Tom's Hardware > Forum > CPU & Components > CPUs > Seen the new AMD AthlonXP 2700+ review?

Seen the new AMD AthlonXP 2700+ review?

Forum CPU & Components : CPUs - Seen the new AMD AthlonXP 2700+ review?

Tom's Hardware: Over 1.4 million members in 6 different countries available to answer all your high-tech questions. Sign up now! Its free!
Ask the community Add a reply
Word :    Username :           
 
o0oSPuNKiEo0o   10-09-2002 at 04:37:50 PM

I don't like the way they benchmark, but sense tom hasn't done it here's the link.

http://www.pcstats.com/articleview.cfm?articleID=1235

What do you guys think?

Add a reply
Sponsored Links
Register or log in to remove.
slvr_phoenix   10-09-2002 at 10:31:26 PM
- 0 +

<A HREF="http://www.pcstats.com/articleview.cfm?articleID=1235" target="_new">Clickable</A>

My personal opinion is that the review was done by half-trained monkeys. I guess it goes to show that any idiot can get a web page these days. **LOL**

Seriously though, they not only couldn't even unlock an AXP, even when they know how to, but they also couldn't run all of the AXP2400+ benchmarks before posting the article?

On top of that they can't even do simple math. 3/4 of 533MHz FSB is 400MHz, <b>not</b> 354MHz. 354Mhz would be 2/3 of 533MHz. And even then, it'd actually be 355.55MHz, not 354MHz. Come on!

So they're using only a P4 2.66GHz instead of a 2.8GHz. Worse than that, because we don't even know if they <i>can</i> configure a P4 system, we don't know if they're running that DDR400 at 400MHz, or at 354MHz! However, they're using a board that only officially supports up to 266MHz, so that leaves their P4's configuration even more in doubt.

But worse than all of that, they're definately screwing the P4 system, since everyone knows the only decent way to run a 533MHz FSB P4 is to use PC1066 anyway.

So basically, my opinion is that it is an article written by morons.

<A HREF="http://forumz.tomshardware.com/community/modules.php?name=Forums&file=viewtopic&p=45775#45775" target="_new"><font color=red>Join</font color=red> <font color=blue>the</font color=blue> <font color=green>THGC</font color=green> <font color=orange>LAN</font color=orange> <font color=purple>Party</font color=purple>!</A>

Reply to slvr_phoenix
o0oSPuNKiEo0o   10-09-2002 at 11:02:40 PM
- 0 +

I'd have to agree on everything you said. The only reason I was posting the article is because it's the first place I ran into with a review talking about the CPU.

;)

Reply to o0oSPuNKiEo0o
Rubberbband   10-10-2002 at 07:07:34 AM
- 0 +

I agree poor comparisons.

Always listen to experts. They'll tell you what can't be done, and why. Then do it. <A HREF="http://www.btvillarin.com/phpBB/viewtopic.php?t=327" target="_new">MY SYSTEM</A>

Reply to Rubberbband
Anonymous   10-10-2002 at 10:25:52 AM
- 0 +

>So they're using only a P4 2.66GHz instead of a 2.8GHz

I think this is a valid comparison, no ? A 2700+ versus 2.66 and the 2.8 versus a 2800+ makes sense to me.

>But worse than all of that, they're definately screwing
>the P4 system, since everyone knows the only decent way
>to run a 533MHz FSB P4 is to use PC1066 anyway.

And how many systems are sold with PC1066 ? None, and I mean, really, NONE.. (okay, 1% or so). For an enthousiast looking for the highest possible SySmark score, regardless od price, PC1066 is relevant, but for 95% of the consumers using DDR in a comparison would make more sense.

I do agree on your other points though

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

Reply to Anonymous
dhlucke   10-10-2002 at 04:07:51 PM
- 0 +

Any technical article that uses smiley faces should be dismissed. I didn't read the whole article, but was there a LOL too?

<font color=red>I'd like to dedicate this post to all my friends, family, and fans. Without them this post would never have been possible. Thank you!</font color=red>

Reply to dhlucke
slvr_phoenix   10-10-2002 at 05:53:45 PM
- 0 +

Quote :

I think this is a valid comparison, no ? A 2700+ versus 2.66 and the 2.8 versus a 2800+ makes sense to me.


**shrug** Valid how? They OCed the 2700+ using a FSB raise (becaues they weren't even bright enough to unlock it) yet they didn't even try to OC the 2.66. You might ask what point that serves, but if you see that at least once they declaired the OCed 2700+ the victor over the stock 2.66 and the stock 2700+, then the whole point of 'fairness' of a 2700+ vs. 2.66 is shot to hell anyway. Heh heh.

Besides, according to AMD marketspeak, a 2700+ <i>should</i> beat a 2.66GHz, so what would even be the point of doing such a review.

(And frankly, considering the platform they used to test the 2.66, I'm amazed that it held up so strongly against the 2700+.)

Quote :

And how many systems are sold with PC1066 ? None, and I mean, really, NONE.. (okay, 1% or so). For an enthousiast looking for the highest possible SySmark score, regardless od price, PC1066 is relevant, but for 95% of the consumers using DDR in a comparison would make more sense.


Are you even closely resembling being serious?
1) Just how many systems do you think ship with an AXP 2700+?
2) Just how many consumers are going to purchase a complete 2700+ system? I'll bet the same as or less than the number that purchase a complete system using PC1066.

<A HREF="http://forumz.tomshardware.com/community/modules.php?name=Forums&file=viewtopic&p=45775#45775" target="_new"><font color=red>Join</font color=red> <font color=blue>the</font color=blue> <font color=green>THGC</font color=green> <font color=orange>LAN</font color=orange> <font color=purple>Party</font color=purple>!</A>

Reply to slvr_phoenix
slvr_phoenix   10-10-2002 at 06:01:28 PM
- 0 +

Quote :

I'd have to agree on everything you said. The only reason I was posting the article is because it's the first place I ran into with a review talking about the CPU.


True, but then that is because most people reviewed the AXP 2800+ instead.

One other thing that bugged me badly about the review: Just about <i>every</i> AXP2800+ review that I've read at least mentioned an nForce2 mobo shipped with their CPU to review, and <i>most</i> of them reviewed the new CPU <i>on</i> the nForce2 mobo.

Yet this review didn't even mention an nForce2 mobo shipped with their sample to review, and all of the AXP benchmarking was done on a VIA chipset mobo at that.

So I think it is <i>highly</i> likely that whoever runs this site is so unprofessional that AMD didn't even consider them worthy of sending out hardware for them to review, and so the site probably had to borrow or buy an AXP2700+ sample off of someone else just to even review it.

So if the review itself wasn't bad enough to question their professionalism, that 'dirty little secret' certainly is. Heh heh heh.

And frankly, after reading that review, I couldn't even blame AMD for not deeming them worthy.

<A HREF="http://forumz.tomshardware.com/community/modules.php?name=Forums&file=viewtopic&p=45775#45775" target="_new"><font color=red>Join</font color=red> <font color=blue>the</font color=blue> <font color=green>THGC</font color=green> <font color=orange>LAN</font color=orange> <font color=purple>Party</font color=purple>!</A>

Reply to slvr_phoenix
Starwind   10-13-2002 at 03:16:49 PM
- 0 +

Quote :

And how many systems are sold with PC1066 ? None, and I mean, really, NONE.. (okay, 1% or so). For an enthousiast looking for the highest possible SySmark score, regardless od price, PC1066 is relevant, but for 95% of the consumers using DDR in a comparison would make more sense.


Dell computers sell the PC1066 and they have a very big slice of the market... So I wouldn't say 1% if I were you

A 5 foot work fan, plastic sheeting for the funnel, some tubing, and duct tape is all you need for a cooling system. :wink:

Reply to Starwind
Ask the community Add a reply
Tom's Hardware > Forum > CPU & Components > CPUs > Seen the new AMD AthlonXP 2700+ review?
Go to:

There are 1293 identified and unidentified users. To see the list of identified users, Click here.

Forum map
Bestofmedia Forum ©
2000-2009 Bestofmedia Group
Page generated in 0.253 seconds
Please mind

You are about to answer a thread that has been inactive for more than 6 months.
If you still wish to proceed, please ensure that your posting is original and does not duplicate or overlap any prior responses to this thread.

Add a reply Cancel
Sponsored links
  • Ask the community now
  • Publish
Ad
Related Topics
See all relatives topics
They won a badge
Join us in greeting them