This just shows that this "presentation" must have come after the 31st because they hadn't received world record certification until later that day. No wonder they removed the date. It makes no sense that they would present this at the same event day that the records were broken.
NEXT, I love how there are many mistakes throughout this presentation that shows it could not have been made by AMD.
For example, DDR3 support for intel is not 1333 mhz, and intel does in fact support 16x crossfire contrary to the statements made in the comparison slides.
Benchmarks showing AMD stomping intel in eyefinity benchmarks at such a high resolution make absolutley no sense given the little difference in fps at lower resolutions. Its simple math, the higher the resolution the less cpu intensive and more gpu intensive the rendering becomes. As seen through many previous reviews, as we increase resolution, the difference in fps shrinks and shrinks between any two given cpus with the same gpu.
Furthermore, the cinibench 11.5 slide seems half-assed and just plain fishy. Why would they test intel xeon in the actual picture and then have an arrow pointing to a much lower result for amd.
The turbos for each processors also are new and unconfirmed, and we see skus for products we never even heared of before such as the fx b4150.
Also, how does dirt 3 fps increase so much given the fact that cpu is such a small factor in fps. As seen in this benchmark a phenom II x4 stomps the intel 2600k.
What do you guys think?? No other sites are linking to this as credible at all... To be it seems like an inside scheme by OBR and donanimhaber.... which have both been proven numerous times to be unreliable and troll sources.
I thought it deserved some attention on its own given the fact that so many people are taking this to be fact. There are too many obvious mistakes and cover ups to convince me of anything, people need to see that!