Thursday, August 24, 2006

Core Duo users are second class citizens

Their laptops explode and burn tables, trucks and even houses. They face humiliation at airports. Now, Microsoft has decided that Core Duo won't be able to play HD videos.

Can they switch to MacOS? Yes. But, then, their Core Duo MacBooks may randomly shut down.

It must suck to be a Core Duo user. Their computing life has no future.

44 Comments:

Anonymous Anonymous said...

Too bad it has now been thoroughly demonstrated to be a Sony battery issue. Headline with pictures on msnbc.com: FIRE HAZARD: Apple recalls 1.8 million G4 notebook batteries. Linky at http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/14500443/ to see for yourself. No Intel processor there, says G4 right in the headline... better hope that no AMD laptops were using Sony batteries. I'd hate for you to hurt yourself coming up with an excuse for that one.

"Facts? Who need facts?"

1:46 PM, August 24, 2006  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

How about the performance decrease if they ever put DUO 2's into LT's, and somebody wants to run 64bit windows on it? :O How sad it runs faster in 32bit mode then 64bit mode! I'd rather keep my X2 thank you because 64bit is the future. And CONroe is not. Just wow... how sad.

2:22 PM, August 24, 2006  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Anonymous (#1):

Well, technically it's Dell users (who are still 100% Intel in the Laptop area) who are being told "no batteries" by Quantas, and Apple (also 100% Intel these days) also issued a battery recall.

But you're correct in that it has not a CPU-related problem.

Let the love flow, DAAMIT

3:09 PM, August 24, 2006  
Anonymous Edward said...

Computer shutdown is a sign of overheating, which may also cause battery failure. We all know that G4 runs hot; some people, though, refuse to recognize that Core Duo could also run hot than its TDP should've been.

3:17 PM, August 24, 2006  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

How can Microsoft prevent playback of HD video in Vista? Isn't it just a driver thing? I'm sure someone will release a driver for it (Cyberlink PowerDVD?) if Microsoft isn't willing to.

3:19 PM, August 24, 2006  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

“Core Duo users are second class citizens”

Wrong again Dr. Sharikou, The core duo is already obsolete and is a candidate for dumping in third world countries, making the Core Duo users third class citizens. You’re are too polite.

3:56 PM, August 24, 2006  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Once again, edward shows his ignorance by claiming the CPU has something to do with battery failure and these recalls. How sad.

4:40 PM, August 24, 2006  
Anonymous enumae said...

Anonymous said...

"How about the performance decrease if they ever put DUO 2's into LT's, and somebody wants to run 64bit windows on it? "

Do you have any idea of what your talking about?

Merom, 64bit, and better performance than Core Duo, while using the same power.

":O How sad it runs faster in 32bit mode then 64bit mode!"

Could you link to a review?

The one I saw comparing X2 and Conroe showed a 10% increase in performance for Conroe and a 16% increase for X2.

No body questions AMD's ability to do a better job with 64bit.

Thanks

4:54 PM, August 24, 2006  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Everyone knows it's due the explosive nature of the core duo chips. It's Otellini's new ploy on pushing inventory - if your chips detonate (each core detonates within seconds of the other), you can push more outdated chips into the market.

5:25 PM, August 24, 2006  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

http://www.theinquirer.net/default.aspx?article=33906

K8L name was invented by Intel..

6:23 PM, August 24, 2006  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

THe pHD pretender is at it again.

Its already been widely reported as to what is causing the overheating in the batterys. A defect of small particles that eventually short the innards.

This has nothing to do with what CPUs are in it.

Did you know that since 90% of all x86 laptops are INTEL, and 99% are probably using lithium batterys that the probabilty of it being an INTEL powered CPU is close to 100%. Does it make it an INTEL problem.. NO...

But the Phd Prentender can't get his head out of his ass to cumm clean on this.

Sharikou did you know how much more credibility you'd have if you wouldn't try so hard to be stupid. Why are you working so hard to be stupid?

6:24 PM, August 24, 2006  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"“Any next-generation high definition content will not play in x32 at all,” said Riley.

“This is a decision that the Media Player folks made because there are just too many ways right now for unsigned kernel mode code [to compromise content protection]. The media companies asked us to do this and said they don’t want any of their high definition content to play in x32 at all, because of all of the unsigned malware that runs in kernel mode can get around content protection, so we had to do this,” he said."

Its not that 32 bit hardware is incapable of playing HD content, but that 32 bit mode allows unsigned drivers to run which means people can CRACK the HD content.

Looks like Vista 64 is just a fancyyway to say DRM INFECTION.

Leave it to Sharikou to insinuate 32 bit processors do not have the processing power. They do. But what they dont have is the digital rights management in the 64 bit OS.

Sharikou is retarded.

6:25 PM, August 24, 2006  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I doubt many people that do not have conroes or meroms will put Vista on their machines. I have an AMD machine and I certainly will not. It will be the next gen chips that most people will use for Vista.

Actually i am hoping I can get a Merom with Win XP on it with the Santa Rosa chipset.

6:49 PM, August 24, 2006  
Blogger pointer said...

Computer shutdown is a sign of overheating, which may also cause battery failure. We all know that G4 runs hot; some people, though, refuse to recognize that Core Duo could also run hot than its TDP should've been.

Every CPU generate heat, just a matter who run hotter, consume more power. Core Duo may run hot, AMD's would be hotter. While a lot of people keep bashing on the "TDP", benchmarks has shown C2D does consume less power than AMD's CPU. And you can't find an AMD laptop which has longer battery life than Intel's (be it Pentium M, Core Duo or C2D) at the same performance envelope. Does that give you a clue?

7:27 PM, August 24, 2006  
Blogger Azary Omega said...

Now, Microsoft has decided that Core Duo won't be able to play HD videos.

Ouch. That realy hurts.

10:17 PM, August 24, 2006  
Anonymous dr. b. kind said...

People should not be divided into classes based on what CPU they buy.

Such a thought is the mark of someone who is just not in a good place.

Sharkie, it would appear that you have a mind that is not in good health. I would guess it is need of a break from technology.

Everything does not have to be "war" all the time. The constant stress of "war" does a person in.

Unplug, dude!

10:19 PM, August 24, 2006  
Blogger Sharikou, Ph. D said...

Too bad it has now been thoroughly demonstrated to be a Sony battery issue.

At airports, those poor core duo users were asked to take their battery out of their NBs. Even the airport guys understand that the batteries won't explode by themselves. They explode when used with an overheating CPU.

10:38 PM, August 24, 2006  
Anonymous Edward said...

"Core Duo may run hot, AMD's would be hotter."

Without specifying which model of each, I have to say your claim above is false.

"While a lot of people keep bashing on the "TDP", benchmarks has shown C2D does consume less power than AMD's CPU."

1) We are not talking about C2D.

2) The only benchmark that I remember showed Core Duo consuming more than expected, and the author and everyone else blaimed USB and motherboard for that.

3) How does a typical 35W CPU consumes less power than a maximum 35W CPU? Maybe someone should go sue AMD for false information, or maybe Intel should mark Core Duo as maximum TDP instead?

"And you can't find an AMD laptop which has longer battery life than Intel's (be it Pentium M, Core Duo or C2D) at the same performance envelope."

Go to Toms Hardware 8/22 Turion X2 review and tell me which (Turion X2 vs. Core Duo) has better performance. Oh well, Toms tried so hard to make Core Duo look well by doing 3 customized "multitasking" tests(READ: imprecise and heuistic at best).

BTW, Intel does have some ULV mobile chips, but those are expensive and are not the ones used in the exploding notebooks.

11:02 PM, August 24, 2006  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

At airports, those poor core duo users were asked to take their battery out of their NBs. Even the airport guys understand that the batteries won't explode by themselves. They explode when used with an overheating CPU.

It's clear this is a social experiment. This is too ridiculous to utter forth even from your mouth.

I'm not sure what's more pathetic, the AMDroids who come here and feast at the trough of your idiocy (even though it's clearly intended to be so), or us poor suckers who have come here and tried to argue with you.

All I have to say is that social experiments like this are so old. It's been done before dude, think of something new.

11:23 PM, August 24, 2006  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"And you can't find an AMD laptop which has longer battery life than Intel's (be it Pentium M, Core Duo or C2D) at the same performance envelope. Does that give you a clue?"
They have longer battery life because it uses higher watt-hour battery smart ass. Does that give you a clue? Larger battery will have heavier notebook, more expensive to manufacture, lesser profit margin.

12:30 AM, August 25, 2006  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Benchmarks of 64bit you want the guy to yet? Hes not the only one complaining. Man get yourself a duo2 and see for yourself with some sandra benchmarks. Boy was I shocked.

Have we ever had a AMD based system explode... NO! Have we had Duo systems explode? !!!YES!!! Lots of them, enought to do a major recall of batteries and DUO Laptops. I sure as hell would NOT buy one. Even HELL wouldn't buy one.

God save us... oh halla loooya! From this evil that has plaged our lands... OH HALLA LOOOYA! OH HEar me out OOo Great one. SAVE US ALL FROM THIS EVIL CON! OHHHHH YEAH HALLA LOOYA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

4:24 AM, August 25, 2006  
Blogger Kalle said...

"2) The only benchmark that I remember showed Core Duo consuming more than expected, and the author and everyone else blaimed USB and motherboard for that."

... and Microsoft agreed it was their fault.
http://www.tgdaily.com/2006/01/28/toms_hardware_uncovers_power_drain_issue/


"They explode when used with an overheating CPU."

If so then what good does a battery recall do?

7:06 AM, August 25, 2006  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"32-bit version of Windows Vista can play next-gen protected high definition content."

http://www.gizmodo.com/gadgets/software/windows-vista-32bit-can-play-hd-dvd-bluray-movies-196535.php

7:50 AM, August 25, 2006  
Blogger pointer said...

The only benchmark that I remember showed Core Duo consuming more than expected, and the author and everyone else blaimed USB and motherboard for that.

it was a Windows USB driver issue, the issue has been resolved.


How does a typical 35W CPU consumes less power than a maximum 35W CPU? Maybe someone should go sue AMD for false information, or maybe Intel should mark Core Duo as maximum TDP instead?


Who knows. AMD in a presentation trying to add up the system power number to prove that Intel system consume more power than AMD system but the world (countless enchmark sites) prove it otherwise. I know you all like to label those site not in favor of AMD as intel pumper ... but do you realize that some of those sites were once reporting in favor of AMD? I'm using the C2D case here as an example on those numbers doesn't really give you any practical sense ... do it in real world system using as similar configuartion as you can, measure the power from the source.


They have longer battery life because it uses higher watt-hour battery smart ass. Does that give you a clue? Larger battery will have heavier notebook, more expensive to manufacture, lesser profit margin.

Yes, the test was carried out with different battery (and different screen size too - Intel's is the largest one). So, you gave me the page 7 and hoping i cannot do some calculation using the battery power ratio? anyway, the page 18 has done that for me. read it for yourself:
http://www.tomshardware.com/2006/08/22/amd_dual_core_laptops_have_arrived/page18.html

to edward, refer to above link ( the same news you quoted), intel's has better perf per watt.

put it into the perspective of the DELL laptop. If the fire were indeed indirectly caused by CPU. An AMD CPU has much better chance than Intel CPU to create such fire work :)

Anyway, another side story. The CPU causing explosion explanation from Sharikou has been and will be one of my favorite jokes. And trust me, i joked about this to my friend and they just laugh ... :)

9:07 AM, August 25, 2006  
Anonymous netrama said...

What abou the crappy Intel Pro wireless ?? Havnt we ignored it

9:21 AM, August 25, 2006  
Anonymous Edward said...

"but do you realize that some of those sites were once reporting in favor of AMD? I'm using the C2D case here as an example on those numbers doesn't really give you any practical sense ... do it in real world system using as similar configuartion as you can, measure the power from the source."

1) Once AMD pumper could become Intel pumper, if money come the the other way. I.e., your argument showed nothing.

2) Again, we are not talking about C2D. Maybe you ought to prove that Pentium-M consumes less power than Athlon XP?

3) The 65W Conroe box I'm using DOES consume more power and hear more noisy than the 89W Athlon 64 X2 box I have. (Oh yes, I have both, and I know first-hand that Conroe is 20% faster, in average, than socket-939 X2.)

4) What point 3. shows is that you cannot compare two PC and measure their power consumption as an indication of how their processors do. A processor with 35W maximum TDP (incl. memory controller) WILL BE more power efficient than a processor with 35W typical TDP (excl. memory controller).

5) I really don't know how the Toms test came up with that power values. Do they measure continuously the voltage and current and perform a running sum (or integration) of their product over time? If not, did they take into consideration that the ATi graphics consume more power (and performs much better for 3D apps - which oddly they did not benchmark) than the integrated on the Core Duo?

Toms are biased, period. They are biased because the unilaterally favor Intel when the two chips seem just about the same (with Turion X2 slightly better performance, slightly higher power usage - due to memory controller, and lower priced).

9:58 AM, August 25, 2006  
Anonymous Edward said...

One more thing to bash Toms on its Turion 64 X2 review: they evaluate performance with Asus notebook, but power with a Dell one. Oh well, Asus is known to make high-performance motherboard, isn't it? And the integrated graphics and large battery on the Dell is admittedly (by Toms) to consume little power.

And they compare the Asus Core Duo with MSI Turion X2, where the latter is a ultraportable notebook (< 4lb). How are you suppose to perform on such notebook? I guess the HP Turion X2 performs too well that they don't want to compare it to Core Duo.

You can believe whatever you want, but honestly this review setup and the sheer tone of it is heavily Intel-biased, even then Turion X2 show very good competition against Core Duo. Either Toms are ignorant or they are Intel-paid pumpers, I don't know. You decide.

10:14 AM, August 25, 2006  
Anonymous enumae said...

Edward said...

"(Oh yes, I have both, and I know first-hand that Conroe is 20% faster, in average, than socket-939 X2.)"

Benchmarks and real world, we all know are different, how does it compare?

Do you see the difference?

Well is it all its cracked up to be?

Just really curious.

Thanks

10:35 AM, August 25, 2006  
Anonymous Edward said...

"
"(Oh yes, I have both, and I know first-hand that Conroe is 20% faster, in average, than socket-939 X2.)"

Benchmarks and real world, we all know are different, how does it compare?

"

I was talking about benchmarks that are of my concern. On those benchmarks, Conroe performs 20% better than X2.

11:39 AM, August 25, 2006  
Anonymous Graham said...

Computer shutdown is a sign of overheating, which may also cause battery failure. We all know that G4 runs hot; some people, though, refuse to recognize that Core Duo could also run hot than its TDP should've been.

This is pure speculation and insinuation at this point. You don't know the actual cause of the shutdowns and we DO know the actual cause of the Dell fires. It was the battery. Hence the battery recall. Why are the AMD fanbois not flaming Sony who is responsible for the defective batteries? It doesn't fir their world-view of "Grrr, Intel bad, AMD good, grunt, grunt"

The fact is, AMD doesn't have a very competitive mobile solution right now and they know it. When you are a small fraction of the market, you have a small fraction of the problems.

12:06 PM, August 25, 2006  
Anonymous enumae said...

Edward, I was not being sarcastic, I am curious if you notice the performance difference, be it in your benchmarks or general user feel.

Thanks

12:58 PM, August 25, 2006  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

This is pure speculation and insinuation at this point. You don't know the actual cause of the shutdowns and we DO know the actual cause of the Dell fires. It was the battery. Hence the battery recall. Why are the AMD fanbois not flaming Sony who is responsible for the defective batteries? It doesn't fir their world-view of "Grrr, Intel bad, AMD good, grunt, grunt"
But obviously something is setting off the batteries, otherwise they wouldn't let the batteries on planes at all. The problems happening while the laptops are on. Maybe it's just natural cycle, but maybe it is caused by a CPU.

I agree it is pure speculation, but at the same time, the battery not being powered isn't exploding. It's when the defective battery is coupled with these laptops that it causes problems. Would it cause the same problem with a Turion CPU? I'd probably say yes. But the bottom line is that Turions aren't exploding, and you can't tell me there aren't any Turions out there with Sony-made batteries...

1:17 PM, August 25, 2006  
Anonymous muziqaz said...

It's is funny that all of the major companies selling their laptops put large capacity batteries into core duo laptops, and small capcity batts into turion x2 laptops ;/
I can only speculate in conspiracy level why.
And one more thing :)
in my country(lithuania) this mounth there were louds of people buying new laptop.99% of bought laptops were hp with turion x2 tl-50 :)
tries to look for similar priced core duo laptop with same video card, couldn't find. :(
And all buyers were very happy with purchase.Tho they were a bit disapointed about battery life, but thats because large capacity batteries goes exclusively to centrino laptops ;/

1:26 PM, August 25, 2006  
Anonymous Edward said...

"It's is funny that all of the major companies selling their laptops put large capacity batteries into core duo laptops, and small capcity batts into turion x2 laptops ;/"

Actually MSI S270/S271 have large (6-cell?) capacity battery for Turion 64. The battery life under typical usage is greater than 3hr, almost hitting 4hr with very light use. The MSI notebook even sports ATi 200M/300M graphics chip, a fairly powerful one compared to the integrated Intel graphics.

Too bad that Toms did not benchmark MSI's battery life against the Core Duo. As I said, Toms comparison of Turion X2 and Core Duo was outright biased.

3:59 PM, August 25, 2006  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Microsoft has retracted their statements about 32=bit HD availability.

http://blogs.technet.com/windowsvista/archive/2006/08/24/450081.aspx

The community is buzzing with reactions to APC Magazine’s article regarding playback of protected High Definition content in 32-bit versions of Windows Vista. However, the information shared was incorrect and the reactions pervading the community are thus (understandably) ill-informed.

Any version of Vista can support HD playback depending on the drivers and hardware that is implemented in a specific system.

6:41 PM, August 25, 2006  
Blogger pointer said...

The bottom line is in the manufacturing of these batteries, there were some quality control issues, metal particles that can be found in parts of the batteries where they actually shouldn't be.
quoted from http://www.abc.net.au/worldtoday/content/2006/s1724436.htm

I seriously wonder why people still want to create consipiracy base on this. If it is sharikou alone, I can understand ... may be too desperate because of poor AMD mobile market share ... cannot win with technology (perf per watt, platform, etc ... not saying MD's is not good, just not as good as intel's in comparison), try consipiracy theory.

8:58 PM, August 25, 2006  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

muziquaz said...

It's is funny that all of the major companies selling their laptops put large capacity batteries into core duo laptops, and small capcity batts into turion x2 laptops ;/
I can only speculate in conspiracy level why.
And one more thing :)
in my country(lithuania) this mounth there were louds of people buying new laptop.99% of bought laptops were hp with turion x2 tl-50 :)
tries to look for similar priced core duo laptop with same video card, couldn't find. :(
And all buyers were very happy with purchase.Tho they were a bit disapointed about battery life, but thats because large capacity batteries goes exclusively to centrino laptops ;/


maybe they just sell cheap crap notebooks in lithuania. so don't wonder when there are just the cheapest batteries in this notebooks. btw. where the fuck is lithuania? maybe you should stick with the olpc notebooks when you can't afford a proper one.

http://sharikou.blogspot.com/2006/08/cm1-is-all-you-boys-and-girls-need.html

4:20 AM, August 26, 2006  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I think AMD with its Turion X2 powerplant , is set to capture mindshare and market share of a few savvy Tech and Enterprise buyers , atleast in the other hemisphere.
For the rest out here ..if your laptops did survive the airport customs and didnt catch fire or did not have a crazy wireless memory leak ..or well if it was not hacked into ..then chances are that you are still buying those crappy stuff out here. What ...I even say a VAIO laptops being pushed with a celeron chip inside agressiveely ...common ..give me a break..

10:56 AM, August 26, 2006  
Blogger Kalle said...

"maybe they just sell cheap crap notebooks in lithuania."

I'm not sure about Lithuania but here in Estonia we mostly have brand-named Intel based laptops. Of course there are some Turions and cheaper ones too but they are not very common.


"btw. where the fuck is lithuania?" It's right between Baltic Sea, Russia, Poland, Belarussia and Latvia. It's one of the three Baltic states.

Btw, our three countries are much poorer than average EU country or US state but we are way ahead of US in IT. E.g with cellphones we have been able to pay in almost every shop and pay for parking for years. Couple of months ago I heard that first similar pilot project was launched in US :)

2:10 PM, August 26, 2006  
Anonymous Edward said...

"Btw, our three countries are much poorer than average EU country or US state but we are way ahead of US in IT. E.g with cellphones we have been able to pay in almost every shop and pay for parking for years."

Yes I believe that. Having been to many parts of the world (regretably not eastern Europe though), I know first-handed that, although Americans like to talk about social security and makeing lots of money, we really have lower IT quality than many "poorer" parts of the world - unless some very rich guys living in excessive squander.

10:10 PM, August 26, 2006  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Do current notebook owners have a future? You can't/won't be able to put HD DVD/Bluray in them anyways LOL


At least the Core !1 has 50% more battery life or around that on the
http://www.tomshardware.com/2006/08/22/amd_dual_core_laptops_have_arrived/page17.html
test:)

8:50 AM, August 27, 2006  
Blogger pointer said...

Again, we are not talking about C2D. Maybe you ought to prove that Pentium-M consumes less power than Athlon XP?

I do not think that i need to prove that. AMD didn't even have a solution back then at the pentium M era. It just prove by itself



The 65W Conroe box I'm using DOES consume more power and hear more noisy than the 89W Athlon 64 X2 box I have. (Oh yes, I have both, and I know first-hand that Conroe is 20% faster, in average, than socket-939 X2.)

4) What point 3. shows is that you cannot compare two PC and measure their power consumption as an indication of how their processors do. A processor with 35W maximum TDP (incl. memory controller) WILL BE more power efficient than a processor with 35W typical TDP (excl. memory controller).


exactly. measuring power from the wall will tell you how much the WHOLE system consume. From all those avaliable benchmanrks shows intel's system has better perf per watt than AMD's (please not that the recent Toms review use Core Duo to compare AMD's latest CPU, it is not even a Merom)

I really don't know how the Toms test came up with that power values. Do they measure continuously the voltage and current and perform a running sum (or integration) of their product over time? If not, did they take into consideration that the ATi graphics consume more power (and performs much better for 3D apps - which oddly they did not benchmark) than the integrated on the Core Duo?


Do not simply blame on certain benchmark being unfair just because it didn't give you AMD favored- results. The benchmark at least show in 2D, the Intel Core Duo system out perform AMD latest system in perf and perf per watt. Want to point your finger to ATI? Well, that's the bets chip AMD can get on thier system. NVidia run much hotter.

10:31 AM, August 27, 2006  
Anonymous Edward said...

"Do not simply blame on certain benchmark being unfair just because it didn't give you AMD favored- results. The benchmark at least show in 2D, the Intel Core Duo system out perform AMD latest system in perf and perf per watt. Want to point your finger to ATI? Well, that's the bets chip AMD can get on thier system. NVidia run much hotter."

I do not point finger to anyone except Toms. My doubts are well-founded: how can a 35W max chip consume more power than a 35W typical chip under load? How can they compare two CPUs while graphics chips are obviously different? You haven't answered that - should people sue AMD for or shouldn't Intel remark their chip as lower power consumption?

I pointed out many places where the Toms didn't have a fair comparison, but you simply avoid them. As you admitted, is system performance is the problem, where you cannot compare two CPUs in different systems. It's you who do not wish to face the fact that the credibility of your favored results are being questioned.

9:42 AM, August 29, 2006  
Blogger pointer said...

My doubts are well-founded: how can a 35W max chip consume more power than a 35W typical chip under load?

you still do not get it? It is the system power, not the chip! Anyway, I do not trust those numbers as to be used for predicting the 'system' power or even represent the CPU power correctly. In a very recent news (within 2 month and i forgot which, may be some one can help to dig out the link), soon after AMD realize they lose out to the C2D in perf and perf per watt especially, there is one AMD guy said that the TDP shouldn't be used balhblahblah because the original TDP is actually Thermal Design Point.

Furthermore, just to re-iterate again, by doing the math on all those number just doens't help. AMD did just that trying to prove Intel system consume more power by add up CPU, MCH, ICH, memory, etc, and yet the world (a lot of benchmarks) proved it otherwise. Don't you get a clue from here?

btw, try not to point me to the benchmack site that you would not trust. You have done that twice to me. (first one was anandtech in other discussion)

11:11 AM, August 29, 2006  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home