Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Will there be a 'new' manufacturers race; to 'Fusion'? - Page 2

Last response: in CPUs
Share
July 31, 2008 10:50:23 AM

yomamafor1 said:
Again, biased opinions based on no actual facts.



Are you seriously trying to argue that any Intel based IGP can go toe-to-toe with a 780G for playing games?


a c 113 à CPUs
July 31, 2008 12:42:08 PM

yomamafor1 said:
How does what you posted prove that GM45 is lacking high definition content playback capability? How does that prove X4500HD is lacking in performance?

I posted earlier, with real benchmarks, from notebookcheck:
http://www.notebookcheck.net/Intel-Graphics-Media-Accel...

Not only X4500HD outperformed the entry level discrete graphic cards from last year, its almost on par with Nvidia's last generation mid-level discrete graphic card (GeForce Go 7400). ~~snip~~


X45 = Underwhelming and Overhyped.





""Targeting"" 3X Performance = Intel ""Marketing""

Nice try in rolling out 2 year-old tech for your comparison. What's interesting is that in your link (for one example) the x45 in 3dmark06 uses a resolution of 1280x800 instead of the standard testing resolution of 1280x1024 to gain an estimated 11% increase overall.


yomamafor1 said:

On the other hand, ATi's IGP doesn't seem to improve that much at all, if 3DMark06 is of any indication. The difference between 690G (HD2400 core) and 780G (HD3200) is a measly 300 points.


Weak. Lame. And. Feable. (Just like the GMA G/X 45)
a b à CPUs
July 31, 2008 1:17:41 PM

never in my life i though i would see people trying to defend a IGP made by intel..........i am amused.....plz do carry on....

NOTE: srsly, i dont think we need graps to prove intel's dominance in IGP, jus ask anyone one the streets. in this case words are more than enof
Related resources
a b à CPUs
July 31, 2008 2:03:07 PM

This is why I can't take any of the intel fanboys seriously.

Their current CPU's are great single socket chips .... that however says nothing about their IGP solutions .... which are just utter utter crap.

Crap drivers too.

They are not even worthy to be compared to Matrox let alone Nvidia and ATI.

Why are we discussing "Office Machines" ???

yomamafor1 ... you should just give up ... the other pets won't support you on this one ... the benchies can't be argued with I am afraid.

July 31, 2008 5:35:17 PM

Wisecracker said:
X45 = Underwhelming and Overhyped.

http://www.dvhardware.net/news/intel_g45_slide.jpg

http://www.notebookjournal.de/storage/show/image/image482aa5a547d8c_text

""Targeting"" 3X Performance = Intel ""Marketing""


The marketing "3X" is compared to G33, which is the GMA3100-- has no HW support for T&L. The X3100 is GM965-- mobile G965, which has HW T&L. Unfortunately, I don't see G33 in that comparison. Not saying it's that much better (I actually have no idea), but those graphs do not support the conclusion you are drawing.
July 31, 2008 8:04:38 PM

yomamafor1 said:
How does what you posted prove that GM45 is lacking high definition content playback capability? How does that prove X4500HD is lacking in performance?

I posted earlier, with real benchmarks, from notebookcheck:
http://www.notebookcheck.net/Intel-Graphics-Media-Accel...

Not only X4500HD outperformed the entry level discrete graphic cards from last year, its almost on par with Nvidia's last generation mid-level discrete graphic card (GeForce Go 7400).

Is it strong by any means? Absolutely not. Is it competitive against AMD's 780G? Not at all. What X4500HD signify, however, is that Intel is already making significant improvement on its IGP technology.

On the other hand, ATi's IGP doesn't seem to improve that much at all, if 3DMark06 is of any indication. The difference between 690G (HD2400 core) and 780G (HD3200) is a measly 300 points.




Here is all the proof you need that X4500 is more smoke and mirrors from Intel.

http://blip.tv/file/1129114
July 31, 2008 10:54:29 PM

Isn't it strange that Aero is turned off on the AMD laptop, and sidebar not running, while the Intel has Aero turned on, and the sidebar running.

Yeah, that's smoke and mirrors.

Thanks for showing the deception behind a supposed "equal" test.

Oh, and you can tell Aero is turned off, since the Windows taskbar in the AMD machine is not transparent, but solid, while the Intel taskbar has the Aero transparency going.

Why not show the Windows display settings before running this "test"? Show that both laptops are running the same resolution, same Aero/non-Aero settings, with the same sidebar/no sidebar running?

Good try, though.
July 31, 2008 11:48:06 PM

NMDante said:
Isn't it strange that Aero is turned off on the AMD laptop, and sidebar not running, while the Intel has Aero turned on, and the sidebar running.

Yeah, that's smoke and mirrors.

Thanks for showing the deception behind a supposed "equal" test.

Oh, and you can tell Aero is turned off, since the Windows taskbar in the AMD machine is not transparent, but solid, while the Intel taskbar has the Aero transparency going.

Why not show the Windows display settings before running this "test"? Show that both laptops are running the same resolution, same Aero/non-Aero settings, with the same sidebar/no sidebar running?

Good try, though.



Well, I guess you can get mad at them. Let's assume that Aero DOESN'T REALLY USE MUCH CPU. Perhaps I should link you to a test of Half Life 2 where Puma scores 50fps and Centrino scores 14fps (@ 1024). Just search Puma on YouTube. There is also another one that shows WOW with NO DX9 textures or transparency. Face it, Intel graphics are like a retarded kid with crayons and X4500 has done nothing to change it.

Oh alright. I'm sure you'll find something wrong there too. Knock yourself out.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2VcJojNMtmE Gaming/HD on desktop

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n60bafkGjew Gaming on laptop

These are all 780G vs G45

July 31, 2008 11:48:49 PM

I give up. I guess some just can't throw away the prejudice, and focus on the improvments.
July 31, 2008 11:51:36 PM

BaronMatrix said:
Well, I guess you can get mad at them. Let's assume that Aero DOESN'T REALLY USE MUCH CPU. Perhaps I should link you to a test of Half Life 2 where Puma scores 50fps and Centrino scores 14fps (@ 1024). Just search Puma on YouTube. There is also another one that shows WOW with NO DX9 textures or transparency. Face it, Intel graphics are like a retarded kid with crayons and X4500 has done nothing to change it.

Oh alright. I'm sure you'll find something wrong there too. Knock yourself out.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2VcJojNMtmE Gaming/HD on desktop

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n60bafkGjew Gaming on laptop

These are all 780G vs G45


Can't you provide something more solid than... pathetic home-made youtube videos?

Yes, 780G is much superior than G45. That's a fact since the beginning.

Its ironic, that AMD has the better interconnection, and arguably platform, yet has much inferior CPU. Intel on the other hand, has less powerful interconnection, and arguably platform, but have much stronger CPU.

The point is, Intel is already making significant improvement on its IGP and platform, but is AMD making significant improvement on its CPU?
July 31, 2008 11:52:10 PM

yomamafor1 said:
I give up. I guess some just can't throw away the prejudice, and focus on the improvments.



You mean like how Phenom is faster clock for clock than K8 (on the heels of Penryn) and 780G is the greatest IGP second only to 790GX and SB750 is the best OC chipset right now?
July 31, 2008 11:54:00 PM

SB750? The best OC chipset? You mean the best, also the latest, AMD Southbridge?

:lol: 
July 31, 2008 11:55:05 PM

The point is, Intel is already making significant improvement on its IGP and platform, but is AMD making significant improvement on its CPU?

You mean now it's liek two retarded kids with crayons? AMD has improved from K8 over 25% considering Deneb. Perhaps more by the time it ships.
July 31, 2008 11:58:37 PM

25%? More like 18% clock for clock. It also looks like Deneb's clockspeed will be around Phenom as well.

But of course, we should wait for the real benchmarks to arrive, instead of opiniating and speculating.
August 1, 2008 12:25:55 AM

BaronMatrix said:
You mean like how Phenom is faster clock for clock than K8 (on the heels of Penryn) and 780G is the greatest IGP second only to 790GX and SB750 is the best OC chipset right now?

There is no such thing as a 790GX right now. I would've bought it, but it is not for sale. It's AMdelayed.
August 1, 2008 12:41:47 AM

yomamafor1 said:
25%? More like 18% clock for clock. It also looks like Deneb's clockspeed will be around Phenom as well.

But of course, we should wait for the real benchmarks to arrive, instead of opiniating and speculating.



But you won't even accept that improvement so what difference does it make? Super Pi IS NOT indicative of the average desktop use. You may as well use 3D Mark.
August 1, 2008 12:43:15 AM

Slobogob said:
There is no such thing as a 790GX right now. I would've bought it, but it is not for sale. It's AMdelayed.



It was due to ship in the last week of July. ASUS press-released one which means it's on the way to Newegg. I actually thought it would show up by now. I'd say early next week. They should all make it to retail.
August 1, 2008 12:51:55 AM

BaronMatrix said:
But you won't even accept that improvement so what difference does it make? Super Pi IS NOT indicative of the average desktop use. You may as well use 3D Mark.


Baron, its called "correcting your overinflated figures", not "not accepting improvements". If I didn't accept any improvements, would I be acknowledging there's improvement in the first place?

Super Pi is not indicative of average desktop use, but its a preliminary performance comparison between K8 and K10, no? That's all we've had at the moment in regards to Deneb's performance.

Again, as I said before, we should wait until the real performance benchmarks, not going out and spewing FUDs like "25% faster".
August 1, 2008 12:52:29 AM

BaronMatrix said:
It was due to ship in the last week of July. ASUS press-released one which means it's on the way to Newegg. I actually thought it would show up by now. I'd say early next week. They should all make it to retail.


790GX will show up in mid-Aug.
a c 127 à CPUs
August 1, 2008 1:28:20 AM

25% with a die shrink. I will only believe it when I see it. At most I would expect Deneb to give 10-15% with the die shrink and thats IF it goes well.

Problems are possible. But 25%? Thats a wish and a dream.
August 1, 2008 9:33:55 AM

jimmysmitty said:
25% with a die shrink. I will only believe it when I see it. At most I would expect Deneb to give 10-15% with the die shrink and thats IF it goes well.

Problems are possible. But 25%? Thats a wish and a dream.


I am assuming that the move to K10.5 is more akin to the RV600 to RV670 move than normal die shrinks - there will be detail march changes. Intel made some quite substantial changes to Conroe when moving to Penryn - look at the change in performance for FPU divisions:



Quote:
The only weakness remaining in the Core x87 architecture is the FP divider. Notice how even a relatively low percentage of divisions (the 4th number in the mix) kills the performance of our 65nm Xeon. The Opteron 22xx and 23xx are 70% faster (sometimes more) when it comes to double precision FP divisions. However, the new Xeon 54xx closes this gap completely thanks to lowering the latency of a 64-bit FDIV from 32 cycles (Xeon 53xx) to 20 cycles (Xeon 54xx, Opteron 23xx). The Xeon 54xx is only 1% to 5% slower in the scenarios where quite a few divisions happen.




They (AMD) have indicated notable IPC improvements, and that will not be the result of a die shrink.



I do agree with your 15% estimation for K10.5, 25% would be a bit much (although not impossible if K10 has some specific problems holding the whole thing back)
a c 127 à CPUs
August 1, 2008 2:23:19 PM

^True but I would have expected AMD to get those problems out with the B3 stepping. That is unless it is the 65nm stepping and 45nm allows the arch to shine like it should have.

In that case Intel would have been the smarter one in waiting to go naitive quad at 45nm instead of 65nm.

Oh and I always thought AMD was not as cache sensative as Intel.

But only time will tell.
August 1, 2008 4:27:07 PM

yomamafor1 said:
Baron, its called "correcting your overinflated figures", not "not accepting improvements". If I didn't accept any improvements, would I be acknowledging there's improvement in the first place?

Super Pi is not indicative of average desktop use, but its a preliminary performance comparison between K8 and K10, no? That's all we've had at the moment in regards to Deneb's performance.

Again, as I said before, we should wait until the real performance benchmarks, not going out and spewing FUDs like "25% faster".



First I said 25% over K8 not K10. You said they haven't improved. That's FUD.
August 1, 2008 8:19:08 PM

BaronMatrix said:
Here is all the proof you need that X4500 is more smoke and mirrors from Intel.

http://blip.tv/file/1129114


There is a color scale difference, the video on the left is of lesser quality as well.

Word, Playa.
August 1, 2008 9:03:55 PM

BaronMatrix said:
First I said 25% over K8 not K10. You said they haven't improved. That's FUD.


In my exact words:
Quote:
25%? More like 18% clock for clock. It also looks like Deneb's clockspeed will be around Phenom as well.


Did I say they did not improve? No, I said you overinflated the figures by 7%.

I didn't know "twisting words" is also part of the screenplay writing.
a c 127 à CPUs
August 2, 2008 12:40:36 AM

spud said:
There is a color scale difference, the video on the left is of lesser quality as well.

Word, Playa.


Not to mention that the AMD system has Vista Aero disabled and no side bar unlike the Intel system. He never mentions it t all which really annoys me about it.

He said "Encouraging people to try and share the truth that Intels HD video decode is not active". I wounder if he is also encouraging people to not use the same settings for tests. Straight up lie.

I don't like that the do not list the specs of each system. It says its the 3200 mobile for the AMD system but in the background a guy is stating it has a discrete GPU which would mean the 3450 mobile with 256MB of its own GRAM. It seems like marketing lies to me.
August 2, 2008 1:46:17 AM

jimmysmitty said:
Not to mention that the AMD system has Vista Aero disabled and no side bar unlike the Intel system. He never mentions it t all which really annoys me about it.

He said "Encouraging people to try and share the truth that Intels HD video decode is not active". I wounder if he is also encouraging people to not use the same settings for tests. Straight up lie.

I don't like that the do not list the specs of each system. It says its the 3200 mobile for the AMD system but in the background a guy is stating it has a discrete GPU which would mean the 3450 mobile with 256MB of its own GRAM. It seems like marketing lies to me.


Of course, they're lying. They can't even post winning scores for Web Serving. Oh wait, they did. I hope that the test was even. But that doesn't change the fact that you're arguing a moot point. Everybody and their IT guy knows Intel's graphics suck. Even if the settings were different, that would mean that Intel definitely can't run with Aero and a SideBar (can you say class action?). Maybe that was the point.

Even if it was using a 3450, that's what a 3200 is, so it's the same thing. You can't divide an HD stream across two GPUs as far as I know. And as far as color scale differences, I didn't know you could turn the color down on a DVD or BluRay. It's 1080p\10bit color, period.

I posted two more video links but I guess there's something wrong with those too. They were done at CeBit.
a c 127 à CPUs
August 2, 2008 4:22:12 AM

^Dude it was the Intel system running Areo and the sidebar. The AMD system had the Aero and sidebar off. Now it makes a bit of difference because thats less memory and CPU cycles that the AMD system has to give away to unneeded programs. So right off that was not a equaly fair test setup.

There could be more but without knowing the specs of each system and only knowing the model (since each model offers multiple choices on each hardware set) they could have the lowest end Intel system and highest end AMD system.

No 1080p is not always 10bit if the display does not have the part for it hence why you see some HDTVs that advertise 10bit. It could be possible that they had a worse display or something but you can clearly see there was discoloration on the AMD system.

What moot point am I arguing? That they purposly left more services and advanced features that use up more memory, CPU cycles and tax the graphics to make it look worse? And they turned it all off on the AMD machine to make theirs look better?

Seriously BM you cannot deny there was so BS in that video. You can cleary see that they are trying to make the Intel system look bad on purpose running them at unequal settings and so forth.

Now unless you have the specs and can prove me wrong that the Aero was not turned off on the AMD machine (although I have Vista and when the task bar is solid its normally off) don't deny that that was put there to make their system look better.
August 2, 2008 4:49:08 AM

BaronMatrix said:
Even if the settings were different, that would mean that Intel definitely can't run with Aero and a SideBar (can you say class action?). Maybe that was the point.


By that same token, maybe all those Phenom users troubled by the AM2-> AM2+ upgrade should also file a class action suit against AMD for not deliver.


a b à CPUs
August 2, 2008 5:28:53 AM

Well if it means money/store credit or etc. I'm willing to see them bleed for my 690G.
August 2, 2008 5:42:37 AM

jimmysmitty said:
^Dude it was the Intel system running Areo and the sidebar. The AMD system had the Aero and sidebar off. Now it makes a bit of difference because thats less memory and CPU cycles that the AMD system has to give away to unneeded programs. So right off that was not a equaly fair test setup.

There could be more but without knowing the specs of each system and only knowing the model (since each model offers multiple choices on each hardware set) they could have the lowest end Intel system and highest end AMD system.

No 1080p is not always 10bit if the display does not have the part for it hence why you see some HDTVs that advertise 10bit. It could be possible that they had a worse display or something but you can clearly see there was discoloration on the AMD system.

What moot point am I arguing? That they purposly left more services and advanced features that use up more memory, CPU cycles and tax the graphics to make it look worse? And they turned it all off on the AMD machine to make theirs look better?

Seriously BM you cannot deny there was so BS in that video. You can cleary see that they are trying to make the Intel system look bad on purpose running them at unequal settings and so forth.

Now unless you have the specs and can prove me wrong that the Aero was not turned off on the AMD machine (although I have Vista and when the task bar is solid its normally off) don't deny that that was put there to make their system look better.




Well, let's look at it from the CPU power side. The highest retail Ultra in the HP D5v (see the shopping.hp.com site) is ZM80 which is 2.1GHz. A 2.1GHz Penryn has a 400MHz advantage, so we can tack on (400MHz\2100MHz * 100)% to the Turion score to equalize. I don't have numbers for SIdebar though I would assume that the CPU% widget would use maybe 2% CPU as it's just a display of what the OS already records.

I also don't know what amount of GPU potential is taken from UVD for DX9. I hate that the Player window was not transparent on either system so how Aero is running is unknown. The point is that AMD is attacking Intel's still-lacking so-called DX10/HD IGP while at the same time, saying that the 3% Sidebar usage is inconsequential as would the GPU RAM used for Aero.

It's actually my fault because I can't say that was an AMD-sanctioned video. I can't think of what I should apologize for but you know me. No regrets. The other videos I linked to were done by AMD personnel.
August 2, 2008 6:06:34 AM

BaronMatrix said:
Well, let's look at it from the CPU power side. The highest retail Ultra in the HP D5v (see the shopping.hp.com site) is ZM80 which is 2.1GHz. A 2.1GHz Penryn has a 400MHz advantage, so we can tack on (400MHz\2100MHz * 100)% to the Turion score to equalize. I don't have numbers for SIdebar though I would assume that the CPU% widget would use maybe 2% CPU as it's just a display of what the OS already records.

I also don't know what amount of GPU potential is taken from UVD for DX9. I hate that the Player window was not transparent on either system so how Aero is running is unknown. The point is that AMD is attacking Intel's still-lacking so-called DX10/HD IGP while at the same time, saying that the 3% Sidebar usage is inconsequential as would the GPU RAM used for Aero.

It's actually my fault because I can't say that was an AMD-sanctioned video. I can't think of what I should apologize for but you know me. No regrets. The other videos I linked to were done by AMD personnel.


Aero is substancial on lower end hardware regardless of the memory foot print.

What would be more important at this point is the actual physical memory foot print that the OS and app are useing and what is remaining, if one machine has 1 gig and the other 2-4 there will be a large difference in the actual performance needed to stream that video segment regardless if the one on the left is clearly of a lesser quality.

But this is your Baron this is your "evidence" it won't take long before the community sees this.

Word, Playa.
a c 127 à CPUs
August 2, 2008 7:11:48 PM

BaronMatrix said:
Well, let's look at it from the CPU power side. The highest retail Ultra in the HP D5v (see the shopping.hp.com site) is ZM80 which is 2.1GHz. A 2.1GHz Penryn has a 400MHz advantage, so we can tack on (400MHz\2100MHz * 100)% to the Turion score to equalize. I don't have numbers for SIdebar though I would assume that the CPU% widget would use maybe 2% CPU as it's just a display of what the OS already records.

I also don't know what amount of GPU potential is taken from UVD for DX9. I hate that the Player window was not transparent on either system so how Aero is running is unknown. The point is that AMD is attacking Intel's still-lacking so-called DX10/HD IGP while at the same time, saying that the 3% Sidebar usage is inconsequential as would the GPU RAM used for Aero.

It's actually my fault because I can't say that was an AMD-sanctioned video. I can't think of what I should apologize for but you know me. No regrets. The other videos I linked to were done by AMD personnel.


Considering there are no specs we cannot say what CPU it was. As for the Aero, the program itself I believe is Power DVD, not to sure since I use Windows Media Center (its much easier and nicer than anything else). But if you look at the task manager you can see it has the Aero effect around it as well as the start menu is slightly transparent thus it has the Aero effect. The AMD machines task manager does not have the clear Aero effect around it and the task bar is solid.

That was a AMD sanctioned video at a booth setup to show off the mobile 780G series. But the fact that they didn't at least make them both run with/without Aero and the side bar already shows it was all biased.

spud said:
Aero is substancial on lower end hardware regardless of the memory foot print.

What would be more important at this point is the actual physical memory foot print that the OS and app are useing and what is remaining, if one machine has 1 gig and the other 2-4 there will be a large difference in the actual performance needed to stream that video segment regardless if the one on the left is clearly of a lesser quality.

But this is your Baron this is your "evidence" it won't take long before the community sees this.

Word, Playa.


100% agreed. Without the full specs being not only listed but shown as well its hard to tell. I like how they only were showing the CPU usage and had the memory blocked out. This is because that part shows how much memory that the system has and if they did cripple the Intel system with less RAM people would not believe them.

Don't worry spud. We already see through Baron. It wont take long I hope for others, even the AMD fans, to see through his "evidence"
August 5, 2008 5:18:01 PM

spud said:
Aero is substancial on lower end hardware regardless of the memory foot print.

What would be more important at this point is the actual physical memory foot print that the OS and app are useing and what is remaining, if one machine has 1 gig and the other 2-4 there will be a large difference in the actual performance needed to stream that video segment regardless if the one on the left is clearly of a lesser quality.

But this is your Baron this is your "evidence" it won't take long before the community sees this.

Word, Playa.



What does all of that mean? How is this "evidence?" It's my opinion of how to look at the fact that the Penryn box can barely play HD content. I just tried to see how to equalize it and even if you add 3% for widget, 10% for Aero and 10% for shnits and giggles, teh AMD box would still only have hit 70% or so (I'd have to look) but the fact remains that X4500 is suposed to accelerate HD

AND IT DOESN'T


Before Intel tries to get Larrabee or IGP Nehalem they should get DX and HD working. But then they don't have to because people like you will volunteer others to get ripped off thinkng that the mighty Penryn can defeat 780G at HD or gaming.

BTW, why would I listen to anyone with some ghetto slang fetish on a tech board?
August 5, 2008 6:28:07 PM

Reynod said:
Why are we discussing "Office Machines" ???


Because that's the kind of market these chips are aimed at.

No-one in their right mind is going to buy a combined CPU/GPU to play new games, and for systems which don't run new games or other high-end 3D applications, the Intel integrated graphics are fine. So arguing that some ATI chip could play Crysis with ten times the frame rate is utterly irrelevant, because few people will be playing it at work.

Even Aero is pretty much irrelevant for office machines, since it's pointless eye candy which can easily be turned off.
August 5, 2008 6:43:12 PM

BaronMatrix said:
What does all of that mean? How is this "evidence?" It's my opinion of how to look at the fact that the Penryn box can barely play HD content. I just tried to see how to equalize it and even if you add 3% for widget, 10% for Aero and 10% for shnits and giggles, teh AMD box would still only have hit 70% or so (I'd have to look) but the fact remains that X4500 is suposed to accelerate HD

AND IT DOESN'T


Before Intel tries to get Larrabee or IGP Nehalem they should get DX and HD working. But then they don't have to because people like you will volunteer others to get ripped off thinkng that the mighty Penryn can defeat 780G at HD or gaming.

BTW, why would I listen to anyone with some ghetto slang fetish on a tech board?


It's not the overall CPU performance hit that I was concerned with its the available system reasources that are available to the GPU and the memory footprint there in, whether or not it's accelerateing the video playback is moot considering there are many unknowns that can explain further why the performance was aparently lack luster. Can't have a fair test if the hardware there in is not listed.

Secondly I have never bought a entry level video solution and never will as power and thermal issues are on the back burner to overall performance, also I have never stated that I feel Larrabee will be successful or not or I will use it or not. The solution looks good on paper but soo did the FX and 600 series of GPU's.

As for listening to me. Im not concerned with that not even the slightest, the mods that see things in a similar light as I do which in turn has rectified the multiple account issue is something that concerns me, rest assured when you enter that list you will be rectified as well.

Word, Playa.
August 5, 2008 6:44:30 PM

BaronMatrix said:
What does all of that mean? How is this "evidence?" It's my opinion of how to look at the fact that the Penryn box can barely play HD content. I just tried to see how to equalize it and even if you add 3% for widget, 10% for Aero and 10% for shnits and giggles, teh AMD box would still only have hit 70% or so (I'd have to look) but the fact remains that X4500 is suposed to accelerate HD

AND IT DOESN'T


Before Intel tries to get Larrabee or IGP Nehalem they should get DX and HD working. But then they don't have to because people like you will volunteer others to get ripped off thinkng that the mighty Penryn can defeat 780G at HD or gaming.

BTW, why would I listen to anyone with some ghetto slang fetish on a tech board?


Keep spreading FUDs... X4500HD does have HD content playback capability. Even the Atom has HD content playback capability.

August 5, 2008 6:55:11 PM

yomamafor1 said:
Keep spreading FUDs... X4500HD does have HD content playback capability. Even the Atom has HD content playback capability.



You're right. It just sucks and can't do it.


August 5, 2008 6:56:46 PM

As for listening to me. Im not concerned with that not even the slightest, the mods that see things in a similar light as I do which in turn has rectified the multiple account issue is something that concerns me, rest assured when you enter that list you will be rectified as well.


Except that I don't vote and only have one account. Naahmean son? Is you feelin me kid? Wit ya wack self.
August 5, 2008 6:57:03 PM

Hmmm, like, er... I know you weren't talking to me, Baron, but... Here it goes:

1) Just to be clear: I liked and disliked many of your posts. But I always "listen" to you - just as to anybody else -, nonetheless. Never rated down anybody, no matter how stupid I thought one's comments were.

2) I also acknowledge you are arguably an old legend of this forum.

3) Why would you listen to him? Well, perhaps simply because anyone (well, kind of...) usually "listens" to you? Isn't this the purpose of a forum?

Honestly, how can you expect to be taken seriously and to be considered unbiased towards AMD with a Phenom logo under your nickname? Doesn't that imply your vision will usually be favorable to AMD's products or is it just a result of AMD's strong products as of late? /sarcasm

(PS: [mindreading] Yeah, I would be saying the same if it were an "Intel Inside" logo. BTW, my signature is just for fun. Could that also be what's your picture for?[/mindreading])
August 5, 2008 6:59:48 PM

dattimr said:
Hmmm, like, er... I know you weren't talking to me, Baron, but... Here it goes:

1) Just to be clear: I liked and disliked many of your posts. But I always "listen" to you - just as to anybody else -, nonetheless. Never rated down anybody, no matter how stupid I thought one's comments were.

2) I also acknowledge you are arguably an old legend of this forum.

3) Why would you listen to him? Well, perhaps simply because anyone (well, kind of...) usually "listens" to you? Isn't this the purpose of a forum?

Honestly, how can you expect to be taken seriously and to be considered unbiased towards AMD with a Phenom logo under your nickname? Doesn't that imply your vision will usually be favorable to AMD's products or is it just a result of AMD's strong products as of late? /sarcasm

(PS: [mindreading] Yeah, I would be saying the same if it were an "Intel Inside" logo. BTW, my signature is just for fun. Could that also be what's your picture for?[/mindreading])



So, in just a few words, sarcasm escapes you?

What does my avatar have to do with anything? I just think it looks cool. I used to have my picture but that pushed people to the edge of their ability to cope.
August 5, 2008 7:10:30 PM

BTW, jimmy and yo mama(can you be more offensive?) I could be a real jerk and post the scores recorded by ExtremeTech on the new G45 chipset. In short, IT BLOWS CHUNKS and none of them are pixels. Hey why not.

These PCMark Vantage numbers aren't particularly impressive, either. The overall score, and most of the sub-scores, are lower than the $830 Bang-for-the-Watt PC we recently built using an AMD processor and chipset. That system featured a dual-core Athlon 64 X2 running at a higher clock speed, but one that is actually less expensive. Suffice it to say, we're not exactly floored by the overall performance of this motherboard.


An excerpt of the review. And yet another below.

We keep hearing about how Intel is going to make a really awesome integrated graphics component, and we get our hopes up, and then the part comes out and lets us down. Intel has stated that, by 2010, it will increase integrated graphics performance tenfold (over the GMA 3100 it had on the market when making those claims).


Wow, quite an indictment. And just for you link nuts.


http://www.extremetech.com/article2/0,2845,2327143,00.asp

They have been stringing people along for years with claims of 50% or more faster and yet they still can't play DX9 games at 1024. I'd post a link to 780G getting 50fps and G35 getting 16fps but I don't care.
August 5, 2008 7:10:36 PM

So, you use an AMD's product picture because of its cool-factor, post on discussions related to AMD - usually with "cool" things to say about it, even if without links (not to say this is always the case) - and intend to be taken seriously or to be seen as a more credible source of information than a guy who uses a slang under his nickname - and who has perfectly reasonable posts - , just because the guy uses a damn slang under his nickname?

Sorry, but I can't get it. Perhaps sarcasm really escapes me - just as good-sense.

August 5, 2008 7:14:36 PM

And I agree with you about G45 not looking very good so far and lacking some of its promised features - performance included. I read ExtremeTech's article this morning. I just thought your previous post was kinda agressive towards spud and incoherent after all.
August 5, 2008 7:16:59 PM

BaronMatrix said:
You're right. It just sucks and can't do it.


Not according to the demo I saw at Centrino 2's launch event, as well as reports from others. Even EeePC can play high definition content @ 1080p. Keep trying Baron.
August 5, 2008 7:34:37 PM

dattimr said:
So, you use an AMD's product picture because of its cool-factor, post on discussions related to AMD - usually with "cool" things to say about it, even if without links (not to say this is always the case) - and intend to be taken seriously or to be seen as a more credible source of information than a guy who uses a slang under his nickname - and who has perfectly reasonable posts - , just because the guy uses a damn slang under his nickname?

Sorry, but I can't get it. Perhaps sarcasm really escapes me - just as good-sense.



That's right. The guy is wiggity wigity wack. I have posted Intel news and people didn't comment at all.
August 5, 2008 7:35:52 PM

dattimr said:
And I agree with you about G45 not looking very good so far and lacking some of its promised features - performance included. I read ExtremeTech's article this morning. I just thought your previous post was kinda agressive towards spud and incoherent after all.



Incoherent? Wow, someone's been reading the thesaurus. I guess it's a good thing your opinion counts for naught.
August 5, 2008 7:42:17 PM

yomamafor1 said:
Not according to the demo I saw at Centrino 2's launch event, as well as reports from others. Even EeePC can play high definition content @ 1080p. Keep trying Baron.



That's not what every review I see says. For image quality, the G45 got 30 out 100. OUCH. I can see where you want to believe that Intel would never pad anything to make themselves look good even though NO ONE expects any Intel graphics to be more effective than a retarded kid with 32 bit crayons.

Even VC1 took usage up to 70-100% and that's not h.264. Face it. Intel's graphic are substandard even for Via - no wait the S3 chrome is pretty good. Wow, now they're behind Via.

That must suck for you - dare I say it - Intel fanboys. I'd hate me too if I kept reminding me of that fact.
August 5, 2008 8:07:09 PM

30 out of 100 in a non-optimized player. PowerDVD apparently did not have advanced de-interlacing activated, let alone HW accel enabled.

Other players are apparently not as crippled:

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=1054632

Still wouldn't buy it for gaming, but the problems are software. Intel needs to get better about making sure the SW players are all on board on release day.

At any rate, HD HQV is near-useless for analyzing Blu-ray playback quality as 90% of Blu-rays are high-quality progressive scanned images and HD HQVs tests are 20% video denoising (which you shouldn't need on images as pristine as Blu-ray) and 80% deinterlacing (which you shouldn't need on progressive images).

And, yes, I work for Intel. And no, I don't speak for them.
a c 127 à CPUs
August 5, 2008 8:23:45 PM

Wow BM. You just keep insulting the people even if they agree with you but think you are being a - dare I say it- jack ass?

BM my whole point is that it is obvious that the Intel system has more apps using more MEMORY and CPU cycles while the AMD system is being setup to LOOK better.

There are no definative specs so we do not know what each system has just that the AMD man in the video is BSing everyone and yet the person recording never asked why the Intel system had Aero running and the sidebar and the AMD system did not.

I agree that Intel IGPs are not good for gaming and anyone who games on any IGP is a idiot to me but if there is proof showing it can play 1080P HD then it can. Now if it can play while gaming is another question.

Either way BM you are being a judging jerk and calling people fanboys yet saying you yourself are not when you have a Phenom logo as your avitar, have been known to spread FUD about Phenom before it came out and are known to post anti-Intel (or Inhell as you like to say). Look in a mirror and stop being a jerk.
!