I just read toms article on the Barton 3000 going up against a p4 and I am shocked at how many facts that are wrong that a rookie should have picked up. Most anyone on this message board should be able to go through and pick up the errors but I just want to point out the worst ones. These are not in order just the way I write them.
He makes a big thing about how the Barton will only work on motherboards that have a 166Mhz bus but then he says on his overall list that it will work in AMD 750 and 760 chipset boards. Now correct me if I am wrong but the 750 and 760 are STRICTLY 133Mhz BUS chipsets. He also says it can run at 133Mhz memory bus speeds. Now I didnt think it was possible to have the memory running SLOWER than the main bus. Say the BUS at 166Mhz and the memory at 133Mhz. What a stupid thing to put. OH and I may be wrong but I thought the SIS 735 and 745 chipset was also strictly 133Mhz. Though I am not sure on that last one.
Also in his list he has a lot of errors in the Thunderbird specs. He lists the thunderbird as having SSE. Now anyone who even has BASIC CPU knowledge should know the Thunderbird DID NOT have SSE support. Also he limits the memory clock to 166Mhz with a KT400 chipset. Now we all know that with a chipset like that you can easily have the memory at 200Mhz and the main bus at 133Mhz. It is nothing to do with the CPU. He did the same for the Palomino too but not for the T-Bred A which aside form the different micron size is the came chip. He needs to make up his mind.
He got the voltages for the T-Bred A wrong too.
He says that the Thunderbird has the thermal protection with the motherboard logic. This is NOT TRUE. Only the Palomino`s and upwards have the thermal diode protection. That was in one of this sites OWN articles.
He shows the DIE size for the Thunderbird and Palomino as exactly the same when we all know the Palomino is a bigger die because of the added SSE instructions. Plus you can see that just by looking at it anyway.
He has the introduction dates for the Thunderbird core and the Palomino core at the same time when we all know the Thunderbird was introduced when a 650Mhz CPU was standard and the Palomino was introduced when a 1.2gig CPU was standard. Besides the fact that they are a whole generation apart. Also I know the Palomino was introduced later than Q4 1999.
Also on chipsets we know for a fact that the minimum for the T-Bred B IS NOT KT333. It can be as low as a KT133A if it is a 133Mhz Bus version.
Thats all I can think to point out at the moment. I myself am outraged that such a clearly flawed article could even make the light of day. It seems the only thing still any good about toms hardware is the forum. I myself have now lost all trust in any of of the articles posted on toms hardware.
AREA_51
'It's only when you look at an ant through a magnifying glass on a sunny day that you realise how often they burst into flames'
He makes a big thing about how the Barton will only work on motherboards that have a 166Mhz bus but then he says on his overall list that it will work in AMD 750 and 760 chipset boards. Now correct me if I am wrong but the 750 and 760 are STRICTLY 133Mhz BUS chipsets. He also says it can run at 133Mhz memory bus speeds. Now I didnt think it was possible to have the memory running SLOWER than the main bus. Say the BUS at 166Mhz and the memory at 133Mhz. What a stupid thing to put. OH and I may be wrong but I thought the SIS 735 and 745 chipset was also strictly 133Mhz. Though I am not sure on that last one.
Also in his list he has a lot of errors in the Thunderbird specs. He lists the thunderbird as having SSE. Now anyone who even has BASIC CPU knowledge should know the Thunderbird DID NOT have SSE support. Also he limits the memory clock to 166Mhz with a KT400 chipset. Now we all know that with a chipset like that you can easily have the memory at 200Mhz and the main bus at 133Mhz. It is nothing to do with the CPU. He did the same for the Palomino too but not for the T-Bred A which aside form the different micron size is the came chip. He needs to make up his mind.
He got the voltages for the T-Bred A wrong too.
He says that the Thunderbird has the thermal protection with the motherboard logic. This is NOT TRUE. Only the Palomino`s and upwards have the thermal diode protection. That was in one of this sites OWN articles.
He shows the DIE size for the Thunderbird and Palomino as exactly the same when we all know the Palomino is a bigger die because of the added SSE instructions. Plus you can see that just by looking at it anyway.
He has the introduction dates for the Thunderbird core and the Palomino core at the same time when we all know the Thunderbird was introduced when a 650Mhz CPU was standard and the Palomino was introduced when a 1.2gig CPU was standard. Besides the fact that they are a whole generation apart. Also I know the Palomino was introduced later than Q4 1999.
Also on chipsets we know for a fact that the minimum for the T-Bred B IS NOT KT333. It can be as low as a KT133A if it is a 133Mhz Bus version.
Thats all I can think to point out at the moment. I myself am outraged that such a clearly flawed article could even make the light of day. It seems the only thing still any good about toms hardware is the forum. I myself have now lost all trust in any of of the articles posted on toms hardware.
AREA_51
'It's only when you look at an ant through a magnifying glass on a sunny day that you realise how often they burst into flames'
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram