Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

I wonder what Fugger has to say on this

Last response: in CPUs
Share
Anonymous
a b à CPUs
November 25, 2003 9:05:11 PM

<A HREF="http://www.amdzone.com/forums/messageview.cfm?catid=26&..." target="_new"> Athlon FX breaks 3DMark orbs database 30.000 limit</A>

<A HREF="http://service.futuremark.com/compare?2k1=7264790" target="_new"> database extened, 30014 3Dmarks </A>

= The views stated herein are my personal views, and not necessarily the views of my wife. =

More about : fugger

Anonymous
a b à CPUs
November 25, 2003 9:10:37 PM

Probably something like:

<b>I thought the P4 EE was supposed to be fast??

P4EE is now totally owned by the AFX and has no chance of beating it, ever.

GG intel, with the P4 core. A dead end that you make people pay extra for less performance. The EE is a dead horse,and I shot it.

Nice to see the top Intel benchmarkers proclaim they jumped ship too soon and state how they cannot compete with AFX.

I can link a dozen similar threads that all say the same thing and that is the FX beat the EE brutally.

FX doors are wide open to dominate the high end gaming market.

The all caps title is in memory of Fugger, I know how you all miss him.

Let me say this ahead of time, if you chiming to defend Intel and do not own a EE just sit back down. Tell us you are still gonna buy one and a good reason cause Intel needs to see something in its favor after I deflated many ego's. Done even talk price as the EE is the most expensive carcass to get into atm. </b>

;) 

Original fugger post: <A HREF="http://forumz.tomshardware.com/hardware/modules.php?nam..." target="_new">http://forumz.tomshardware.com/hardware/modules.php?nam...;/A>

= The views stated herein are my personal views, and not necessarily the views of my wife. =
November 25, 2003 9:11:40 PM

LoL LOL LOL! Right on dude!
Related resources
November 26, 2003 2:49:35 AM

<b>ROOOOOOOFLMAO!!!</b> :lol: 

Just after FUGGER goes bragging about how great his P4EE is and how bad the FX51 sucks, the FX51 gets a 3Dmark so high the ORB database has to be tweaked to accept it. Classic.

Poor FUGGER must have a god who does not like him. A certain horse just rose from the grave and took a dump in his P4EE rig!

I expect FUGGER will stay quiet for a week, then claim he's got 32000 3Dmarks. When we demand proof, he'll frantically OC his P4EE rig, fry his vidcard, and finally replace it with one of those ridiculous new quad-GPU Radeon cards and claim it proves how superior the P4EE is. :eek: 

<i>I can love my fellow man...but I'm damned if I'll love yours.</i>
November 26, 2003 7:29:14 AM

roflmao ive just come from amd forums and wandered what fugger has to say about this... lol bet hes frantically tweaking and overclocking as we speak.. surprisingly he isnt here hmmm i wonder why that is??
Anonymous
a b à CPUs
November 26, 2003 9:31:28 AM

Yeah, if he would have had a brain, at least he would have left behind the ridiculous FX bashing. Then he'd still have a great 3Dmark score and something to brag about. Now he is really defaced if he can't break that 30.000.

Making such bold claims over a few percent better score on a 2 year old synthetic benchmark is ridiculous enough as it is, then getting this thrown in your face is just what you deserve :D 

= The views stated herein are my personal views, and not necessarily the views of my wife. =
November 27, 2003 3:08:09 AM

Oppainter is on my team, props to him and his fine accomplishment.

He also has the best hardware too, read the description.

I left the competition over 2K points behind several weeks ago.

If you read the threads, everyone thought the FX51 would have done better (including myself) and aknowledge his superior card clocks.

Ill catch/pass the AMD soon, let him enjoy the top for few as it has only been 24 hours. Took weeks to catch me.

<b>"You haven't proven anything that once 64-bit support comes out, it will perform even better." -EDEN</b>
November 27, 2003 9:18:47 AM

"You haven't proven anything that once 64-bit support comes out, it will perform even better." -EDEN

Fugger, you are just the same fool that said years back : 32 bit is not bether/faster then 16bit !
You have something against A64 ?
Does Intel gives you the hardware to overclock ? but you have to talk this way about AMD ?
If you know something about CPU`s you would know the AMD64 is a great peace of technologie.
I think you like it here @ THG, they got also a back of money from intel 4 writing such a review of the A64, just pethetic, overclocking an EE to 3.6 GHz and compare it to an not overclocked AMD64, DJEEZUS !!!



<P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by Coop on 11/27/03 06:22 AM.</EM></FONT></P>
November 27, 2003 9:41:29 AM

a)That is not his view, it's a direct quote from EDEN, hence it being surrounded by <b>quotes</b>.. :tongue:
b)The "TOMS IS BIASED!!! THEY'RE IN INTEL'S POCKET" line is both old and bullshit. The overclocked P4s where <b>clearly</b> marked as such, <i>I</i> had no problem with seeing that, and the conclusion was <i>not</i> comparing the Oc'd P4 to the A64 you idiot.

Learn to read before you learn to flame.

---
<font color=red>The preceding text is assembled from information stored in an unreliable organic storage medium. As such it may be innacurate, incomplete, or completely wrong</font color=red> :wink:
November 27, 2003 10:46:11 AM

A) If you Quote something, you agree with it !

B) You are an Idiot if you Think THG is not an Intel site !
Go read out other sites, all the forums out there call THG AN INTEL SITE !!!! Are they all wrong and you richt ?
If you use overclocked CPU`s in a bunch of benchmarks, IT LOOKS FOR MANY VIEWERS THAT INTEL IS MUCH BETHER !!! AND THIS WAY THEY FAVOR INTEL !!!

YOU ARE A MORON IF YOU SAY THIS ISNT TRUE !!!
November 27, 2003 11:13:53 AM

a) Fugger's sig always consists of quotes of other people which he believes are stupid, or ill-thought out. He's actually quoting it because he believes it was a stupid thing to say.

Quote:
IT LOOKS FOR MANY VIEWERS...

b)I didn't once think that. I have the ability to read.
It <i>clearly</i> stated in the review that the 3.4 & 3.6 are overclocked. If you just flip thru looking at pictures then that's your fault, not anyone else's. and that's not counting the fact the two oc'd bars were always a completely different colour to the others.

I was interested in how the P4 performed at those speeds because it was an unlocked chip, so therefore was not overclocked in the 'usual' manner for P4s of raising the FSB, and so was a perfect indication of how a 'real' chip released at that speed would perform.

THG has been accused of being AMD Bias in the past. If you actually <i>read</i> the review, it's not particularly biased at all. it merely pointed out that there's very little between them, when (with the A64 being the <i>next</i> generation) it should have lead by more, considering at the time it was alleged that prescott was going to give 20% more performance per clock compared to the P4C. The situation has since changed and things <i>do</i> now look better for AMD, tech-wise.

Their results didn't really differ very much from anywhere else. It's just everywhere else played up the fact the A64 was ahead by a few% in many tests, whereas Tom's (quite rightly IMO) did not.

the A64 is a good chip. Whether it's going to be good enough in two years or more is the question. (which I don't know the answer to. I certainly hope so, because competition is always a good thing)

And lose the caps. It's not big, not clever, and it makes you look like you've got rabies or something. :wink:

---
<font color=red>The preceding text is assembled from information stored in an unreliable organic storage medium. As such it may be innacurate, incomplete, or completely wrong</font color=red> :wink:
November 27, 2003 11:35:05 AM

Quote:

I was interested in how the P4 performed at those speeds because it was an unlocked chip, so therefore was not overclocked in the 'usual' manner for P4s of raising the FSB, and so was a perfect indication of how a 'real' chip released at that speed would perform.

Do that testing in an other review(Haw far can the EE go ore something), this way you spoil the A64 introduction, and that is just what Intel wants.

Im from Belgium, we also read reviews if something new comes out, because our englich is not so good many friends of me refered to the THG review and said to me, AMD64 is not GOOD !
After i let them read other reviews they where convinced AMD64 is faster then P4.

Intel put the EE out to spoil the A64 lounch, and when you`r gonna overclock such an EE(and use it in the same benchmarks) you even spoil it more !
And the fact that an AMD system always performs not so good on a review of TH(you handicap it one way ore the other) also presumes Intel bias.

Face it, if everyone says, THG is Intel bias, there will something be true, dont you think ?
November 27, 2003 1:58:24 PM

Quote:
Im from Belgium, we also read reviews if something new comes out, because our englich is not so good many friends of me refered to the THG review and said to me, AMD64 is not GOOD !
After i let them read other reviews they where convinced AMD64 is faster then P4.

Where in the review did it ever say the Athlon 64 was a poor performing CPU??? I looked over it again and cant seem to find anything that says "AMD SUCKORS DONT BUY THIS CRAP" or "LEAVE IT TO AMD TO SUCK SOMEMORE, STUPID CPU CANT DO ANYTHING WORTH NOTEING"

I also never read anywhere where they "THG" said the Athlon 64 was slower than the P4 other than in clockspeed. Personally I think your grasping at straws here buddy. Knocking THG doesnt change the fact that THG is a hardware review site. If you dont like their review style then dont read them. Constantly "blah blah blah'n" THG is Intel bias'd just goes to show you have only recently been reading THG reviews. Take a step back and read the reviews from when the P4 first came out. Youll be eating your words let me tell you.

-taitertot

I carry the legacy of one of your fallen; let us remember him fondly for he is always watching.
November 27, 2003 2:27:48 PM

Look, you micht think THG is very objective, me and the rest of the world think they got a big bag of money from Intel.

This does not says i dont like their review`s on printers and other stuff, but when it comes to CPU, their intel bias.
That`s wat i think, and the other users in the forums think, (and there are also englich forums by).
Further more, a nice day...
November 27, 2003 3:16:04 PM

"If you Quote something, you agree with it !" -Coop

I disagree with that quote.

THG has been putting Intel in the better light as of recently, I agree, but it in no way are they Intel Bitches now. They also have reasons to be pro-Intel right now. Firstly, P4Cs obliterated the AXP series. P4Cs barely lose at most to the A64 series. A64 series is still potentially buggy (though I think it is fine and would get one if I saw fit). P4Cs OC like it's their job. Only morons couldn't see/recognize the clearly marked OC testing. They did not include the OCed P4EEs in their comparision. Saying that P4C beats A64 and that P4EE beats AFX does not mean that it is an Intel site!! Maximum PC ranked the EE over the FX and nobody is bitching about them. The P4C did clearly beat the A64 in some of the tests, as well.

If THG had said that the A64 was a superior chip to all others (including the EE), then you would be bitching about that too, some people just aren't happy when somebody wins.

Oh yeah, the fact that you call me a moron means nothing to me.

Damn Rambus.
November 27, 2003 3:33:51 PM

You'll find your opinion in the minority here. The only ones that will agree with you 100% are the AMD zealots. If you had actually bothered to read the review (it's clear you didn't) you would have seen the chastizing Intel received for the P4EE.

<font color=red> If you design software that is fool-proof, only a fool will want to use it. </font color=red>
November 27, 2003 3:56:37 PM

I'm new here and I've read almost, if not all of the reviews on Intel and AMD processors at THG. It took me weeks to choose which one I wanted to get simply because the reviews of each processor were evenly matched. THG is not biased for Intel or for AMD.
November 27, 2003 5:05:14 PM

I to am new at Toms,not real new but a few months old.I would not leave Toms for nothing as i have gotten good advice and made friends here but i did not agree with there reviews on the AMD 64.I do not think they are biased but i do think they leaned toward Intel for whatever reason(may have been justafiable i dont know).I think that has been proved by the A64 already.That does not mean that they are bad or anything.I have 2 computers one AMD and one Intel i love them both and think that compotition is good for the industry.I also think the people have there own minds and can use them without following after other peoples opinions.

The man of steel said that
November 27, 2003 6:07:25 PM

His original post was a satire of FUGGER's recent post, which used <i>exactly</i> the same reasons to argue the superiority of the P4 over the FX.

I thought it's a little funny myself... :smile:

And that 200FPS makes all the difference dood. Once you've tryed playing at 400FPS, you'll never want to go back to 300FPS... :wink:

---
<font color=red>The preceding text is assembled from information stored in an unreliable organic storage medium. As such it may be innacurate, incomplete, or completely wrong</font color=red> :wink:
November 27, 2003 7:33:06 PM

Yeah, only lamer noobs play at >300 FPS. It makes a HUGE difference. If you don't agree, then ur an idiot. I'm leet hardcore so don't argue!














<pre> For those of you with no sense of humor, before I get flamed, that was sarcasm. </pre><p>



<font color=blue>If the <font color=yellow>laurel</font color=yellow> is to big for your head, it becomes a hoola-hoop, and you have to keep your butt really busy.</font color=blue>
November 27, 2003 8:38:15 PM

Quote:
I do not think they are biased but i do think they leaned toward Intel for whatever reason(may have been justafiable i dont know)

What you think about a big bag of money from intel ?
Hey eh, here you can have this UNLOCKED EE, for free ofcourse, why dont you put them in the same test as the A64 that comes out next week, make that amd64 a little bit look silly, you know what i mean ? overclock this EE as far as posible, and make the A64 as slow as posibel, do something in the bios with the timings, i dunno...

okay that was a joke :o ), lets get seriuos now, if everyone on very much forums all over the world in different languages are saying : THG is an Intel bias, then there will be something true of it ? dont you think ? only the intel fanboys think they are just telling the truet. because this is what they want to read, and that`s why they keep coming back !

I myself have read the THG review of the AMD64, because on our forum they where saying, go have a look, you wont believe it, look at the forum too, they are mad at Tom...
Before that, i always thought THG is a very objective review site, boy whas i wrong...
Anyway, i hope my point is clear :o )
November 27, 2003 8:52:23 PM

OMFG!! J00 is t3h l337x0r ub3r n00b!!!! <i>ONLY</i> 300FPS????? WTF is wrong with j00??? OMFG this is like t3h gh3y!!

The one and only "Monstrous BULLgarian!"
November 27, 2003 9:02:09 PM

Yeah... everyone knows that if you can only get 300fps you have a small weener.
Real men play at 350 to 400!

Interesting that the guy got the FX to 3Ghz. Quite some achievment.

Though i do hope he actually <b>USES</b> his system for more than 3dcockstroking.

<b>Lead me not into temptation.
I know the way myself. :evil: 
Regards,
Mr no integrity coward.</b>
November 27, 2003 9:29:53 PM

"if everyone on very much forums all over the world in different languages are saying : THG is an Intel bias, then there will be something true of it ? dont you think ?"

No. This is one of the worst ways to reach a conclusion, basing it on what the majority believes. There is a proverb that goes "Better the quiet words of a poor wise man, than all the shouts at a counsel of fools."

But I'm not saying this to say I disagree that Toms is Intel biased, I'm only taking issue with your reasoning quoted above.

I don't know if they're biased. I do know that I've only been around here bout a month. I originally came here looking for info on what processor to buy, as I had finally reached a point where I could afford my first "cutting edge" system in about 9 years(thank you microsoft for WindowsXP, my services haven't been in this high a demand since Windows98!) Based on the reviews I read here, as well as elsewhere, I went with a dual Opteron setup. So if they're trying to be biased, they messed up here, because thanks in part to them, I went with dual Opterons(248s).

<i>SCO is to Linux what a flea is to a dog.</i>
November 27, 2003 10:48:32 PM

THG isn't biased. It's <A HREF="http://www.omidshardware.tk" target="_new">Omid's Hardware Guide</A> (2001-2003) which is stupid and biased/$old out to Intel.

Anybody remember THG's "Special HT supplemental"? No website except THG had such thing. Others had huge banner ads, but no other hardware website had such special sponsored section.

Omid's Hardware Guide isn't a hardware review website. It's mainly a marketing website in THG's shell. More low quality stuff is more important than less quality stuff, only because it's a marketing website. This is why you see such stupid new sections like "Game review", a section which nobody demanded.

----------------
<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>
November 28, 2003 5:13:40 AM

I think having almost every other hardware site come out with the fx on top in most benchmarks made THG look bad.
I think any reasonable person would question that.
Bob
November 28, 2003 7:20:32 AM

Question. How many qwack3 benchmarks are in that review? Someone once said " the medium is the message" With so many benchies paid for by intel, what is the message?
November 28, 2003 6:26:52 PM

Re: THG isn't biased. It's Omid's Hardware Guide (2001-2003) which is stupid and biased/$old out to Intel.

Spitfire, I gotta agree with you on this one. I cannot stand Omid nor do I read his commercials. The guys a huge hypocrite. Omid could not prove AMD to be an inferior chip so he labels anyone who prefers AMD a fanboy. The guys an Intel or whoever can spend the most on advertising fanboy.

Ya just know this Omid guy would just love to set up a scheem to rank best buy computers where Omid could create a rating formula giving 60% of the points to 1 800 tech support this way he could ALLWAYS place Dell at #1 (best buy)

If I glanced at a spilt box of tooth picks on the floor, could I tell you how many are in the pile. Not a chance, But then again I don't have to buy my underware at Kmart.
November 28, 2003 11:29:28 PM

The main problem with Omid is, he isn't a PC enthusiast himeself. Have you ever seen him writing anything but (50% BS + 50% Fantasy) columns and few IDF/CeBIT/Comdex coverage article? But he's the editor of THG. That's ridiculous! Compare him with Tom (THG), Anand (Anandtech) or Kyle (HardOCP). He's actually better suited as a tabloid editor.

Quote:
Omid could not prove AMD to be an inferior chip so he labels anyone who prefers AMD a fanboy.

Did he need to prove it? He writes AMD/Intel fantasy stories, not reviews. In fantasy stories, you don't need to prove anything.

Compare the OHG columns with THG columns. You'll see the difference unless you're an Omid fanboy.

----------------
<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>
November 29, 2003 12:13:40 AM

"if everyone on very much forums all over the world in different languages are saying : THG is an Intel bias, then there will be something true of it ? dont you think ?"

Well, i know that millions accross the globe say Britney Spears is awesome and i don't see any truth in that.

As for this site being biased.. i think they might lean a bit to intel.. but i wouldn't go all out saying they got a sak o' money for it.
As of now i use Pentium.. although i would like to build an AMD machine to overclock.
Although the 2.4c-2.6c seems to be a better deal than a 2600+. But untill i see for myself i don't believe it.
I built a 2.6c machine and i'm planning on building a 2600+ machine next weekend.

Don't start flaming me saying that the 2600+ is just marketing terms blah blah blah.

p4 2.8 533fsb
intel mobo
1gb rdram pc 800
radeon9800 pro
120gb seagate s-ata
November 29, 2003 1:05:23 AM

" i think they might lean a bit to intel.. but i wouldn't go all out saying they got a sak o' money for it."

Yeah, you know what, after reading this thread I went around to other sites to read the reviews and comparisons for AMD, and compare them here. I couldn't see it before, but there does seem to be something a little slanted towards Intel. Definetly not blatant like the above mentioned OHG, which I just looked at. Ugh. Can you say Intel Fanboy? too late!

Oh well, I made the right choice and the information I obtained from the reviews here helped me make that choice. That's all I care about. Besides, it's the forums here and the people on them that keep me coming back. I've been combing through tons of posts and been playing catch up on the tech of the last 6 months. Having a baby and "unplugging" for 6 months makes you feel like a tech grandaddy: "Back in my day..." :lol: 

<i>SCO is to Linux what a flea is to a dog.</i>
November 29, 2003 11:06:40 PM

Quote:
Definetly not blatant like the above mentioned OHG, which I just looked at.

I don't think OHG is a biased hardware website that get money from Intel for saying extra good words for them. It's not a pure hardware review website anymore. It's more comparable to a marketing website. Can you say, "Intel TV Commercial makers get bribe from Intel, so they speak high about Intel products". It's not bribe, it's their job. OHG's only objective is to earn money.

----------------
<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>
Anonymous
a b à CPUs
December 7, 2003 3:22:43 PM

>He also has the best hardware too, read the description.

Well, at least he uses components I can actually BUY, and could buy months ago, unlike your P4EE.

>I left the competition over 2K points behind several
>weeks ago.

Well you where one of the only people on this planet with a P4EE and nuts enough to overclock it to oblivion.

>If you read the threads, everyone thought the FX51 would
>have done better (including myself)

Which probably explains why you claimed "FX is a dead horse,and I shot it."..."and that is the EE beat the A64 and FX brutally.", etc, etc..

Frankly, I don't care much about a pissing contest between people with too much money and time that end up frying perfectly good hardware to win a rather meaningless, old, synthetic benchmark -seriously, it reminds me of my childhood when we blew up perfectly fine 50cc mopeds with methanol/glycerol trying to break that 120 km/h. The only difference was that at least it required some skill to hand tune those mopeds, we could actually ride those things at those speeds if you where nuts enough and the rims didnt disintegrate and no one claimed "honda was now totally owned by Aprilia" just because some lunatic managed to win a quartermile once before his engine exploded.

But hey, you couldnt resist making such statements, so don't expect me to feel sorry if you have to eat your words now.

= The views stated herein are my personal views, and not necessarily the views of my wife. =
December 8, 2003 12:53:16 AM

Well, I have issues with hyper-thread enabled on my system using a 3.06GHz P4 so I'm sure glad I didn't spend the bucks an an EE series CPU! I turn it off and pretend I just have a faster plain old P4. I guess I got 80% or so of what I paid for?

I do believe that AMD's CPU design's have been much more efficient and their engineering is commendable to do so much with so little. The 32/64 bit move is fantastic but Intel is so cash rich that it can FORCE smaller companies to go out on the limb first and then reel them in later if they have a great product and crush them with price. Being too big forces you to be very conservative. The Extreme Edition Intel CPU is an example. Simply more memory on the same old thing. But...does HT work yet?
!