Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Appeal to THG: Rewrite the $300 PC article, please!

Last response: in CPUs
Share
February 19, 2007 7:43:24 PM

Having read this article:
http://www.tomshardware.com/2007/02/19/the-300-pc/index...
and luckily many others on budget CPUs aside from having many personal experiences, in the name of all the conscious members of these forum and for the sake of the many students, kids and overall people on a tight budget reading reviews to find themselves the best solution, I am kindly asking you to complete the article since very differently from your other reviews it TOTALLY lacks benchmarks of:
-Games
-File compression/encoding (other than WinRar)
-Rendering
-Multitasking
Aside from evading the most important, real life benchmarks which give the real value of a system and concentrating on largely irrelevant synthetic benchmarks, you also build the Celeron system on a $60 celeron, that being a good 20% more expensive than the $50 sempron, while the CPUs could, and should have been within a much tighter price margin.
February 19, 2007 8:34:43 PM

Gaming benchmarks with onboard video. Good idea!
February 19, 2007 8:39:54 PM

Many games are playable on an onboard video card, but if for you synthetic and single sided benchmarks is a better idea :roll:
Related resources
February 19, 2007 8:54:57 PM

The best thing, what I am hoping for, is that they retrieve and rewrite it with the full set of benchmarks, because it depicts a totally inverse situation on price and performance; on the average, the Sempron is cheaper and performs better than the CeleronD (at least that is what agreed by all other reviews). But casual readers are unlikely to follow our threads to find the answer.
February 19, 2007 9:00:48 PM

... i think you have to take into account the market group they are preaching to...... who would want to build a $300 system when they have budget gaming in mind. for $300 you probably cant build even a decent minimal requirements gaming system. the only thing you can do with a system like this is play older games, player newer games like crap, and do basic home and work stuff like internet browsing and word processing. If it can only run windows vista basic what does this tell you about the onboard video? it tells you that you cant expect much when it comes to performance. So the $300 system in this article is obviously geared towards people looking to get a new computer with basic needs in mind.
February 19, 2007 9:08:03 PM

Yes, but wouldn't it be better that this people is really shown the best PC, not just the best 'Intel' PC for their needs?! Benchmarks are about performance and if you run them, you'd better run them all, no just those you need to say that the Celeron is the best choice.
On the other hand, if all they care about is a cheap home PC (but forget about upgrading it), the Socket 754 Sempron 2600+ has no rivals in price/performance and it's boards are cheaper, DDR400 is dropping like a stone.
February 19, 2007 9:37:44 PM

Ask the question how much does Intel "donate " to THG every year? While it may not be the Billions that Michael Dell received to be sure it was substantial.
There has long been a recognizable bias in THG Forums, which seems to be fathered by THG itself. Many of my friends do not frequent THG Forums because of this perceived bias. I am neither an Intel or AMD fanboy but from my observations AMD will never get a fair shake. All of you Intel fanboys out there are free to flame me, which is what you seem to do best, when the question of bias arises. AMD doesn't buy business as Intel does. Where do you think all that money they paid out in bribes to buy the business came from. Charging way too much for an inferior product, in other words from you . I do have much more respect for AMD, than I do for Intel because AMD earned the business they have did not have to buy it. Flame away.
February 19, 2007 10:11:43 PM

Please direct your thoughts to this section, seeings as it is more appropriate to the discussion at hand. I haven't read the article in question, but your best bet would be to PM RobWright, who happens to be a THG editor with your name along with the names of others who feel that this issue should be revisited in a, "less biased", and, "more precise" manner.
Regards,
Ninja
February 19, 2007 10:18:12 PM

I think the article needs to be rewritten too. I was doing something similar (for my brother and a computer class) but for a $500 computer. This includes OS, Monitor, Keyboard, Mouse, graphics card (even though the one I would have used had on board), and speakers. Got it to $515, not including shipping and taxes. It use the most budget of AMD Sempron, mainly because I have heard of less instability and over heating issues then with a Celeron. When I was doing this I checked to see the advantages of going with dell, and really, I couldn't build the same configurations, but I did find that when I matched mine up to it's I saved about $50, even if I calculated the shipping and tax on the parts, and not figuring tax on the dell (no shipping for $500 or more I think). The only difference was that the dell had a one year warranty. The only question I might have had was if the X1300 is a graphics card that you can use for Vista premium's features. Everything else, in the build, could handle it. It looks like the artical was rushed.
February 19, 2007 10:48:22 PM

Highly biased article comparing an 102$ Asus P5LD2-VM with an 52$ K8M890M2MA-R2SH ... talking about comparing apples to apples, pleeease! Celeron 57$, Sempron 70$ so 13$ diff on CPU and 50$ on MB?

An Intel Celeron will never beat an AMD Sempron the same price. The Sempron has better perf/$.

Also "Winrar Beta 3"? since when is it ok to use beta software for benchmarking purposes ? even if it is the greatest application on earth. The only non syntetic bench where Cleron wins is Winrar Beta 3 I wonder how much someone has struggled to find that app.

Quote:

PostPosted: Mon Feb 19, 2007 6:37 pm Post subject: Re: Appeal to THG: Rewrite the $300 PC article, please!
Ask the question how much does Intel "donate " to THG every year? While it may not be the Billions that Michael Dell received to be sure it was substantial.
There has long been a recognizable bias in THG Forums, which seems to be fathered by THG itself...


I too think TH is biased, and I've found that out by pure observation...later I've found others to share the same opinion.
February 19, 2007 10:54:11 PM

Quote:
Having read this article:
http://www.tomshardware.com/2007/02/19/the-300-pc/index...
and luckily many others on budget CPUs aside from having many personal experiences, in the name of all the conscious members of these forum and for the sake of the many students, kids and overall people on a tight budget reading reviews to find themselves the best solution, I am kindly asking you to complete the article since very differently from your other reviews it TOTALLY lacks benchmarks of:
-Games
-File compression/encoding (other than WinRar)
-Rendering
-Multitasking
Aside from evading the most important, real life benchmarks which give the real value of a system and concentrating on largely irrelevant synthetic benchmarks, you also build the Celeron system on a $60 celeron, that being a good 20% more expensive than the $50 sempron, while the CPUs could, and should have been within a much tighter price margin.


While I agree with you, and believe THG should have completed the full range of benchmarks, I think (and obviously I have no way to back this up) THGs intent was not to put together a do-it-all machine. Both systems would suck at running current games and rendering software. I have little doubt that any of the current gaming/rendering benchmarks THGs uses would bring both machines to their 'knees'. However, as entry level web browsing/word processors/email machines for poor students, non computer inclined octogenarians on social security, single moms on tight budgets etc, these machines would clearly fill the bill better than an FX or EE based machine. I mean cmon now M25, would you honestly try to play a game or render anything on those systems with the video cards and ram they used? Personally, I'd rather try writing a book using stone, hammer and chisel.
February 19, 2007 10:54:27 PM

Wow you guys made a post to remove the article - THG rocks! Its their business how and what to write. There is nothing wrong with the article - THG articles are usually the best.


The price difference in chips is only $4-5 dollars. When i look at the systems and they are all amd - you guys are pitiful - this thread is sad.

Well THG if do rewrite it please run avg and spysweeper while you test so we can see who works in the real world. They will both grind to a crawl.

Also - as long as we are making requests - i wish for a gaming test with avg on and a cd running. A lot of gamers Im, do muisc and game so how about a gaming test with avg, IM and a music playing.

Both systems should be tuned for peak performance and speed to make it fair.

I suggest do forgot the 805 to make it fair at $75 i am sure it will make quiet a nice $300 pc. As far as amd chips i let the rest of you guys vote for which chip you think THG should run.
February 19, 2007 10:56:55 PM

You really think the board is the issue - here? Do think if they used a old out dated cheaper board the bench marks would be better?

I can guarantee there would not be much difference!
February 19, 2007 11:04:28 PM

Quote:
Highly biased article comparing an 102$ Asus P5LD2-VM with an 52$ K8M890M2MA-R2SH ... talking about comparing apples to apples, pleeease! Celeron 57$, Sempron 70$ so 13$ diff on CPU and 50$ on MB?


Found a $40 sempron, not as fast as the $70 one and the $70 was the one dell used, but both were OEM, so about $10 for a heat sink. I found Case, mobo, and 400W power supply for $90 for the AMD, so I really think the artical was rushed.
February 19, 2007 11:06:26 PM

Quote:
You really think the board is the issue - here? Do think if they used a old out dated cheaper board the bench marks would be better?

I can guarantee there would not be much difference!


Ok, so where does the Celeron win? in syntetic benches?
For exapmle in thisprevious bechmark the Celeron wins the syntehics again but no real life applications.

Non extensive testing == biased testing, no matter if they suck or not in games (wich they do).

This was one of the most crappy testing I've ever seen in my entire life. This can't be labeled "professional testing".
February 19, 2007 11:17:38 PM

Just ignore him. I read a thread he started earlier today, and he stated that he's just trying to get a rise out of anyone remotely AMD. Whatever he says should just be ignored, especially taking into account what he's trying to "request".
February 19, 2007 11:38:53 PM

Quote:
Just ignore him. I read a thread he started earlier today, and he stated that he's just trying to get a rise out of anyone remotely AMD. Whatever he says should just be ignored, especially taking into account what he's trying to "request".


The Irony of the article is that other articles have been talking about AMD trying to keep the price-performance better then Intel at the lower end, so it feels contradictory. I may be a fan of AMD, but I bought an Intel Core 2 for my new PC, because Intel was winning high end category. But it did seem the article wasn't put together as well as others on the site. There was no push to keep under the $300 mark, and no thought over the OS, and peripherals. I just seemed rushed.
February 19, 2007 11:40:43 PM

This has to be the most idiotic article I've ever read on Toms.

A $300 PC article on an enthusiast site? Should be $500 minimum.

And who even builds $300 PC's now? Where's the monitor and OS?

Add those items in and you might as well buy a dual-core after rebate HP, Compaq, EMachine, etc.
February 19, 2007 11:44:27 PM

That thought was examined in detail in the topic dedicated to that topic, linked at the bottom of the article. Needless to say, many others share your thoughts.
February 19, 2007 11:45:24 PM

Intel's been kicking AMD's butt for any number of years. But then again Intel's got deep pocket's. They can afford to keep kicking AMD's Butt with the money they have been overcharging for their products. Hurrah! Intel has finally released a processor that doesn't need to be propped up in the market place. It's about damn time! :lol: 



__________________
In answer to that eternal question, Booze is the answer. But now I don't remember the question. Everyone needs belief in something. I believe I'll have another beer!
February 19, 2007 11:47:27 PM

Oh.
My.
Fukkin.
God.

What is wrong with you guys?
You don't have to be a part of this community.
If you think the writers are biased, then just go to your "unbiased" sites.
Just because THEY say the celeron is better, doesnt mean you have to go out and do that.
Either way, the difference is nothing.
Both are 21st century microprocessors, they both can run any program on the market today, proably slower than a c2d extreme edition, but they can run it.
Mabye you guys should appreciate the probable DAY of work they put in to let the public know what kinda benchies they can expect with those kinda parts.

Its just computers, put it in perspective to the rest of life.
relax playaz

now....

screw youu guys. im going home
-eric cartman
February 19, 2007 11:55:36 PM

yeah i think i missed somthing i just went to ebuyer to try and build a similiar system heres what i got...

£204 including postage and package. and if you go with my version u get a keyboard, mouse and 11in1 card reader....

February 19, 2007 11:55:55 PM

And why are you posting here?

@sifiroth:
I hope you are talking about profitability, as the AMD procs for three+ years up until midway through last year were dominating any Intel processor at the same price point. In fact $175 procs from AMD were nudging out $1000 procs from Intel in many areas, and thats at stock speeds. Like I said, I hope you were talking about profitability, as Intel has been doing that for years...
February 20, 2007 12:01:10 AM

infact im now considering buying the system i just made in ebuyer i could use it as a meadia center pc.......(but i do have three computers already, my flatmates would kill me for the electric bill)
February 20, 2007 12:15:58 AM

well i started out try to get a true debate of amd vs intel - but it failed!

how about a fantasy $300 pc post? every list their $300 pc - from lets say new egg and we can vote on who is projected to run the fastest.


ok heres my $300 fantasy pc it will rule all - note i decided to use the factory psu and add a video card! THG take this on!


Shopping Cart

Qty. Product Description Savings Total Price
1
NEC 18X DVD±R DVD Burner With 12X DVD-RAM Write Black E-IDE / ATAPI Model 7170A-0B - OEM
Item #: N82E16827152076
Return Policy: Standard Return Policy


$29.99
1
RAIDMAX O2 ATX-302BP Black Steel ATX Mid Tower Computer Case 420Watt PRESCOTT/ SATA Ready Power Supply - Retail
Item #: N82E16811156182
Return Policy: Standard Return Policy


$48.99
1
Seagate Barracuda 7200.9 ST3802110A 80GB 7200 RPM IDE Ultra ATA100 Hard Drive - OEM
Item #: N82E16822148095
Return Policy: Limited 30-Day Return Policy

Select An Optional Extended Warranty Plan 1 Year Service Net Replacement Plan -- $9.99 2 Year Service Net Replacement Plan -- $14.99

$43.99
1
BIOSTAR V6202AL26 GeForce 6200A 256MB GDDR2 AGP 4X/8X Video Card - Retail
Item #: N82E16814141040
Return Policy: Standard Return Policy

Select An Optional Extended Warranty Plan 1 Year Service Net Replacement Plan -- $9.99 2 Year Service Net Replacement Plan -- $14.99

$49.99
1
CORSAIR ValueSelect 512MB (2 x 256MB) 184-Pin DDR SDRAM DDR 400 (PC 3200) Dual Channel Kit Desktop Memory Model VS512MBKIT400C3 - Retail
Item #: N82E16820145477
Return Policy: Standard Return Policy

Select An Optional Extended Warranty Plan 1 Year Service Net Replacement Plan -- $9.99 2 Year Service Net Replacement Plan -- $14.99

$44.99
1
ASUS P5VDC-MX LGA 775 VIA P4M800 PRO Micro ATX Intel Motherboard - Retail
Item #: N82E16813131587
Return Policy: Standard Return Policy

Select An Optional Extended Warranty Plan 1 Year Service Net Replacement Plan -- $14.99 2 Year Service Net Replacement Plan -- $19.99

$54.99
1
Intel Pentium D 805 Smithfield 2.66GHz LGA 775 Processor Model HH80551PE0672MN - OEM
Item #: N82E16819116249
Return Policy: Processors (CPUs) Return Policy

Select An Optional Extended Warranty Plan 1 Year Service Net Replacement Plan -- $14.99 2 Year Service Net Replacement Plan -- $19.99

$75.00
Subtotal: $347.94
February 20, 2007 12:21:33 AM

ok , youve had your fun now , you have made a complete arse of yourself ,

now go die quietly !.
February 20, 2007 12:53:23 AM

Ah, you just broke like all the rules there dude.

You changed the DVD burner, saving some money.
You dropped down to 512MB RAM, now you're system is a rock.
You added a video card that runs off of system RAM, and still won't let you actually play games.
You picked a low end chip that suits overclockers if anyone, and yet you can't really overclock it on a Biostar motherboard.
You chose an 80GB HD, using PATA, what can that store, like 3 games?

THG's $300 systems were fine, they aren't designed for games, and they said that. Your attempt at a psuedo-game capable system is highly laughable, at best.

I'd probably drop the 3400+ Sempron in favor of the S939 3400+ Venice 2.2GHz Athlon 64, which is actually $14 cheaper, then find a S939 board. THG already included the dual channel RAM, though you'd need DDR400.

Now, I'm fairly sure a 2.2GHz A64 can atleast tie a 3.2GHz Celeron...if not then Intel dominates the high and low-low ends, maybe they should write up a mid-priced article, say $600. Maybe AMD can win there.

(I've used AMD systems for the past 10 years, my next build is an Intel; I'm just going where the price/performance is in my favor, no loyalty)
February 20, 2007 12:57:31 AM

Quote:
well i started out try to get a true debate of amd vs intel - but it failed!

how about a fantasy $300 pc post? every list their $300 pc - from lets say new egg and we can vote on who is projected to run the fastest.


ok heres my $300 fantasy pc it will rule all - note i decided to use the factory psu and add a video card! THG take this on!


Shopping Cart

Qty. Product Description Savings Total Price
1
NEC 18X DVD±R DVD Burner With 12X DVD-RAM Write Black E-IDE / ATAPI Model 7170A-0B - OEM
Item #: N82E16827152076
Return Policy: Standard Return Policy


$29.99
1
RAIDMAX O2 ATX-302BP Black Steel ATX Mid Tower Computer Case 420Watt PRESCOTT/ SATA Ready Power Supply - Retail
Item #: N82E16811156182
Return Policy: Standard Return Policy


$48.99
1
Seagate Barracuda 7200.9 ST3802110A 80GB 7200 RPM IDE Ultra ATA100 Hard Drive - OEM
Item #: N82E16822148095
Return Policy: Limited 30-Day Return Policy

Select An Optional Extended Warranty Plan 1 Year Service Net Replacement Plan -- $9.99 2 Year Service Net Replacement Plan -- $14.99

$43.99
1
BIOSTAR V6202AL26 GeForce 6200A 256MB GDDR2 AGP 4X/8X Video Card - Retail
Item #: N82E16814141040
Return Policy: Standard Return Policy

Select An Optional Extended Warranty Plan 1 Year Service Net Replacement Plan -- $9.99 2 Year Service Net Replacement Plan -- $14.99

$49.99
1
CORSAIR ValueSelect 512MB (2 x 256MB) 184-Pin DDR SDRAM DDR 400 (PC 3200) Dual Channel Kit Desktop Memory Model VS512MBKIT400C3 - Retail
Item #: N82E16820145477
Return Policy: Standard Return Policy

Select An Optional Extended Warranty Plan 1 Year Service Net Replacement Plan -- $9.99 2 Year Service Net Replacement Plan -- $14.99

$44.99
1
ASUS P5VDC-MX LGA 775 VIA P4M800 PRO Micro ATX Intel Motherboard - Retail
Item #: N82E16813131587
Return Policy: Standard Return Policy

Select An Optional Extended Warranty Plan 1 Year Service Net Replacement Plan -- $14.99 2 Year Service Net Replacement Plan -- $19.99

$54.99
1
Intel Pentium D 805 Smithfield 2.66GHz LGA 775 Processor Model HH80551PE0672MN - OEM
Item #: N82E16819116249
Return Policy: Processors (CPUs) Return Policy

Select An Optional Extended Warranty Plan 1 Year Service Net Replacement Plan -- $14.99 2 Year Service Net Replacement Plan -- $19.99

$75.00
Subtotal: $347.94


How many times will you post this :roll: Your over budget :roll:
February 20, 2007 3:38:17 AM

Quote:
Dude --- you are not helping the AMD cause ... it is in AMD's best interest not to excel in the ultra low cast regime --- it is partially the fault of the Sempron line that drags the ASPs way down....

Let Intel have this one -- :) 

BTW, I am about to build a ~190 buck Sempron 3000+ system...

10 bucks for the CPU (Tigerdirect -- w/rebate)
10 bucks for 1 stick of 512 Kb DDR-400 (Tigerdirect -- w/rebate)
45 bucks for MB
39 bucks for case
19.99 for PSU (waiting for the sale again)
43 bucks for 80 gig HD
20 bucks for crappy Keyboard and mouse.

Have CPU, memory, eyeing MB, case and waiting for the same sale on the crappy PSU. 20 buck keyboard and mouse are easy to come by.


Jack,

This will be what, your 3rd system over the past 8 months? Thats a lot of mouths to feed and give attention to....sure to be an excessive drain on anyones patience. I'll be more than happy to free up some spare time for you and ease some of the strain you must be feeling by taking that EE6800 off your hands.

Hell, now that you have your semperon, you dont need that nasty old intel chip anyway. :wink:
February 20, 2007 4:07:12 AM

Quote:
well i started out try to get a true debate of amd vs intel - but it failed!


AMD tried to defile the Intel, but they were stricken down to the ground. No one can destroy the Intel. The Intel will strike you down with a vicious blow.

For those that have no idea, get a clue. The article wasn't a train-wreck. Anyone ever heard of op-ed?
February 20, 2007 4:12:19 AM

Quote:
Oh.
My.
Fukkin.
God.

What is wrong with you guys?
You don't have to be a part of this community.
If you think the writers are biased, then just go to your "unbiased" sites.
Just because THEY say the celeron is better, doesnt mean you have to go out and do that.
Either way, the difference is nothing.
Both are 21st century microprocessors, they both can run any program on the market today, proably slower than a c2d extreme edition, but they can run it.
Mabye you guys should appreciate the probable DAY of work they put in to let the public know what kinda benchies they can expect with those kinda parts.

Its just computers, put it in perspective to the rest of life.
relax playaz

now....

screw youu guys. im going home
-eric cartman

Yes and the k5 and intel 8086 processors are both 20th century microprocessors, and? Terribly done article. A 300 dollar pc sounds good in your head, THG editor, but practicality? How about a floating +/- $5 dollars per part? And don't run multimedia benches on a semperon, because that's not the market it was made for. Next I'll see a review on THG of a QUAD FX used in a cell phone.
February 20, 2007 4:25:53 AM

For $350 ($344.95)

February 20, 2007 4:50:11 AM

Quote:

4th.... X6800, QX6700, E6700 and now the Sempron (NAS is where it is heading). :wink:

Catch this --- just picked up a Gateway 24" HD widescreen (6 ms response time, 1000:1 CR) --- now, you have not enjoyed COD2 until you have done 1900x1200 with all the eye candy turned on!! To be frank, beats the crap out of the 360 :) 

EDIT: Also, you have asked me about the 6800 before ... and my answer is still the same :)  ;) 



The FPD2485W? Very nice, but you also have condolences. 24 inch LCDs are like cable modem. Once you've had one, you can never go back. I bought a dell 2405 a year ago, and I cant stand the 17/19 inch monitors at work any more. Looking at my old NEC 18 inch feels like looking at a wristwatch. :lol:  Its so nice to be able to open both corel and 3dsmax and have them displayed side by side to drag shapes with out having to copy paste.


But I'll keep asking...just for the fun of it. :wink: Ya know, you could suprise me and say yes one of these times. :lol: 
February 20, 2007 5:00:22 AM

Quote:
The FPD2485W? Very nice, but you also have condolences. 24 inch LCDs are like cable modem. Once you've had one, you can never go back. I bought a dell 2405 a year ago, and I cant stand the 17/19 inch monitors at work any more. Looking at my old NEC 18 inch feels like looking at a wristwatch.


I feel your pain, i bought the dell 24" in october, even the 22" gateway at work looks small... i call it the "2 Foot Curse"

damn nice screens though, both of them
February 20, 2007 6:02:49 AM

Quote:
The FPD2485W? Very nice, but you also have condolences. 24 inch LCDs are like cable modem. Once you've had one, you can never go back. I bought a dell 2405 a year ago, and I cant stand the 17/19 inch monitors at work any more. Looking at my old NEC 18 inch feels like looking at a wristwatch.


I feel your pain, i bought the dell 24" in october, even the 22" gateway at work looks small... i call it the "2 Foot Curse"

damn nice screens though, both of them

I will likely pick up a 30" someday .... I was using an old Sony 21" (4:3) CRT --- weighs about 30 lbs. I like my 24" much better...

Lol, Ive got an old gutted sony 22in CRT in my MAME cabinet. I desperately want to replace that with a 22 LCD just to cut the wieght. Im getting older and I swear that damn cabinet gets hearver every time I have to move.


Oh are you going to get spoiled! :wink: The big FPs are just so easy to work with. Easy to move, clean around, set up etc. They use so much less power and generate so much less heat. The extra cost over a CRT pays for itself in power savings. If only that would put a thing glass pane on top to protect the screen. Oh well, ya cant have everything.
February 20, 2007 6:07:37 AM

Quote:


I feel your pain, i bought the dell 24" in october, even the 22" gateway at work looks small... i call it the "2 Foot Curse"

damn nice screens though, both of them


:lol:  :lol: 
Lol,

Yup, the 22in sony CRT I have seems miniscule
February 20, 2007 6:51:42 AM

i have a compaq 22inch crt and it is small.
February 20, 2007 6:55:43 AM

Hmm!

You are suppossed to be intelligent and well informed. A lot of people on this forum have a high degree of respect for what you say. Yet, you are happy to stand by this obviously unbalanced and completely biased article.

May I suggest that you at least read the article in question as it clearly shows a complete lack credibilty and for you to stand by it puts a dent in yours.
a b à CPUs
February 20, 2007 7:02:22 AM

Quote:
Highly biased article comparing an 102$ Asus P5LD2-VM with an 52$ K8M890M2MA-R2SH ... talking about comparing apples to apples, pleeease! Celeron 57$, Sempron 70$ so 13$ diff on CPU and 50$ on MB?

An Intel Celeron will never beat an AMD Sempron the same price. The Sempron has better perf/$.

Also "Winrar Beta 3"? since when is it ok to use beta software for benchmarking purposes ? even if it is the greatest application on earth. The only non syntetic bench where Cleron wins is Winrar Beta 3 I wonder how much someone has struggled to find that app.


PostPosted: Mon Feb 19, 2007 6:37 pm Post subject: Re: Appeal to THG: Rewrite the $300 PC article, please!
Ask the question how much does Intel "donate " to THG every year? While it may not be the Billions that Michael Dell received to be sure it was substantial.
There has long been a recognizable bias in THG Forums, which seems to be fathered by THG itself...


I too think TH is biased, and I've found that out by pure observation...later I've found others to share the same opinion.

1. "future proofing"
2. Intel chipsets are more expensive
3. AMD integrates most of the north bridge so performance between boards isnt much compared Intel setups
4. winrar beta 3 was used on all the rigs so its comparable.

Is it just me or did all the AMD fanboys come out when they read that it lost in the budget segment.

Personally, i wouldn't buy such a budget package, and i live in Australia so the prices and availability are TOTALLY different here.
February 20, 2007 7:07:00 AM

Dude,

I used all the same components in a cart on ebuyer and got dual core 3800+ for the same price as Intel system.

see here:

http://img231.imageshack.us/img231/2345/amdsyshm0.jpg

This article is complete bollox and is bollox.

Read the title, then read the conclusion, you get the impression that the comparision was actually balanced.

What a load of INTEL PROPAGANDA, where's the fracking Vista benchies then?
February 20, 2007 7:16:47 AM

LG 18X DVD±R Super-Multi DVD Burner With 12X DVD-RAM Write Black IDE Model GSA-H42N-BK - OEM
Item #: N82E16827136108
Return Policy: Standard Return Policy $30.99

POWMAX CP0327PL-4 Window Black/Silver SGCC ATX Mid Tower Computer Case 400W Power Supply - Retail
Item #: N82E16811145047
Return Policy: Standard Return Policy -$10.00 Instant
$10.00 Mail-in Rebate $39.99
$29.99

Western Digital Caviar SE16 WD2500KS 250GB 7200 RPM SATA 3.0Gb/s Hard Drive - OEM
Item #: N82E16822144701
Return Policy: Limited 30-Day Return Policy

$74.99

ASUS EAX1300/TD/128M Radeon X1300 128MB DDR PCI Express x16 Low Profile Video Card - Retail
Item #: N82E16814121551
Return Policy: Standard Return Policy

$49.99

WINTEC AMPO 1GB (2 x 512MB) 184-Pin DDR SDRAM DDR 400 (PC 3200) Dual Channel Kit Desktop Memory Model 3AMD1400-1GK-R - Retail
Item #: N82E16820161627
Return Policy: Standard Return Policy

$72.99

AMD Athlon 64 3200+ Venice 2.2GHz Socket 754 Processor Model ADA3200AI04BX - OEM
Item #: N82E16819103035
Return Policy: Processors (CPUs) Return Policy
DFI nF4X Infinity Socket 754 NVIDIA nForce4 4X ATX AMD Motherboard - Retail
Item #: N82E16813136162
Return Policy: Standard Return Policy -$22.00 Combo $102.99
$80.99
Subtotal: $339.94


i cant do it. dont have time. but it would beat both systems in thg's article.
February 20, 2007 12:35:49 PM

Quote:
Dude --- you are not helping the AMD cause ... it is in AMD's best interest not to excel in the ultra low cast regime --- it is partially the fault of the Sempron line that drags the ASPs way down....

:lol:  I don't want to help AMD or Intel, I was just trying to help the occasional buyers fooled by that article; What made me really angry was this:
Quote:

These CPUs are single-core devices, as opposed to dual and quad cores, they carry little cache memory and they operate at relatively low clock speeds (Sempron) or on an old micro architecture (Celeron).

This sounds like the old 'More GHz Intel song';holy crap, does not the E4300 run at the same 'relatively low clock speeds' of this Sempron :?: :!: , It's totally unacceptable for a supposed PC expert to write this total newbie sentence.
Quote:
However, both systems had to adhere to our $ 300 budget, which we had to extend slightly for reasons of making the systems somewhat future-proof.

8O :?: You can find a good AM2 Sempron 2600+ for around $40, just as futureproof as the 3400+, but obviously, not a LGA775 CeleronD to stand near enough :lol: 

Quote:
The remaining question is: Which is the better low-cost solution, the AMD or the Intel system? Most of the benchmarks are dominated by Intel's Celeron D processor 352, which was even cheaper than the Sempron 3400+.

Sure, if you chose this particular price and all you put on show is the benchmarks the Celeron is able to win.
February 20, 2007 12:37:21 PM

Quote:
And why are you posting here?

@sifiroth:
I hope you are talking about profitability, as the AMD procs for three+ years up until midway through last year were dominating any Intel processor at the same price point. In fact $175 procs from AMD were nudging out $1000 procs from Intel in many areas, and thats at stock speeds. Like I said, I hope you were talking about profitability, as Intel has been doing that for years...


Profitability no! Sarcasam Yes :wink:


__________________
In answer to that eternal question, Booze is the answer. But now I don't remember the question. Everyone needs belief in something. I believe I'll have another beer!
February 20, 2007 1:02:22 PM

people who would like a computer like that, are going to use this for; browsing the web, maybe typing a letter, instant messengering,..
not like you state it:
rendering?
gaming: they would upgrade the build with a low budget gfx-card (like a 7600?), consider that a game sells for +/- 50$ so for the price of 2 or 3 games you could have a relative decent gfx card.

this computer is for people who don't need all the power of current computers and don't want to spend all the money for it.

so different needs, different prices.
February 20, 2007 1:56:41 PM

If I get the time to do it. I will post the research I have done for a $500 computer. This taking into account the fact that you won't have anything (IE :Monitor, Keyboard, Mouse, Speakers, and OS.), not just the hardware for the computer itself.
February 20, 2007 2:37:19 PM

Quote:
people who would like a computer like that, are going to use this for; browsing the web, maybe typing a letter, instant messengering,..
not like you state it:
rendering?
gaming: they would upgrade the build with a low budget gfx-card (like a 7600?), consider that a game sells for +/- 50$ so for the price of 2 or 3 games you could have a relative decent gfx card.

this computer is for people who don't need all the power of current computers and don't want to spend all the money for it.
so different needs, different prices.

There is soemthing important to consider; if we talk about a low budget upgradeable system, it's usually a system targeted by kids, students and overall low budget people with more or less high requests but low budget. Less than 6 months ago I was doing 3D and renderings on a 2.0G celeron. And for the sake of showing the best CPU, a detailed benchmark suite is necessary.
On the other hand; mu grandfather was browsing the web on a PentiumPro until last month, when the RS232 connector on the motherboard died so these people don't need an upgradeable system for sure.
February 20, 2007 2:45:16 PM

OMG, rendering on a celeron 2 Ghz? 8O
talking about having a hard time, did you get therapy for this?
but hey, you are right,
there are a lot of people who just keep their systems until they die on them.
yeah, the upgrade element is important in this article, when there's again a little money after some time, they can upgrade to a better GPU, a new CPU.
thats a good thing!
February 20, 2007 2:47:06 PM

Tere are also people wit high requests bu that just can't afford a more than $300 system, and there are more of them than you think, so for their sake, those benchmarks SHOULD be complete :wink: .
February 20, 2007 2:59:55 PM

Quote:
Having read this article:
http://www.tomshardware.com/2007/02/19/the-300-pc/index...
and luckily many others on budget CPUs aside from having many personal experiences, in the name of all the conscious members of these forum and for the sake of the many students, kids and overall people on a tight budget reading reviews to find themselves the best solution, I am kindly asking you to complete the article since very differently from your other reviews it TOTALLY lacks benchmarks of:
-Games
-File compression/encoding (other than WinRar)
-Rendering
-Multitasking
Aside from evading the most important, real life benchmarks which give the real value of a system and concentrating on largely irrelevant synthetic benchmarks, you also build the Celeron system on a $60 celeron, that being a good 20% more expensive than the $50 sempron, while the CPUs could, and should have been within a much tighter price margin.


I don't see enough basis to support the appeal (which I would support if an article is grossly biased or misleading). Firstly, the benchmarks were to give a ballpark idea of acceptable performance and to verify that there wasn't a huge disparity between tight-budget chips from both companies. This was NOT a CPU shootout. The conclusion did not rule out either company as offering a good choice of CPU (especially considering the number of budget models available aside from those used for the guide).

Article specifically mentions integrated graphics are not good for gaming, so silly comparisons of 1.6 vs. 2.7 game fps were not done. Encoding benchmarks included DivX, Xvid, and H.264 video plus WinRAR compression and some audio encoding - what makes you think Winzip or other encoding formats would show meaningfully different results? Rendering was measured with Photoshop and Cinebench - Photoshop is probably the most a $300 PC would see, and honestly you would not use this for full-time rendering.

The only synthetic benchmarks I see are PCMark and SiSoft Sandra, possibly Cinebench though having run that bench, the picture used seems quite ordinary. The encoding/compression tasks and Photoshop rendering seem to be done on actual files, and I don't really know how to get more real-world than that without going unscientific.

I cross-checked prices with Newegg and confirmed that THG quoted accurately - the Celeron is sold for about $57 and the Sempron, $70.

The part that I agree with you on is Multitasking, although this comes down to a matter of opinion. As the two setups both utilize single-core CPUs, heavy multitasking is likely to be abysmal. You'd have to cancel and postpone the antivirus check or volume defrag whenever you're encoding or working with Photoshop or any application which moderately taxes CPU resources.

I just think that with sluggish cores to start with, going dual-core is that much more important in future-proofing the system and enhancing productivity. The problem is that the cheapest dual cores I could find off Newegg are at $109 for AMD (x2 3800+ retail) and $80-85 for Intel (PD 805 OEM $75). Some compromise would have to be made for the motherboard or other components to fit within the arbitrary budget.
February 20, 2007 3:08:36 PM

Quote:
If I get the time to do it. I will post the research I have done for a $500 computer. This taking into account the fact that you won't have anything (IE :Monitor, Keyboard, Mouse, Speakers, and OS.), not just the hardware for the computer itself.


It's more consistent to set a budget for the system chassis itself. For example, some people might get a legit copy of Windows and a small $100 LCD and be left with only $250 for CPU, board, and RAM. On the other hand, another builder could find a used CRT for $30, salvage a case from some throwaway computer, run Linux or pirated XP, and have enough for an E4300 on a G965-based overclocking board. That's tremendous disparity in performance.
!