No more problem. ~Alexander Jodorowsky
February 19, 2007 1:48:42 PM

They're updated 4 times a year if I recall correctly.
February 19, 2007 1:56:25 PM

makes sense, I was thinking quarterly was sensible for a general guide. But inside the forum itself, I'd expect if I wrote a guide to update it *when a significant new price/performance situation happened*, as it did 2 weeks back now.

but Nov 6 means it's time already for the quarterly. So we'll see if it's quarterly, or only....when Intel has an advantage.
February 19, 2007 1:57:19 PM

Quote:
I really do not know what is going on. Some more chips in the cpu charts would be nice. I would like to see the E4300 and E6300 as well. Some of the newer brisbane chips as well just to add to the mix.

It's not just that; if you carefully check some results like I have often done, you will find a lot of mistakes and impossible situations like a 4400+ that encodes MP3s faster than a 4800+ or a 1.8GHz Sempron 3000+ rendering faster than a 1.8GHz Athlon64 3000+. Also the dropdown list of CPUs needs to be categorized for faster access; it takes quite a while to identify a CPU there.
February 19, 2007 2:20:10 PM

Quote:
I really do not know what is going on. Some more chips in the cpu charts would be nice. I would like to see the E4300 and E6300 as well. Some of the newer brisbane chips as well just to add to the mix.

It's not just that; if you carefully check some results like I have often done, you will find a lot of mistakes and impossible situations like a 4400+ that encodes MP3s faster than a 4800+ or a 1.8GHz Sempron 3000+ rendering faster than a 1.8GHz Athlon64 3000+. Also the dropdown list of CPUs needs to be categorized for faster access; it takes quite a while to identify a CPU there.
True, it could be loads better, but do not forget that it is the first, not to mention the only, of its kind. Something as big and ambitious as this is bound to have room for improvement...
February 19, 2007 5:04:29 PM

Quote:
I have *never* thought that THG itself might be connected to Intel, even though Paul O., Intel CEO says it's his favorite site....


That's a bunch of bullsh*it that all the fanboys over at Anandtech like to sling around. IMO, Anandtech has the most bias. I've done extensive investigation into their test beds and they used to setup Intel test beds for failure. For example, when they reviewed the Pentium D 955 EE, they used DDR2-667 RAM at 5-5-5-15 2T timings. At the time MUCH lower timings were available for DDR2-667. But they sure as hell used the lowest possible timings w/ AMD CPU's (2-2-2-5 1T)

They quit doing that after everyone called them out on their B.S. But still...
February 19, 2007 5:15:43 PM

Quote:
Well, I do consider THG *invaluable*. While it's great THG helped us learn (way back) about the superior performance of the C2duos, we'd hope they'd be prompt enough to compare the AM2 5600, etc. to the C2duos! After all, that was the whole point of any of those reviews -- to compare to current chips.

But....even if THG would always be slow to send kudos towards AMD, *even then*, it would still be invaluable, IMO.

And, I don't yet presume that THG has such a tendency. I'm just beginning to monitor it now.

Again, THG is a top site, and my favorite, myself, for quite a while now.


Now now, Lets remember the 5200s spotty availability and prohibitive pricing when it became available. Your post seems to imply that that THG is deleberately 'witholding' a comparison you believe would be favorable to AMD, yet comparisons of the E6300 which would be favorable to intel (based on the anadtech data which I showed you in another post) has also been left out.

So it would seem that THG is failing to show favor by ommision/inclusion to both companies...in other words, they areant favoring anyone, they just havent got to it. Annoying, but in no way what-so-ever indicative of favoritism. But dont take my word, just go back through the review archives and see how many times THGs data shows Intel gettings its arse handed to it by AMD
February 19, 2007 5:15:45 PM

Just take me at my word, and read all the words. Not that many. Less than 100 I think.
February 19, 2007 5:36:00 PM

...
February 19, 2007 5:39:18 PM

I try to use precise language, but I realize that people understand language differently, and just as important, being human, my language is individual to myself.

Yes, I remember plenty of articles regarding the AMD superiority, etc., back when it was so unavoidable. I've read Tom's for a good while.

My presumption (presumption means my first guess) is yes, THG is equal in this regard. But my question (question means I don't already have an answer) is whether this is true.

The current delay referenced re the sticky post at top of this forum seems like a lot to me.

I hope this clarifies for you.
February 19, 2007 7:47:00 PM

What I find a little sad is that they've done way with all the cheap processors on the newest CPU chart. No semprons or Celeron Ds anywhere. In the future charts I wouldn't be surprised if they drop all single core CPUs. I guess THG thinks that anyone interested in computers doesn't build on a shroestring budget.
February 19, 2007 10:42:58 PM

Quote:
I try to use precise language, but I realize that people understand language differently, and just as important, being human, my language is individual to myself.

Yes, I remember plenty of articles regarding the AMD superiority, etc., back when it was so unavoidable. I've read Tom's for a good while.

My presumption (presumption means my first guess) is yes, THG is equal in this regard. But my question (question means I don't already have an answer) is whether this is true.

The current delay referenced re the sticky post at top of this forum seems like a lot to me.

I hope this clarifies for you.



Funny, I thought

Quote:

Very out of date now. Clearly the AM2 5200 would belong in the mid range recomendation.




Quote:

have *never* thought that THG itself might be connected to Intel, even though Paul O., Intel CEO says it's his favorite site....

Does anyone have information about this?






Quote:

But....even if THG would always be slow to send kudos towards AMD, *even then*, it would still be invaluable, IMO.

And, I don't yet presume that THG has such a tendency. I'm just beginning to monitor it now.


were pretty precise wording, leaving little doubt as to the innuendo. IMO, those statements are pretty straight forward and dont require any clarification. Not unlike your attempts to prove the AMD x2 3800 was the best entry level level value last month. You seem to keep looking for ways to dis THG and attach an anti AMD miasma to it
February 19, 2007 11:12:41 PM

Frankly, if I am I wrong about something, *I hope someone explains why*, so I can get more right!

I hope they explain why rationally, without insults or innuendo.

See, I'm not about winning an argument, so I won't get into some kind of mud slinging back and forth with you.

But innuendo is suppose to mean suggesting something negative that is difficult to disprove, and is so a form of a smear.

That the sticky post on CPUs is from Nov6 2006 isn't difficult to check at all.

That it's out of date isn't innuendo.

It's an opinion. Innuendo for example would be something making a smear like saying the OP is an Intel employee. I haven't said that, and won't. I don't like innuendo.

Whether the X2 3800 is a great buy is a matter of debate. I hope my previous posts on it were clear, as to my reasoning.

If you can discuss that *without innuendo*, I'd frankly be glad to make your acquaintance.
February 20, 2007 1:28:54 AM

Quote:
Frankly, if I am I wrong about something, *I hope someone explains why*, so I can get more right!

I hope they explain why rationally, without insults or innuendo.

See, I'm not about winning an argument, so I won't get into some kind of mud slinging back and forth with you.

But innuendo is suppose to mean suggesting something negative that is difficult to disprove, and is so a form of a smear.

That the sticky post on CPUs is from Nov6 2006 isn't difficult to check at all.

That it's out of date isn't innuendo.

It's an opinion. Innuendo for example would be something making a smear like saying the OP is an Intel employee. I haven't said that, and won't. I don't like innuendo.

Whether the X2 3800 is a great buy is a matter of debate. I hope my previous posts on it were clear, as to my reasoning.

If you can discuss that *without innuendo*, I'd frankly be glad to make your acquaintance.



in·nu·en·do /ˌɪnyuˈɛndoʊ/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[in-yoo-en-doh] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation
–noun, plural -dos, -does. 1. an indirect intimation about a person or thing, esp. of a disparaging or a derogatory nature.
2. Law. a. a parenthetic explanation or specification in a pleading.
b. (in an action for slander or libel) the explanation and elucidation of the words alleged to be defamatory.
c. the word or expression thus explained.



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[Origin: 1555–65; < L: a hint, lit., by signaling, abl. of innuendum, ger. of innuere to signal, equiv. to in- in-2 + nuere to nod]


—Synonyms 1. insinuation, imputation.
Random House Unabridged Dictionary, © Random House, Inc. 2006.



Quote:

Very out of date now. Clearly the AM2 5200 would belong in the mid range recomendation.


Innuendo insinuating THG is deliberately not perfroming tests of the 5200 because it may be the "mid range recommendation"


Quote:

.... have *never* thought that THG itself might be connected to Intel, even though Paul O., Intel CEO says it's his favorite site....

Does anyone have information about this?


innuendo insuating THG may be on Intels payroll


Quote:

But....even if THG would always be slow to send kudos towards AMD *even then*, it would still be invaluable, IMO.

And, I don't yet presume that THG has such a tendency. I'm just beginning to monitor it now.


Innuedo insinuating THG deliberately denies AMD due accolades.

Please stop attempting to play the innocent, and dont insult the intelligence of the readers/members here. You wrote these things and they are clearly innuendo, just as you authored this thread openly accusing the forum of Intel bias:

http://forumz.tomshardware.com/hardware/modules.php?nam...

Which you them followed up with....

http://forumz.tomshardware.com/hardware/modules.php?nam...

.....attempting to play the innocent.

The only bias Ive seen in your threads is yours
Please dont sit there and play the "Im here to learn, dont be mean" game when you have previously demonstrated a prediliction to deliberately ignore information which does not corroborate your opinions. Thats not coming here to learn, thats coming here to argue an opinion, which you also attempt to deny. i.e. fanboyism.

Finally, think about what you are doing. As in your previous posts, you walk into this forum, THGs forum, imply that THG or the forum members hold a bias, then take offence when your implications are exposed or debunked. Like so many others, you seem to feel you can trot in, make a derogatory remark but that you stand above rebuttal.

C2Ds Uarch is superior to K8. The price cuts AMD has been making have not finished filtering down to the etailers so the value war is still a daily/per unit battle. Get over it.

Casting accusations againts THG does not change facts. When AMDs price cuts are in full affect, that will change facts...assuming Intel does not respond. When Barcelona is here, that will change facts assuming it performs up to 1/2 the claims. When these things happen, your opposite, whoever they may be, will be in here whinning that the forums are AMD biased. They will be whinning, 'THG didnt include the Intel XXX processor in its price/perfromance chart because its biased'. And all the regulars here will have to listen to the exact same crap your selling, just from a different behind.

Do you have any idea how old this is? Its been going on for a very long time, and you are just another one of the countless mass who favors one side while casting accusations against the other. The strategies are the same, the tactics are the same, the arguments are the same. The only thing that changes are the names, and which side the accusations of bias are leveled at. There is no manufacturer bias in THG or the forums. Stop trying to manufacture one.
February 20, 2007 2:15:25 AM

I can tell you, from personal experience, that's it's easy to slide downhill into thinking discourse is warfare. It's possible to imagine slights and "innuendo" where none exists. It's possible to think all the people who cut you off in traffic are trying to. etc. It's common, and happens to most people at one time or another.

It's a pattern. When you break that pattern, it's like feeling a weight come off of you.

Then it's really easy to befriend people everyone you go.
February 20, 2007 2:27:08 AM

Quote:
I can tell you, from personal experience, that's it's easy to slide downhill into thinking discourse is warfare. It's possible to imagine slights and "innuendo" where none exists. It's possible to think all the people who cut you off in traffic are trying to. etc. It's common, and happens to most people at one time or another.

It's a pattern. When you break that pattern, it's like feeling a weight come off of you.

Then it's really easy to befriend people everyone you go.


Hal, please spare us the attempt at shifting the problem to someone else shoulders.

Quote:

Very out of date now. Clearly the AM2 5200 would belong in the mid range recomendation.

Quote:

.... have *never* thought that THG itself might be connected to Intel, even though Paul O., Intel CEO says it's his favorite site....

Does anyone have information about this?

Quote:

But....even if THG would always be slow to send kudos towards AMD *even then*, it would still be invaluable, IMO.


You wrote this, not me. Its your pattern, not mine. Its BS, not warfare. There is nothing to imagine, its printed for all to see plain and simple. Do you really believe, by implying that there is a personal perception problem, that it somehow changes what you wrote, how you wrote it, or what it says? If you truly believe that, then there is a perception problem, but its not mine.
February 20, 2007 3:16:29 AM

Quote:

Casting accusations againts THG does not change facts. When AMDs price cuts are in full affect, that will change facts...assuming Intel does not respond. When Barcelona is here, that will change facts assuming it performs up to 1/2 the claims. When these things happen, your opposite, whoever they may be, will be in here whinning that the forums are AMD biased. They will be whinning, 'THG didnt include the Intel XXX processor in its price/perfromance chart because its biased'. And all the regulars here will have to listen to the exact same crap your selling, just from a different behind.


The truth is that there are so many processor choices from both companies that fit all kinds of budgets and needs, that it's harder for any tech site to keep up with all the latest recommendations. I was a Northwood fan over the Athlon X2 because of heat issues. I didn't upgrade to Pentium D because of heat issues and couldn't afford a socket 939 X2 3800+ when they were close to $300 way back when I was anticipating Oblivion.

I went budget AMD over Intel because of price, and because I really don't like pins on the motherboard or the kind of heatsink that I had to fiddle with for a friend's build awhile back. So, I went a more traditional dual core CPU route that was not only priced where I wanted to spend, but also was very easy for me to install in this barebones. It helped that I'd also gotten cataract surgery in December, so I could see well again.

As for bias claims, I remember hearing that back in the 486 days, and I've been building my own PCs (most of the time) since the 386-SX. I once remarked how I couldn't get a K5 to boot Windows and an AMD fanboy blamed the chipset support, but a processor doesn't stand on it's own. It needs adequate and compatible chipsets. On the other hand, I had great experiences with a K62-450 on an ASUS board and I used that until I had to go P4 Williamette for Morrowind.

I like AMD as the second processor company that keeps Intel on it's toes. I don't like Intel's alleged tactics, which will all be sorted out by the trier of fact, regardless of how it all proceeds on message boards. I liked AMD's lead over Prescotts, Smithfields and Presslers, and understood that they had to keep their prices high when they were in the clear lead.

Both Intel and Microsoft have deep pockets due to a virtual monopoly in the corporate market, but as Opteron proved, that doesn't always hold up. I wish there were another viable x86 processor company and two other viable x86 OS companies out there, because I like competition leading to choices and innovation. I almost miss the days when I could choose an Intel 386DX-33, an AMD 386 DX-40 or a Cyrix 486DLC-40 (I chose the budget Cyrix and it worked fine with DR-DOS).

People get worked up over brand loyalty and there is occasional bias on any thread, depending on the number of people with preferences who get involved. I do not think that Tom's is biased, nor Anandtech. I do think that they aren't always realistic, Tom's touting the Smithfield 805 as an overclockable CPU was a bit much. I guess there are people who really want a day to day space heater like that, but I don't know any of them personally.

When compariing AMD and Intel, or ATI and Nvidia, and I prefer ATI All in Wonder cards, and will probably go ATI when I replace the 7600GS when DX10 mainstream cards arrive -- mainly because I've found I don't like Pure Video but do like Avivo, it's best to be thankful that there are choices out there, that we aren't stuck with Intel integrated graphics for games or that we only have one GPU card company the way we have only one viable OS (I'll get flamed by Linux fans now -- there's a real fanbase for you, nothing AMD or Intel fans can say equals the heat generated by those who would use any other OS but that from the Redmond Lodge).
February 20, 2007 3:31:49 AM

Quote:

Casting accusations againts THG does not change facts. When AMDs price cuts are in full affect, that will change facts...assuming Intel does not respond. When Barcelona is here, that will change facts assuming it performs up to 1/2 the claims. When these things happen, your opposite, whoever they may be, will be in here whinning that the forums are AMD biased. They will be whinning, 'THG didnt include the Intel XXX processor in its price/perfromance chart because its biased'. And all the regulars here will have to listen to the exact same crap your selling, just from a different behind.


The truth is that there are so many processor choices from both companies that fit all kinds of budgets and needs, that it's harder for any tech site to keep up with all the latest recommendations. I was a Northwood fan over the Athlon X2 because of heat issues. I didn't upgrade to Pentium D because of heat issues and couldn't afford a socket 939 X2 3800+ when they were close to $300 way back when I was anticipating Oblivion.

I went budget AMD over Intel because of price, and because I really don't like pins on the motherboard or the kind of heatsink that I had to fiddle with for a friend's build awhile back. So, I went a more traditional dual core CPU route that was not only priced where I wanted to spend, but also was very easy for me to install in this barebones. It helped that I'd also gotten cataract surgery in December, so I could see well again.

As for bias claims, I remember hearing that back in the 486 days, and I've been building my own PCs (most of the time) since the 386-SX. I once remarked how I couldn't get a K5 to boot Windows and an AMD fanboy blamed the chipset support, but a processor doesn't stand on it's own. It needs adequate and compatible chipsets. On the other hand, I had great experiences with a K62-450 on an ASUS board and I used that until I had to go P4 Williamette for Morrowind.

I like AMD as the second processor company that keeps Intel on it's toes. I don't like Intel's alleged tactics, which will all be sorted out by the trier of fact, regardless of how it all proceeds on message boards. I liked AMD's lead over Prescotts, Smithfields and Presslers, and understood that they had to keep their prices high when they were in the clear lead.

Both Intel and Microsoft have deep pockets due to a virtual monopoly in the corporate market, but as Opteron proved, that doesn't always hold up. I wish there were another viable x86 processor company and two other viable x86 OS companies out there, because I like competition leading to choices and innovation. I almost miss the days when I could choose an Intel 386DX-33, an AMD 386 DX-40 or a Cyrix 486DLC-40 (I chose the budget Cyrix and it worked fine with DR-DOS).

People get worked up over brand loyalty and there is occasional bias on any thread, depending on the number of people with preferences who get involved. I do not think that Tom's is biased, nor Anandtech. I do think that they aren't always realistic, Tom's touting the Smithfield 805 as an overclockable CPU was a bit much. I guess there are people who really want a day to day space heater like that, but I don't know any of them personally.

When compariing AMD and Intel, or ATI and Nvidia, and I prefer ATI All in Wonder cards, and will probably go ATI when I replace the 7600GS when DX10 mainstream cards arrive -- mainly because I've found I don't like Pure Video but do like Avivo, it's best to be thankful that there are choices out there, that we aren't stuck with Intel integrated graphics for games or that we only have one GPU card company the way we have only one viable OS (I'll get flamed by Linux fans now -- there's a real fanbase for you, nothing AMD or Intel fans can say equals the heat generated by those who would use any other OS but that from the Redmond Lodge).

Thats very true, and as I pointed out to hal in another thread, CPU prices are only a part of the total system price. When looking at the best value, to consider CPU price alone, without taking into account ram or the mobo can be misleading. Unless you just want to make a keychain out of a CPU.

Every day brings changes in retail pricing for not only CPUs but ram and mobos as well. With CPU price/performance(value) so close now, to know what the best value system is you really have to check the prices daily. Thats a good thing for AMD, at least IMO, until barcelona comes out, assuming it performs well.

There is definiately the occasional manufacturer bias among individuals within the forums, but so many people jump on it quickly enough that (IMO) its kept well in check. As for the site itself, THG, I have never seen an indication of bias towards one company or the other. The only truly pervasive bias's Ive seen on both THG and the THG forums are towards performance and value, and as you point out, its tough to keep up on the value side right now with so many options available.
February 20, 2007 5:36:34 AM

I've never liked the fact that they use a single core 2.8GHz HT P4 as the standard comparison chip. It has been my opinion, this being a 100% multicore (mainly dual core) buyer's guide, that the current lowest performing dual core cpu should be used as the standard CPU to measure against all others. In this case, it should be the D805. Giving the 805 a performance level of 1 would really help the reader in understanding how much better a different dual core CPU is over another, and not so much how good a dual core cpu is over a single core CPU. This way, there would also be no negative marks (when comparing the D 805 to the 2.8GHz P4, the 805 often received a negative score in single threaded applications, which dragged down its average score, masking its true effectiveness in multithreaded applications).
!