THG Apologizes and removes the 3.4, 3.6 EE

[eden]

<A HREF="http://www20.tomshardware.com/cpu/20030923/athlon_64-22.html" target="_new">http://www20.tomshardware.com/cpu/20030923/athlon_64-22.html</A>
Alright you desperate mongrels trying to outwit THG. They just apologized and even explained themselves. Takes a BIG, and I mean BIG man to apologize in this industry.

So Crash and many others will like here what I say: Shut the flak up about this issue and go suck on other websites' nuts all you want, but leave THG outta this one!

--
<A HREF="http://www.lochel.com/THGC/album.html" target="_new"><font color=blue><b>This just in, over 56 no-lifers have their pics up on THGC's Photo Album! </b></font color=blue></A> :lol:

 

[darko21]

Your right Eden,
But that being said they only pulled them because of the backlash from all the posters here in THGF.. Those overclocked benchmarks should never have been posted in the first place. So koodos to all the forum guys making complaints about it. and an even bigger koodos to THG for having the balls to correct the situation.

 

[eden]

Yeah I kinda see your point.

What I do respect is that THG apologized. Think of nVidia's continued lying and wrongdoing and compare that to THG quickly apologizing. Takes a lot to do that. I admire them for that and definitely it makes me feel people continue to bash against THG for bias with no background.

--
<A HREF="http://www.lochel.com/THGC/album.html" target="_new"><font color=blue><b>This just in, over 56 no-lifers have their pics up on THGC's Photo Album! </b></font color=blue></A> :lol:

 

[Frozen_Fallout]

Ok I am very confused right now form what I have seen they did nothing but state that they removed the P 3.4, 3.6 EE's and didn't actualy do it. Now that takes balls.

PS: I am double checking to make sure its a mistake on my part and not THG but if what I see is true then WTF is going on with THG

-------------------------------------------------
Remember what your fighting for, Remember why you even started fighting, and Remember who you are

 

[Spitfire_x86]

Agree with you

----------------
<b><A HREF="http://geocities.com/spitfire_x86" target="_new">My Website</A></b>

<b><A HREF="http://geocities.com/spitfire_x86/myrig.html" target="_new">My Rig & 3DMark score</A></b>

 

[eden]

I guarantee you they are, I checked many, and they are off!

You must have your IE cache omitting to refresh.

--
<A HREF="http://www.lochel.com/THGC/album.html" target="_new"><font color=blue><b>This just in, over 56 no-lifers have their pics up on THGC's Photo Album! </b></font color=blue></A> :lol:

 

[simwiz2]

Try refreshing the page.

 

[HardWareBoss]

That is very big of them. Doing the right thing.

 

[amdchooser1]

http://www20.tomshardware.com/cpu/20030923/athlon_64-22.html
Alright you desperate mongrels trying to outwit THG. They just apologized and even explained themselves. Takes a BIG, and I mean BIG man to apologize in this industry.

So Crash and many others will like here what I say: Shut the flak up about this issue and go suck on other websites' nuts all you want, but leave THG outta this one!

How are we trying to outwit THG???, when even THG admits they made a mistake. I applaud them for that tho.

How are we sucking on other websites nuts?
just because we read all the reviews we can and make an educated observation, we suck on other websites nuts?

Looks like you're the "desperate mongrel!".

 

[TTZX]

I don't understand what the big deal was but I guess their email boxes got flooded with AMDummies screaming at the top of their lungs. Even though they removed the 3.4 and 3.6 EE bars they state that their conclusion still stands so nothing really changed as far as the review is concerned.

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
P4 2.4C @ 3.0GHz 1.525V Stock HSF
Abit IS7 BIOS v1.3 GAT Auto
Corsair XMS 512MB TwinX3200C2 2-3-3-6
GeForce4 Ti4200 AGP8X 128MB
Seagate Barracuda 80GB SATA

 

[coolsquirtle]

well cause the CPU forum is flooded with stupid "THG is Biased topics -_-"

RIP Block Heater....HELLO P4~~~~~
120% nVidia Fanboy
PROUD OWNER OF THE GEFORCE FX 5950ULTRA <-- I wish this was me
waiting for aBox~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

 

[amdchooser1]

Yeh were AMDummies because we read all the reviews we can and make an observation.

 

[spud]

God damn the fagboy fanboys are everywhere. *spud pulls out can of fagboy fanboy killer* psst psst holy shite im all light headed!!!

-Jeremy

<A HREF="http://service.futuremark.com/compare?2k1=7013108" target="_new">Busting Sh@t Up!!!</A>
<A HREF="http://service.futuremark.com/compare?2k3=1311896" target="_new">Busting More Sh@t Up!!!</A>

 

[hineigger]

AMD still owns all.

Think about it, Intel may perform better but what about price?

Its like a Corvette and a Ferrari. Yes, youll get much more performance from a Ferrari, but check out the price tag retard.

Id take the corvette and be completely happy and capable of anything the ferrari can do, but with alot more money left over.

The intel fanboys are out in force thats for sure.

 

[pitsi]

If anyone from TGH is looking I would like to make a suggestion to them. <b>Make your reviews simplier!</b> What I mean is that, there was no reason for including all those CPUs in the benchmark. If they only included the 3.2 P4 EE, 3.2c, 3.0c, XP 3200+, and the A64s, it would be much easier for them and I believe for us too, reading the review.

Maybe it's just me though!

 

[bandikoot]

For myself, I simply tuned any part of the chart that didn't have the top CPUs from each company. Having seen reviews containing just what you stated I will say that they looked "cleaner," but they do require you already having an idea in your head about how the other CPUs score. I dunno, may THG thought there was enough hype to bring more casual readers in that would need the extra stuff.

Edit: er, "tuned out" that is. Of course, perhaps like any good instrument, THG needs a bit of tuning every now and then. <P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by bandikoot on 09/25/03 01:36 AM.</EM></FONT></P>

 

[NMDante]

I don't get the whole Ferrari and Corvette comparasion, since it doesn't apply.

If a Ferrari was only $100-150 more, why not get it for the performance? It's about speed and performance right?

If the Corvette was, say, $5000 less, then you'd have a reason, but it's not, in this case.

If AMD is $150 less than an intel CPU, that's not too bad. But when you have to add extra for mobo and RAM, it makes that $150 a moot point, does it not? With the A64-FX being over $700USD and the P4EE being approx. $750-800USD, what's the difference? With a P4EE, anyone with an existing 800FSB mobo and DDR400, saves money by not needing them, while the A64-FX needs a new mobo ($120-250) and registered ECC RAM (???). You're now paying <i>more</i> for the so-called Corvette than the Ferrari, aren't you?

Price/performance went out the window this go round. Like it or not, AMD and intel will be priced pretty damn close to each other, or AMD will not gain the needed profit margin it needs.

Just my opinions...



How many watts does it take to get the center of CPU core?

 

[rain_king_uk]

Why does "Memory DDR400, 1 GB" cost $100 less in the P4EE than the A64-3200+, and $50 less than the A3200+ according to their price comparison?

"In the test systems we used 1 GB of memory (DDR400) made up of various modules depending on the test configuration. That explains the different prices, too."

No, I don't think it does.

 

[NMDante]

Okay...I don't get that either, but my point wasn't just memory, but the whole CPU price/performance issue.

If the A64-FX cost $799 (according to THG) and the P4EE cost $849 (THG), then the price/performance issue wouldn't be there, would it? Especially with mobo and RAM costs considered. BUT...since the P4EE is supposedly able to run on exisiting 800FSB mobos, most P4 800FSB owners won't need to buy a new mobo and RAM to use it, while A64-FX owners are straddled with the costs. That makes the price/performance issue go against the whole "AMD is a better price/performance solution".

Again, as for the RAM pricing in the review, that's strange. If the A3200+ and P4 used the same type of RAM, that shouldn't be different. The A64-FX, I can see, since it is registered RAM, but not the other two. Maybe THG can shed more light on the RAM types used on each system during testing.



How many watts does it take to get the center of CPU core?

 

[QuadDamage]

Just popped in to ask Few questions:

--why did you run the benches using slow ram timings? You should know that AMD does much better at "tight" ram timings. If you are gonna say that you set it to "By SPD", then i'm gonna ask you why your P4 ran at 2/2/2/5?
-- How come your P4 did better in 3DMark2001, while AMD is way faster stock in this particular benchmark by around 1500 points. I can prove it by posting link to video showing AMD A64 scoring 20200+ using absolutely default settings. I know FX Ultra is slower than r9800Pro in 3DMark2001, but either way AMD should've scored higher than P4.
-- Also, your Q3 benchmark is... laughable. AMD beats P4 in Q3.
-- You shouldn't have overclocked your paper tiger and bench it against stock AMD chip, especially a non-existant chip (yet). Or maybe you wanna see what your "3.6EE" can do vs. my 2600mhz+ A64?
Thanks.

 

[augustus108]

In some way, I don't think THG is wrong, reasons:
1) The article is TOO BLOODY long, by the time I read through half (actually after the 4th page), I already forget what I have read.
2) As someone pointed out, THG really should publish the OC 3.2EE in another article.
3) I think most of us, want our CPU to LAST AS LONG AS POSSIBLE, therefore I don't see why THG shouldn't publish a CPU that doesn't exist yet, but will soon exist (2 to 3 months is queit sometime, I must admit). So that for some of us who plann to upgrade, we could save the money now, when something better is around the corner.

Also, could someone clarify the issue about unlocked 3.2EE? Is that what Intel going to do? I am confuse.

IMO, I think people who are planning to get a new system, should go for Intel, cause the way I see it, I think it is very uncertain about WINXP 64bit with the way how Microsoft has been. I know there is a BETA ver. going around, but then again, could anyone really know for sure about Microsoft?
COuld someone also clarify the issue of AMD64, r they a real 64bit CPU? Ie, put the architecture aside, do they support 64bit operation like IBM or "Itanium"(spelling don't know)? The 32bit is like extra part to ensure backward compatibilty?
'cause if it is, I think AMD64 is better, cause i don't think people will update software that often. Also, from what I have heard, Intel 64 won't support 32. But how well will WINXP 64 support 32bit application?
Also, we should applaude AMD in some way, cause their CPU is not based on speed? If the speed of AMD64 and Fx speed is identical to INtel, 3.2, what would the result be?
THe only thing I really do believe is that AMD should really do something about their marketing strategy. As someone who is new to computing, they really MISLEAD the public.


System Integration...yeah right, thanks to marketing, more confusion

 

[darko21]

Tight yes, Tight is always good, Things are not always as they would seem. 2/2/2/5 is not necessarily better on an amd system than 2/2/2/6 in fact I'll bet 2/2/2/6 would offer better performance on a amd system over 2/2/2/5.
Don't believe ask the knowledgeable crashman. If crash can't help i'll fill in the blanks...

 

[kinney]

Firstly, we are not desperate mongrels trying to 'outwit' THG. It was borderline deceit and simply did NOT make much sense.

The unbiased were correct about this.
I didn't see to much opposition from my posts on the subject besides the usual from the usual fanboys and their lackeys.
And even the mob intel mentality around here can't stop the truth.

In coolsquirles thread I even posted something about admitting wrong restored your honor and credibility...
<b>CONGRATS THG!</b>

I'm really glad to see this. I defended Toms during the recent Omar/HardOCP/AMDZone conflict all over the web and I don't want to see them destroy their rep over something so blatantly deceitful.

See, the good guys DO win sometimes!
Everybody who was brave enough to promote the issue deserves a pat on the back!
This admittance is hopefully a new era for THG of watching that kind of funny business.
Congrats again everyone!

-----
eden is my intel/ati superboy

 

[Schmide]

You want to bet on memory timings after reading <A HREF="http://www.tomshardware.com/howto/20030701/memory_tuning-10.html" target="_new">this</A>?

How would adding a extra tick in the RAT help?

Dichromatic for your viewing plesure...

 

[darko21]

yup I saw it, but if you don't mind I'd like to see the knowledgeable crashman answer this one.
But thanks alot and I stand by what I said.