I wonder what Fugger has to say on this

Guest · Nov 26, 2003

<A HREF="http://www.amdzone.com/forums/messageview.cfm?catid=26&threadid=70385" 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. =

Guest · Nov 26, 2003

Probably something like:

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.

Original fugger post: <A HREF="http://forumz.tomshardware.com/hardware/modules.php?name=Forums&file=viewtopic&p=158625#158625" target="_new">http://forumz.tomshardware.com/hardware/modules.php?name=Forums&file=viewtopic&p=158625#158625</A>

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

ratas911 · Nov 26, 2003

LoL LOL LOL! Right on dude!

Guest · Nov 26, 2003

Captain Obvious points to the Extreme Availability of the P4 EE as well!

<A HREF="http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=12852" target="_new">http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=12852</A>

Captain Obvious To The Rescue!!!
Captain Obvious: Pointing out the Obvious and not so Obvious!

Kelledin · Nov 26, 2003

ROOOOOOOFLMAO!!! :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.

I can love my fellow man...but I'm damned if I'll love yours.

rcj187 · Nov 26, 2003

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??

Guest · Nov 26, 2003

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

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

FUGGER · Nov 27, 2003

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.

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

Coop · Nov 27, 2003

"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 !!!

Edited by Coop on 11/27/03 06:22 AM.

ChipDeath · Nov 27, 2003

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

Learn to read before you learn to flame.

---
The preceding text is assembled from information stored in an unreliable organic storage medium. As such it may be innacurate, incomplete, or completely wrong

Coop · Nov 27, 2003

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 !!!

ChipDeath · Nov 27, 2003

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.

IT LOOKS FOR MANY VIEWERS...

b)I didn't once think that. I have the ability to read.
It clearly 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 read 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 next 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 do 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.

---
The preceding text is assembled from information stored in an unreliable organic storage medium. As such it may be innacurate, incomplete, or completely wrong

Coop · Nov 27, 2003

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 ?

taitertot · Nov 27, 2003

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.

Coop · Nov 27, 2003

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...

Vapor · Nov 27, 2003

"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.

Zoron · Nov 27, 2003

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.

 If you design software that is fool-proof, only a fool will want to use it.

oops · Nov 27, 2003

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.

ironmike · Nov 27, 2003

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

sjonnie · Nov 27, 2003

Hey man, that's really awsome, I mean, now you can probably play Quake with 600fps instead of 400fps, man, that extra 200fps makes SUCH a difference!

<A HREF="http://www.anandtech.com/myanandtech.html?member=114979" target="_new">My PCs</A>

ChipDeath · Nov 27, 2003

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

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

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

---
The preceding text is assembled from information stored in an unreliable organic storage medium. As such it may be innacurate, incomplete, or completely wrong

Snorkius · Nov 27, 2003

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>

If the laurel is to big for your head, it becomes a hoola-hoop, and you have to keep your butt really busy.

Coop · Nov 27, 2003

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

), 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

)

flamethrower205 · Nov 27, 2003

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

The one and only "Monstrous BULLgarian!"

lhgpoobaa · Nov 28, 2003

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 USES his system for more than 3dcockstroking.

Lead me not into temptation.
I know the way myself. :evil:

Regards,
Mr no integrity coward.

I wonder what Fugger has to say on this

Guest

Guest

Guest

Guest

Distinguished

Guest

Guest

Distinguished

Distinguished

Guest

Guest

Distinguished

Distinguished

Splendid

Distinguished

Splendid

Distinguished

Distinguished

Distinguished

Distinguished

Splendid

Distinguished

Distinguished

Distinguished

Splendid

Splendid

Distinguished

Illustrious

Illustrious

Share this page