Opteron rules them all
After SUN's Galaxy x4100, x4200, x4500, x4600 (8P 16 core), Blade 8400, IBM's x3455, x3655, x3755, LS21, LS41 mass frags, it now appears that SUN has even more frags ready for Intel - the Sun Fire x2200 m2. It seems the same 4x4 technology will be used in low end servers to frag 2P Woodcrest. This is exactly what I predicted when 4x4 was announced, using 2 AM2 CPUs in a cheap 2P server.
So the theme will be this, at 2P level, two socket AM2 CPUs will frag Woodcrest. Above 2P, Intel doesn't have an effective x64 solution. Opteron frags them all (Tulsa, Itanium).
posted by Sharikou, Ph. D. @ 8/05/2006 10:47:00 AM
89 Comments:
Sharikou, look at my website(it's new so) www.tech-blog.blogspot.com
Wow...
Opteron Leadership
Reminds me of Power, Power1, PowerII, Power3, Power4, Power5, and now Power6 they were the best.
Then there was Alpha the fastest in the world.. look what happened to DEC..
Then there was Sun and the SPARC look at them
Wow.. the list is long of leaders by companies who later made little money and folded.
Nothing new, got benchmarks. Having benchmarks is like having the fastest 0-60 time in your car. Looks good, wins the special race. Wow, its impressive, but you as the list shows you can't build a long sustaining business.
History is a good prediction of the future. The only reason POWER has lasted so long is because of IBM. Sun is on its deathbed, HP has its printer business to help, and Dell has it's slim volume business.
Like my son says like flies attracted to poop are you amd fanboys.
Sharikou, your endless and shameless AMD pumping has gotten pathetically boring.
A non-shipping server based on a non-shipping platform based on non-shipping chips from a non-performing floundering company is not going to rule much of anything.
Sun is a company that thinks selling overpriced servers is smart. Meanhile they are laying off over 5000 workers because the CEO is a moron (as was the CEO before him).
Looking at Sun as some great example of a server company is just dumb. They are a company that with a few bad quarters will BK faster than Intel.
Wake up, Sharkie.
As much as I like AMD, Sharikou you give us AMD fans a bad name. I like AMD because they produce better tech simply. I mean look at the enw power saving versions, they are right up there with Intel which is on 65 nm and AMD is on 90 nm! Your blog is giving AMD as a company a bad name. Just stop blogging!
PS: If I were to build a machine this year it would be undoubtedly an Intel based machine! I always go for what is best for me.
" 8-ball said...
Sharikou, your endless and shameless AMD pumping has gotten pathetically boring.
A non-shipping server based on a non-shipping platform based on non-shipping chips from a non-performing floundering company is not going to rule much of anything.
Sun is a company that thinks selling overpriced servers is smart. Meanhile they are laying off over 5000 workers because the CEO is a moron (as was the CEO before him).
Looking at Sun as some great example of a server company is just dumb. They are a company that with a few bad quarters will BK faster than Intel.
Wake up, Sharkie.
11:51 AM, August 05, 2006 "}
werent you and many intel fanboys saying the same about woodcrest vaporware and now conroe?
"ohh noes, even its its not yet out it will rule!!!!"
" Anonymous said...
Wow...
Opteron Leadership
Reminds me of Power, Power1, PowerII, Power3, Power4, Power5, and now Power6 they were the best.
Then there was Alpha the fastest in the world.. look what happened to DEC..
Then there was Sun and the SPARC look at them
Wow.. the list is long of leaders by companies who later made little money and folded.
Nothing new, got benchmarks. Having benchmarks is like having the fastest 0-60 time in your car. Looks good, wins the special race. Wow, its impressive, but you as the list shows you can't build a long sustaining business.
History is a good prediction of the future. The only reason POWER has lasted so long is because of IBM. Sun is on its deathbed, HP has its printer business to help, and Dell has it's slim volume business.
Like my son says like flies attracted to poop are you amd fanboys.
11:46 AM, August 05, 2006 "
tell me plz, how expensive was a PowerPc for servers?
and how expensive where the alphas?
how specialized where these cpus?
how much intel marketting, vaporware and monopolistic tricks atacked them too?
diference is, Opteron aint that expensive as these models you mentioned, also opteron isnt that specialized, its a multipurpose server ( while your montecito is just good for a very small variety of tasks.. )
Bummer, Woodcrest is obsolete and I haven’t even seen one yet.
people need to stop flaming on sharikou, cmon he can believe what he wants to believe and you can too so keep your mind open and your mouth shut
people need to stop flaming on sharikou
I don't care if somebody flames, they have their first amendment right to flame here -- I just ignore them. Intelers need to be a bit more civilized though. I have sympathy for their lack of IQ -otherwise they won't be Intelers.
I don't care if somebody flames, they have their first amendment right to flame here -- I just ignore them. Intelers need to be a bit more civilized though. I have sympathy for their lack of IQ -otherwise they won't be Intelers.
Well, I tend to harp on you a bit because I think you're a dipshit, Sharikou, but you're a good man/woman for not censoring things here. No one gives you enough credit for that and you really deserve some.
I have far less knowledge of CPU's than you and most other people that visit this blog (and don't care about Intel OR AMD for that matter), but I like to come here just to see the lapses in logic on both sides that occur as a result of bias. It's really enjoyable!
Keep up the good work, dipshit!
Hey, by the way, are you male or female, just out of curiousity? And what part of the world do you come from? United States?
"Keep up the good work, dipshit!"
With comments like this, instead of actual constructive debate, reinforce my viewpoint (and others I'm sure) that most Intel zealots cannot reasonably debate intelligently without namecalling or making comments toward one's character without factual evidence.( I think this is referred to as character assisination!)
I'll repeat this so anyone and everyone can get this through thier thick skulls:
Once someone reduces themselves to namecalling and attacking a person's character, its a dead giveaway that they have already lost the arguement.
Want to be taken seriously? Want to be seen as reasonable in a arguement? Want to have a semblance of credibility? Want to be treated with respect? Leave your juvenille behaviour at the door, debate the facts with respect to your opposition and stay on topic.
It's alot simpler than you think people. Otherwise this comments box is nothing more than a second rate AOL chatroom.
Sharikou, Accept the fact that all K8s are being slower then Conroe. K8L will beat Conroe because Power6 is like K8L and Power6 is ultra powerful
people need to stop flaming on sharikou, cmon he can believe what he wants to believe and you can too so keep your mind open and your mouth shut
You got it backards dude.
Sharikou's minid is shut and his mouth is open. He has little ability to digest facts. Acknoweldge the strengths and weakenss currently of AMD or INTEL. In his mind all that INTEL is stupid, bad, and mindless. What is most funny?
INTEL is the most profitable semiconductor company on Earth.
INTEL is the most dominate force in PCs.
INTEL currently now has the greatest single/dualcore desktop/server and mobile chips.
INTEL had some serious senior management blunders, continues some big ones even now. but he can't see anthing but the silly notion that they are going bankrupt. He deserves all the flaming...
LOL.. I can see AMDs strengths and threats... but there is no way they are every going to beat INTEL.
You all are jokers if you think that AMD will ever catch INTEL in the next 5 years. If Paul Otellwennie and Sean can manage as horrible as the GM folks maybe in 10 years AMD will start looking like Toyota. But today AMD is nothing but a little HONDA of 10 years ago.
I guess we'll just have to see if Socket F actually ships on time.
http://www.theregister.com/2006/08/05/survey_server/
As it stands, however, the Rev F chips will be more delayed than previously expected. AMD already pushed back its official "launch" announcement from July to August. Now we hear that HP doesn't expect to slot Rev F chips into boxes until "late September or the first week of October."
"werent you and many intel fanboys saying the same about woodcrest vaporware and now conroe?"
Conroe has shipped in small quantities and is ramping up fast. The tests, done all over the world, show that Conroe without any doubt frags AMD. Cheap Conroe chips frag AMD so bad that AMD has put all their equivalent chips on massive firesale.
Contrast shipping awesome chips vs. AMD's vaporware of (1) 4x4 motherboards, (2) chipsets for 4x4, (3) chips for 4x4.
As for Woodcrest, there are chips out, motherboards, reviews, etc. The volume is not high, but it is far more than zero. And K-L8 is... nothing more than vaporware. Even Socket F is nothing more than vaporware. No motherboards, no chips, no reviews, etc.
If this blog talked OBJECTIVELY about what was on the market, it would be far more interesting. Trumpeting the virtues of vaporware is childish and dumb.
As it stands today, this blog is nothing more than an ex-Intel jilted lover talking smack about the girl that dumped him.
"PS: If I were to build a machine this year it would be undoubtedly an Intel based machine! I always go for what is best for me. "
Looks like some of Intel's low paid Indian employees are at it again.
"Well, I tend to harp on you a bit because I think you're a dipshit, Sharikou, but you're a good man/woman for not censoring things here. No one gives you enough credit for that and you really deserve some."
Bullshit he doesn't. He lets personal flames go, because that doesn't prove his ludicrous claims wrong in any way.
But the moment you make a post with factual evidence that proves him wrong yet again, he won't let it go through.
"Anonymous said...
Wow...
Opteron Leadership
Reminds me of Power, Power1, PowerII, Power3, Power4, Power5, and now Power6 they were the best.
Then there was Alpha the fastest in the world.. look what happened to DEC..
Then there was Sun and the SPARC look at them
Wow.. the list is long of leaders by companies who later made little money and folded."
What a moron! I guess this means history proves that no matter how much Intel sucks, they'll continue to lead the market.
The only thing history proves is that things are more like they are now then they ever have been before.
No I'm wrong, things have been the same the last 3 yrs. Opteron rules.
Hey you anonymous that wrote
"Once someone reduces themselves to namecalling and attacking a person's character, its a dead giveaway that they have already lost the arguement."
You just stupid? Idiot? Dipshit? Fuckhead? or just a dumb AMD fanboy. That last one is the lowest namecalling LOL..
You figured it out. There is nothing but namecalling here!
Sharikou is the king of name calling. Look at his stupid headlines. If he actually digested the data and saw both sides maybe there'd be less name calling. Frankly I don't feel any need to raise above the level of intelligence that sharkiou and shit heads like you show. I can type and call names as well as you folks and use logic as well as you fuckhead too! Maybe when we see some of Sharikou's IQ that earned him that PhD I might bother bring more interesting tone.
You get what you sow you fuckhead. Is it clear enough?
"I don't care if somebody flames, they have their first amendment right to flame here -- I just ignore them. Intelers need to be a bit more civilized though. I have sympathy for their lack of IQ -otherwise they won't be Intelers."
You also have the right to censor us at will but thanks for the censor free zone:)
BTW, you're one to talk about flamer;)
Ladies and gentlemen and Fannies:
I interrupt this program to bring you an important announcement.
LOL did i forget to menttion potty-mouthed Intel trolls here.
APPLE IS MOST LIKELY GOING AMD WAY.
Whoops.... what a shocker.
http://weblog.infoworld.com/enterprisemac/archives/2006/08/apple_finally_g.html
PS. Sorry for bringing you the bad news.
Opps i made a mistake with the link
Here you go again
http://weblog.infoworld.com/enterprisemac/archives/2006/08/apple_finally_g.html
"Reminds me of Power, Power1, PowerII, Power3, Power4, Power5, and now Power6 they were the best.
Then there was Alpha the fastest in the world.. look what happened to DEC..
Then there was Sun and the SPARC look at them"
You seem to missing a few facts little man... allow me to educate you.
For one, you're comparing apples to oranges. Here's why:
Power X is what it is and will never be more. Why? Because IBM has reshaped itself into a services company. It doesn't care which processor it sells so long as there is a long term maintenace contract that goes with it. Thus resulting in limites to how much it can push for its own technology. Read Who Says Elephants Can't Dance? to learn (and understand) more.
Second, there was Alpha. One of the best processors that existed at the time (ahead of its time, I'd say). DEC was an incredibly awful company especially when it came to marketing. Its clear (at least in my mind since 1995) that RISC processors had no chance in todays world. When Compaq purchased DEC they killed the Alpha, not the market!
Third, the SPARC is a RISC based processor... same result!
Server processor companies back then lacked standards, too much proprietory specs & technologies... NO TECHNOLOGICAL SYNERGY, thus competition killed them all (everyone).
Why do you think that Apple went CISC (x86)? Why do you think the CELL is almost already dead? Why do you think the Itanium won't survive? How long do you think Motorola/Free Scale will keep making processors?
It's not the product or the company that defines tomorows technological success. It's the TECHNOLOGICAL SYNERGY! What can maximize my current investment.
Intel didn't think about this when trying to shove Itanium down the worlds throat! It would have cost companies hundreds of billions of dollars to migrate... and they would have been locked in proprietary technology!
If AMD stops using open technologies/standards, they too will die!
Here's the link to that Apple story: http://weblog.infoworld.com/enterprise
mac/archives/2006/08/
apple_finally_g.html
*Anonymous* coward who calls himself bigbadwolf said:
Looks like some of Intel's low paid Indian employees are at it again.
Lol, what's the matter wolfie? Got replaced by an immigrant worker? Go get at least your college degree first and quit working in taco bell, then maybe you *may* qualify for jobs you crib about.
I know you won't let this through, but sooner or later people will stumble on it anyway:
http://www.gamepc.com/labs/view_content.asp?id=xeon5160&page=9
Quote: 8-ball
-----------------------
Contrast shipping awesome chips vs. AMD's vaporware of (1) 4x4 motherboards, (2) chipsets for 4x4, (3) chips for 4x4.
As for Woodcrest, there are chips out, motherboards, reviews, etc. The volume is not high, but it is far more than zero. And K-L8 is... nothing more than vaporware. Even Socket F is nothing more than vaporware. No motherboards, no chips, no reviews, etc.
-----------------------
Sorry to disapoint you Intel lover but 4X4, K8L & socket F haven't actually been released yet & therefore cannot be considered vaporware. This is in stark contrast to the currently missing Intel Woodcrest & the limited supply of Conroe.
4X4, K8L and socket F are in fact future announced products from AMD which unlike Intel I'm sure they will make sure they actually ship in decent volume from day one.
Need I remind you that Intel has in fact beat the crap out of it's Core 2 drum/chips for the past 6+ months regardless if it had the chips to ship or not in a cheap (and largely failed) attempt to try and slow down AMD. Now just try and tell me that that's not the king of all hype and vapourware releases?.
Just go out and buy yourself a Woodcrest or Conroe dude (if you can even find one). I'm sure it will make you feel a whole lot better.
Cheers & peace out dude....
It's not the product or the company that defines tomorows technological success. It's the TECHNOLOGICAL SYNERGY! What can maximize my current investment.
Yo fuckhead!
The business term that is used is "Virtuous Cycle"
Synergy is when my dick fits in your asshole and stretches it real good. Once you are stretched good and wide then we have synergy!
The only company that nutures synergy right now is INTEL. They are the world biggest technology venture capatilist that pushes x86 cyle. THey enabled Centrino and the whole laptop package. They are now pushing WiMAX.
Please don't get started on the failures. Its venture capatilism!
AMD is trying now with hypertransprot. Pretty hard to nurture the ecosystem if you don't have any money. Look at them poor AMDers have to take on 2.5billion debt to put a GPU and get a northbridge. Pss INTEL already has both and is the world biggest GPU company.
Give it up fuckheads.. INTEL is the king and will stay it for another 10 years. Buy then scaling and moore's law will have hit the wall and only the big will survive as only they will have the factories. The end of semiconductor scaling will be in the board room not the R&D labs. AMD will fold first, followed by the likes of #5 semiconductor company on down. Like the car industry, oil industry only the big guys with billions will survive.
TSMC, INTEL, Samsung, and TI will survive. All others will perish. In 2015 I'll be hear to remind you the Doctor told you that all!
Now lets debate that! I'm going on vacation so I leave the flies to hover around Sharkiou's ass for the next two weeks.
I would have to disagree with you there. There is a tremendous amount of potential with the Cell Processor, yet it is still in the testing stages for the most part. Towards the end of this year we should be a clearer picture of its actual ability.
At the Cebit Trade Show in Hanover, people got a glimpse of what it could do:
Potential.. so what there have been lots of technology with potential. In the end the virtuous cycle means x86 beats all.
PowerPC had Moto/IBM in their heyday against a much smaller INTEL. It was going to win.. had all the players and money. Guess what? It didn't make it. Itanium didn't even do it and it was INTEL's own.
Bottom line, the end. Nothing to debate.
"Sorry to disapoint you Intel lover but 4X4, K8L & socket F haven't actually been released yet & therefore cannot be considered vaporware. This is in stark contrast to the currently missing Intel Woodcrest & the limited supply of Conroe."
Damn, you are one fine retard. Did your mama do too much crack when she was getting knocked up by your Forrest Gump daddie?
When something has been announced, but is not available, it is vaporware. In other words, "a paper launch" or "vapor launch".
"Vaporware (in British English: Vapourware) is software or hardware which is announced by a developer well in advance of release, but which then fails to emerge, either with or without a protracted development cycle. The term implies unwarranted optimism, or sometimes even deception; that is, it implies that the announcer knows that product development is in too early a stage to support responsible statements about its completion date, feature set, or even feasibility."
We have Socket F which is a year late, 4x4 which is announced with some very vague specs, and K8L which was announced a year ago.
Socket F keeps slipping, now to October. How can a competent microprocessor company keep slipping a chip that is just a warmed over version of its first chip? When it's not competent. And when the original Opteron team leaves because management is a bunch of liars and crooks.
Meahwhile, you can go build a Conroe or Woodcrest system yourself today. No the volumes are not at the point that Dell is getting millions of chips. But the volumes will get there and if you really want a system, you can get the parts. And with these parts, you can build the fastest desktop x86 system in the world. Take your pick, 32 or 64 bit. Either way, Intel got the fastest. Can't say that about AMD's new AM2 line of slugs.
Instead of attacking a company that is shipping great chips, this is what you should be taking care of:
""please if you get a chanse put some flowrs on Athlerons grave in the bak yard...".
Sharikou, keep up the excellent blog. Personal attacks are empty.
Even though you sometimes overdo it a little, it is fun to read.
Hey BigBadWolf,
Just because I am Indian does not mean I work for Intel. Hehe funny to see how close minded the white folk are. I take your comment as utter racism but that is ok...you guys are jealous anyway because we are stealing your women and your jobs!
But honestly, all kidding aside, I have a Dell XPS laptop with the most horrendous of processors (Prescott!! ugh), a dual core Opteron workstation, an AMD Athlon XP machine, and AMD Athlon laptop, another P3 machine and told my girlfriend to get an AMD based laptop...so as you can see...whether you would believe it or not, I am a big AMD fan. I just dont agree with Sharikou most of the times. As much as I would like to see AMD kick arse again, I know because I am logical, that it would take a bit of time. AMD has shown utter genius and strategy and they are going to pull off another coup next year. I mean look they are still on 90nm technology and yet the new breed of energy efficient processors they have made are right on par with the new Intel 65 nm processors! That is beyond amazing if not anything else. I cannot wait for the K8L monsters to come out next year.
So BigBadWolf, you can *insert expletive* off for all I care.
Peace!
I didnt read any futher but my gues would be: intel fan?
You spelled the last letter above wrong.
Anonymous said:
"Want to be taken seriously? Want to be seen as reasonable in a arguement? Want to have a semblance of credibility? Want to be treated with respect? Leave your juvenille behaviour at the door, debate the facts with respect to your opposition and stay on topic."
Sharikou, that is a good advice!
anonymour said:"4X4, K8L and socket F are in fact future announced products from AMD which unlike Intel I'm sure they will make sure they actually ship in decent volume from day one."
If they are future chips, stop comparing them to Core II duo then!
Azary "FUDboy" Omega: "Yup, just as expacted: 2.6GHz Opty 'nailing' 2.66GHz woody while stepping on 3.0GHz woody."
Damn, another retarded liar. If you read the entire review, you can see how this conclusion is reached:
"If you made it through the last several pages of benchmarks, you can clearly see that Intel’s new Xeon 5150 and 5160 processors are absolutely top of the line in terms of workstation application performance. Both of these models were able to best AMD’s top of the line Opteron 285 processors in nearly every benchmark, which previous generation Xeon processors simply were not capable of doing. Server performance is still a close call, but Intel’s new Xeon processors again perform fantastically well here. While topping the performance charts is a fantastic achievement for Intel, making things even sweeter here is that Intel is delivering better performance at lower prices. AMD’s Opteron 285 processor still sells for $1100-$1200, whereas the new Xeon 5160 sells for $900-$1000, whereas the Xeon 5150 (which still bests the Opteron 285 in most tests) sells for $700-$800. Thus, Intel is winning not only in raw performance, but also price/performance as well."
Intel Woodcrest is a winner compared to Opteron. And it is shipping, in small quantities, today.
With the lies that the AMD-bois continually spout... one can only think... DESPERATE CPU WIVES.
Gross!
To sharioku:
I think everyone you would make everyone feel better if you just went ahead and admitted that conroe is clearly destroying AM2...clearly just destroying it. It's not just kinda beating it..its just killing AM2. Also overclocking is a plus but still.
Has anyone else noticed Dr. Idiot's reversion to the tactics of a 12 year old? Calling people "crap heads" and what not. Seems like he's really losing it even more and more lately.
Pretty funny. I'm really enjoying watching him descend into insanity. When AMD stock hits 15 or so I'll be back to laugh more.
I actually hope "Dr" Sharikou ends up alone, jobless, and homeless as a raving lunatic wandering the streets. Would be a wonderful piece of karma for this hateful little insect.
I think everyone you would make everyone feel better if you just went ahead and admitted that conroe is clearly destroying AM2...clearly just destroying it. It's not just kinda beating it..its just killing AM2.
Dude, Conroe has become a joke in town. It keeps breaking SuperPi records, that's all. Ask Michael Dell why he is going AMD. There is an old article on this blog on Michael Dell's reaction to Conroe.
"I am so glad that an Intel supporter finally made that statement! It's about time. I totally agree with you. That's why I have also made the statement that it's ridiculous for Intel to compare current AMD processors to the Core 2 line of processors. The Intel Core 2 line of processors was a future product as well and yet Intel has been comparing them to AMD's current line. The Core 2 has been used for comparison against AMD for months now, yet they are only now being released (well sort of, yet with serious shortages) to the public. Intel wanted to capitalize on the performance improvements over their old line to generate hype before its release. If they wanted to compare in a fair manner, they would have waited for the release of AMD's Socket F 1207 Opteron line and then compared their Woodcrest line to those."
Who cares if Intel's new architecture beats AMD's old, they're both here on the market now. As a consumer, you should go for the best product, and if we wait til AMD's new architecture, Intel will release new stuff. And as a consumer, I'd like to say that the FX 62 is a complete rip off at 1K when an Intel processor at half the price matches it.
"Sharikou, Accept the fact that all K8s are being slower then Conroe."
Well... if you mean clock-for-clock, than it's true (10-15% in average). OTOH, after AMD's price cut, Athlon 64 X2 performs better than E6xxx for the same price.
"Wow.. the list is long of leaders by companies who later made little money and folded."
There is no doubt that Intel is the one company that knows how to make money with CPU, just like Microsoft is the one with OS.
There is no problem with that, really.
That however doesn't mean technical leadership is not important. Because such attitude as yours is the very one that would stifle innovation and rot an industry.
There's one thing that's almost identical between Intel and Microsoft, that is their repulse against open standards and fair competition.
Well... if you mean clock-for-clock, than it's true (10-15% in average).
What Intel did is pre-launching Conroe and Woodcrest, which was commiting suicide. AMD could have released K8L today, but it will wait till the thing is fully tested and yields are mature. Intel rushed ahead, but it needs to burn 3 wafers to make one good chip. As a result, Conroe/Woodcrest is totally irrelevant in terms of generating revenue. When Conroe reaches volume production, K8L will be out. That's why DELL went AMD. Intel will simply BK in 5 to 7 quarters.
"And as a consumer, I'd like to say that the FX 62 is a complete rip off at 1K when an Intel processor at half the price matches it."
First, FX-62 is priced well below $1k. But that doesn't matter, really, because now X2 4600+ beats E6400, and X2 4200+ beats E6300 in performance/price.
It's true that AMD will have hard time competing with E6600 and above, but using your consumer-centric argument, how many would spend $600+ just for a CPU in their computer?
OTOH, everyone who were smart enough to own an AMD socket-939 machine can spend less than $400 to upgrade to X2 4800+. Or less than $300 to X2 4600+. How can any Intel offering beat this?
Given that K8L-based CPUs will fit into AM2 socket, I believe it's obvious for any consumer today to purchase the cheaper (ie. below X2 4600+) AM2 boxes instead of any Conroe. That's simply the smart move.
Well, if you really want to pay extra for 6 months of 15-20% performance, than don't know where to put your computer and deal with the selling and buy-new-to-upgrade hassle a year later, then buy a Conroe.
8-ball said: "Damn, you are one fine retard. Did your mama do too much crack when she was getting knocked up by your Forrest Gump daddie?"
Sigh.. what a sad soul in denial. You are certainly embarassed, because he was right on the definition of vaporware. In other words, 4x4 is paper launch, K8L is future release, but none of them is vaporware.
You are just poor and low and need to resort to personal attacks to overwhelm your own embarassment.
Itanium is the Mother of All Ripoffs.
AMD preps to take a few more shark bites out of Intel's flesh.
http://www.digitimes.com/
mobos/
a20060807A1001.html
QUOTE: edward
------------------------
Given that K8L-based CPUs will fit into AM2 socket, I believe it's obvious for any consumer today to purchase the cheaper (ie. below X2 4600+) AM2 boxes instead of any Conroe. That's simply the smart move.
Well, if you really want to pay extra for 6 months of 15-20% performance, than don't know where to put your computer and deal with the selling and buy-new-to-upgrade hassle a year later, then buy a Conroe.
------------------------
...dang couldn't have put it better myself.
This is exactly what all the Intel lovers out there just don't seem to be able to comprehend i.e. AM2 is only going to go from strength to strength.
So yes Conroe is very good vs current X2 on AM2 but don't wright off AM2 just yet i.e. keep masturbating over your Core 2 Duo's while it lasts Intel lovers because it won't last long, AM2 is just the beginning.
Cheers.....
Edward ... First, FX-62 is priced well below $1k. But that doesn't matter, really, because now X2 4600+ beats E6400, and X2 4200+ beats E6300 in performance/price.
that's simply not true. Please do not shoot from the air. here is the link for you. the E6400 beat X24600+ almost across the borad and quite often beating the FX62 as well!
Intel Core 2 Duo E6400 Review
Intel market share keeps slip sliding away
http://www.xbitlabs.com/news/cpu/display/20060806232628.html
AMD serves another loss to Intel
Mercury reports that AMD grew its share to 25.9% during Q2, up 17% from 22.1% in Q1 and 133% year over year. Thank Opteron for the gains
http://www.fool.com/News/mft/2006/mft06080125.htm
Woody can’t stop the bleeding and the best is yet to come. Don’t you Intel fanboys get it, yet! Suicide is your only option.
"Who cares if Intel's new architecture beats AMD's old, they're both here on the market now. As a consumer, you should go for the best product, and if we wait til AMD's new architecture, Intel will release new stuff. And as a consumer, I'd like to say that the FX 62 is a complete rip off at 1K when an Intel processor at half the price matches it."
So a few months ago when Conroe was not yet out, did you also say that we shouldn't wait for Intel's new architecture? Or is it only AMD which should be seen in that light?
Wonder what's the missing component for this Core2Duo machine?
http://www.theinquirer.net/default.aspx?article=33512
"Dell delays miff customers
Revolt simmers
By Nick Farrell: Monday 07 August 2006, 06:03
RUMOURS that Dell is postponing its top of the range XPS 700 model to October is starting to get its customers fuming.
The XPS 700 has been officially available since last May and there is even an upgraded version featuring Core 2 Duo and Core 2 Extreme options which was unveiled last month. However, actual gear has been thin on the ground and some customers have been waiting for months to get their kit.
TG Daily said that some of the angry punters have been mounting a grass-roots campaign to make Dell come clean about the causes of XPS 700 delays.
Apparently Dell has had a number of technical problems with the model and seen thousands of posts to Dell's customer support forum, many complaining about time and money wasted trying to buy one.
Normally Dell's customer service drones repeat the mantra that there is a lack of available parts, but no-one seems to be enlightened as to when the shortage will be over, if it ever will be."
Woody can’t stop the bleeding and the best is yet to come. Don’t you Intel fanboys get it, yet! Suicide is your only option.
it is expected for intel to continue to lose some server market share in Q3, stop losing or gain some it in Q4, and gain back a bit more in Q1. AMD has set its foot firmly in the server space and it is not going to go away even if intel has a better chip. The new Intel chip will need sometime to gain enough momentum.
you might wanna argue that AMD will/might come out with a better chip at Q2'07 ... but trust me, even if AMD does, it will take some time for its new chip to gain enough momentum to take back market share that lost to intel (presumably since Q4'06)
pointer said: "Please do not shoot from the air. here is the link for you. the E6400 beat X24600+ almost across the borad and quite often beating the FX62 as well!"
No, I did not shoot from the air.
The review you quoted is simply a bad one. It only benchmarked gaming and media encoding. We knew Core 2 Duo's SSE2 implementation had an advantage, and most gamers agree that MSI motherboard (used for X2) lagged Asus (where a ~$240 high-end is used) for about 3%.
Previously AnandTech did a better job, but even that favors the Intel platform. Even so, when you interpolate E6400 1:2 beetween E6300 and E6600 (even that favors E6400, since it has the same 2MB cache as E6300, while E6600 has 4MB), E6400 is slightly slower than X2 4600+ across a wide range of apps, not just games and DivX.
Intel Centrino notebook = $1000.00
Simulated leather case = $25.00
Fire extinguisher = Priceless
First, FX-62 is priced well below $1k. But that doesn't matter, really, because now X2 4600+ beats E6400, and X2 4200+ beats E6300 in performance/price.
Liar! Read this:
http://www.gamepc.com/labs/view_content.asp?id=c2le&page=13
E6400 outperforms 4600+ and gives FX62 run for its money...
AMD could have released K8L today, but it will wait till the thing is fully tested and yields are mature. Intel rushed ahead, but it needs to burn 3 wafers to make one good chip.
Source please? Or is this purely conjecture? If conjecture, maybe you can do a back of the envelope proof? C'mon, as a graduate student, no dissertation advisor would let such a statement fly without something to back it up. Neither would a manager at any company that is in the least bit data driven.
You claim to have a PhD, but have in no way demonstrated the sort of logical, data-driven thought processes that allow one to not only survive, but thrive in graduate school. So step up to the plate, and start walking all of the "crap-heads", "fanbois", and "Intelers" through the proof, because this top 10 engineering school PhD is calling bullshit without something to backup the statement. I have seen nothing in any of your posts that lead me to believe you have anything more than a rudimentary understanding of semiconductor process engineering and yield modeling.
-Someone in the yield business, not working for Intel
"So a few months ago when Conroe was not yet out, did you also say that we shouldn't wait for Intel's new architecture? Or is it only AMD which should be seen in that light?"
If it was a few months ago, I would've went 939 if I needed too:P
Intel has been posting benchmarks everywhere for people to look forward to, AMD hasn't give us much.
"You just stupid? Idiot? Dipshit? Fuckhead? or just a dumb AMD fanboy. That last one is the lowest namecalling LOL.."
Thanks for proving my point. Watch in amazement as your IQ drops another hundred or more points and the collective IQ here drops another hundred-thousand or more. Good job, another AOL chatroom already in the works here, thanks.
"You figured it out. There is nothing but namecalling here!
Sharikou is the king of name calling."
It is written: "He who is without sin, cast the first stone" Get the plank out of your own eye first before you go knocking the speck in anyone else's eye. There's a little bit of bible wisdom for you there, enjoy.
"Look at his stupid headlines."
They're only stupid to those who don't agree with them, period. I.E. YOU. You can agree to disagree and try to provide counter-evidence, that will get you a whole lot farther in the long run than simply dismissing his comments with your above comment there.
"If he actually digested the data and saw both sides maybe there'd be less name calling."
Geeeeee... Perhaps he has seen the data on both sides? Perhaps you haven't? Who knows? It's apparanet most Intel fanatics here couldn't care less anyway as anything he writes, accurate or not is "EVIL AND FULL OF BS". So what does it matter? It's Sharikou's blog for pete's sake, it's also pretty much nothing but his opinions! So you don't agree with them? Get over it and yourself so you'll live alot longer without a heart attack. You can thank me later.
"Frankly I don't feel any need to raise above the level of intelligence that sharkiou and shit heads like you show."
Ahhh, the IQ isssss slippppping...
Seriously, with a attitude like that my eyes glaze over and instantly my BS controller takes over and disreguards anything else of the post. I'm sure many others feel the same way. The only reason I bother to respond to your post is so that maybe, JUST MAYBE some common sense will somehow seep into some ignorant soul. But perhaps I ask too much of our sad, declining society... So be it.
"I can type and call names as well as you folks and use logic as well as you fuckhead too! Maybe when we see some of Sharikou's IQ that earned him that PhD I might bother bring more interesting tone."
Yes, with all new colorful expletives! Yea, you look real smart and sophistcated when you do that. *cough* So far I find Sharikou's posts far more thought out and farrrrr more colorful than yours. So in short: Sharikou's colorful comments > your colorful comments.
"You get what you sow you fuckhead. Is it clear enough?"
Hosea 8:1-14 - "They Sow the Wind, and Reap the Whirlwind" You store up wrath against you with your own vile words of deceit and malice, your hate breeds nothing but more hate. Is that crystal clear for you?
@azary omega:
Dude, are you simply too lame to change the page number in the link?
Obviously you are, coz otherwise you would have seen a 2.0 GHz lowend Woody eat the 2.6 GHz highend Opteron for breakfast.
Hint: previous page.
I just hate how people attack Sharikou's postings, yet offer no substantial insight to show a valid and well thought out point of view.
Sigh. Love the "I know what you are, but what am I response." I'll walk you through the exercise, since you didn't bother to offer any substance in your response, and Sharikou hasn't gotten around to an answer yet (I'll give him the benefit of the doubt for the moment."
Sharikou's claim as you will recall, was that "Intel rushed ahead, but it needs to burn 3 wafers to make one good chip". My response was "bullshit, show some proof, either factual or back of the envelope. Here is a back of the envelope to DISPROVE the statement.
Fact: Intel has made public statements claiming they will ship 1 million Conroe/Woodcrest/Meroms in the first 7 weeks of shipping. Public statement, subject to lawsuits by the numerous shareholder lawyers if it doesn't pan out. Sharikou himself posted <1.5M shipping die in the first quarter.
That means Intel needs to be producing either 1M/7 or 1.5M/13 die/week, or ~143K or ~115K die/week. According to Sharikou, that means Intel is devoting between 345K and 429K WAFERS/week to producing Conroes. I knew Intel was big, but last I checked on this blog, there are only 2 65nm fabs at Intel. Neither are >150K wafer start/week to my knowledge, but I would be happily proved wrong. If we assume Intel spent an additional 10 weeks of production building inventory in the hopes that yields would improve, wafer capacity required at Sharikou's postulated yield would still be a best case 1.5M die/week * 3 wafers/die / 23 weeks= 195K wafers /week. All of this while still shipping larger Preslers and smaller Yonahs on the same process with the same 2 fabs.
Conclusion: The claim doesn't hold up. I'd like someone to come up with a proof otherwise.
Maybe you can try the die size approach. Conroe die size is 135mm^2 (try Google, Sharikou's estimate at 155mm^2 is high). A 300mm wafer has an area of 70685mm^2 which yields a theoretical maximum of 523 die/wafer. Excluding incomplete edge die (a nominal 10% of the wafer area), let us assume there to be 471 usable die/wafer. Do you seriously expect anyone to believe, without any evidence to the contrary, that a company, regardless of who they are, would ship product that was yielding 1 die per 1413 manufactured? 0.071% yield is not even a 6-sigma outlier.
Like I said before, let's separate the inflammatory hyperbole from the facts. I stand by original statement. Is that logical and data-driven enough?
"How is your post logical and data-driven?
"this top 10 engineering school PhD" - is pretty vague and does not afford you any credentials.
How do you not have a rudimentary understanding of semiconductor process engineering and yield modeling? I would love to hear a logical and data driven perspective from you on how the statement "Intel rushed ahead, but it needs to burn 3 wafers to make one good chip" is not a factual statement. I am not saying that to attack you. I honestly would like to explore that topic. I just hate how people attack Sharikou's postings, yet offer no substantial insight to show a valid and well thought out point of view. Some Intel supporters do pose some interesting viewpoints and topics for suggestion, but then someone makes a vague attack void of any logic or commonsense."
As we know from real world experience, it is impossible to prove a negative.
I can say "Nyx has weapons of mass destruction and unless Nyx can prove that he doesn't have them, we have to kill Nyx."
And basically, Nyx, you are screwed.
However, asking Sharikou to back his positive statements (i.e. "Intel burns three wafers to make one good chip") is reasonable. Where are the facts that support this statement?
Which is all to say, Nyx, is that either you do not understand logic or you are disingenuously attacking the people who question Sharikou's statements and are nothing more than a sycophantic shill for Sharkie.
Pretty funny. I'm really enjoying watching him descend into insanity. When AMD stock hits 15 or so I'll be back to laugh more.
AMD stock (shows 5 day graph)
intel stock (shows 5 day graph)
You're laughable. Here's one I like better:
AMD
INTC
AMD is only hanging in there and slowly rising because nobody knows the pain they're in for in Q4. They will hit 15 by Dec.
"The claim doesn't hold up. I'd like someone to come up with a proof otherwise."
Maybe he was saying burning 3 wafers to get on X6800? Or maybe it's just an expression, showing how poor the yield is. What's the big deal anyway?
That makes me think of Dr. Ruiz's comment on AMD's flash memory business: "it makes me puke to lose $39 million." Did he actually puke? Maybe you can mathematically prove that he wouldn't have puked that day or week... ;-)
"Liar! Read this:
http://www.gamepc.com/labs/view_content.asp?id=c2le&page=13
E6400 outperforms 4600+ and gives FX62 run for its money..."
Go ask them why did they use high latency settings 2T timing with their memory - the high latency benefits Core 2 Duo large cache but not Athlon 64.
As I said, AnandTech previously did a better job comparing Core 2 Duo with Athlon 64 X2; although it also favored Intel a bit, it showed X2 4600+ slightly outperforms E6400 in more types of applications.
BTW, see here for a list of reviewers' cheats that make Core 2 Duo look better than they are.
Money (ie. Intel's marketing) talks, but we as end users are not always the benefitted.
“Pretty funny. I'm really enjoying watching him descend into insanity. When AMD stock hits 15 or so I'll be back to laugh more”
How about Intel $9.00 per share, you brain dead Intel moron.
Intel Headed for $9 per Share! (By Tony Sagami)
http://www.moneyandmarkets.com/press.asp?rls_id=371&cat_id=6
lol...15 bux for AMD or INTC is different.
right now at INTC 17.00+, intel's market capital is 100Billion+, and AMD at 20.00 means its market cap is < 10Billion.
so INTC = 10 AMD right now. end of discussion.
Edward ... Previously AnandTech did a better job, but even that favors the Intel platform. Even so, when you interpolate E6400 1:2 beetween E6300 and E6600 (even that favors E6400, since it has the same 2MB cache as E6300, while E6600 has 4MB), E6400 is slightly slower than X2 4600+ across a wide range of apps, not just games and DivX.
you want anandtech, i give you anandtech. Intel Core 2 Duo E6300 & E6400
It is clearly that the E6400 frag 4600+ in performance and also performace per value. Why so doggy going to do the interpolation while there are data available.
Look at the 1 year stock traces, neither company is in very good shape based on that alone. It is entirely plausible that Intel will drop below $15 before Core 2 Duo starts to turn their frowns upside-down.
Sharikou, I'm still waiting for your analysis or data to support your wild claim. Or you going to hide behind Edward's claim of "What's the big deal?"
The big deal is that you don't get to make wild ass claims, and then call out everyone else in the world for the same behavior. I guess you can, since it is your blog, but hey, it's your credibility as a useful news source.
Act like a Ph.D., would you? Logical thought processes and proofs, citations of data sources. I know that this is the Journal of AMD Can Do No Wrong, but seriously, would it be so hard to actually promote some discussion based on reality instead of hyperbole?
Nyx called me out, I delivered. Haven't been given the honor of a response by you yet. Or does this request just relegate me to the heap of crapheads?
"It is clearly that the E6400 frag 4600+ in performance and also performace per value. Why so doggy going to do the interpolation while there are data available."
I don't know how AnandTech did it, but it must've been a great effort. The E6300 in the latter actually outperforms the E6300 in the pervious in every test, while X6800/E6700/E6600 and all Athlon64 X2's stayed exactly the same.
Frankly, I don't know that can be called trustworthy. In any rate, when AnandTech reviews the particular product (e.g., E6400), it has the particular agenda to meet with. It's never more reliable (ironically) than those 'side-effect' benchmarks we would otherwise see.
(See how poor Pentium 965 are portrayed in these tests... would this happen in a review of Pentium 965?)
Edward said...
"I don't know how AnandTech did it, but it must've been a great effort. The E6300 in the latter actually outperforms the E6300 in the pervious in every test, while X6800/E6700/E6600 and all Athlon64 X2's stayed exactly the same."
Hey Edward, I went and looked at the test, and the only conclusion I came up with is that he didn't re-run all the test, just those of the E6300 and E6400.
The difference is coming from using an ASUS P5W DH Deluxe (LGA-775) in the new test vs. the Intel D975XBX (LGA-775) in the previous test.
I think the test were ok, but take a look at the improvements, very subtle, nothing dramatic.
It could very well be the different motherboard.
Thanks, and hope this helps.
E6400 is better than 4600+ in performance, and performance per value
> http://www.gamepc.com/labs/view_content.asp?id=c2le&page=13
edward: nah ... i don't trust gamepc
>> http://www.firingsquad.com/hardware/intel_core_2_duo_e6400_review/
edward .. nah, anandtech did a better job
>>> http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=2802&p=4
edward ... i don't trust anandtech either
here is another link for you
>>>> http://www.trustedreviews.com/article.aspx?page=7473&head=0
and here is the reply i predicted from you
edward: nah, this is un-trustedreviews ....
"so INTC = 10 AMD right now. end of discussion.”
The end of your discussion, but not the end of story. Intel is way over priced for a company that is shrinking in market share for several years and profits waning.
The stock market rewards companies that are growing. Example, AMD
"and here is the reply i predicted from you
edward: nah, this is un-trustedreviews ...."
You are actually right. Apparently you couldn't understand that reason that these reviews are not trustworthy.
GamePC used high-latency memory, and everyone knows it's a bad review for that particular reason.
AnandTech's first and second reviews are NOT consistent to each other. In particular, in the first review, where the main star was E6700/X6800, E6300 performed rather poorly compared to its second review, where is main role is E6300 & E6400.
The 'TrustedReviews' is complete junk, because 1) no hardware spec or detail was revealed, 2) no standard software or its detail was used or revealed, and 3) the results are not consistent to those of AnandTech and GamePC (of course since they seem to used non-standard test softwares).
Why don't you go ask GamePC its reason for using high-latency memory, and ask AnandTech its inconsistency of E6300 performance, and ask TrustedReivews to reveal its test HW & SW details? Be sure that if they all come back with reason answers, and they can finally agree with each other, then I'll be happily convinced. ;-)
Conclusion: if you quote 100 bad reviews, you get 100 bad results, not any better.
"The difference is coming from using an ASUS P5W DH Deluxe (LGA-775) in the new test vs. the Intel D975XBX (LGA-775) in the previous test."
Well... I didn't compare them in much detail, but since you mentioned and I took a brief look back, it seems like it.
That could be out of convenience or laziness, but that's bad thing to do anyway. Plus the fact that it is comparing a engineering sample AMD motherboard w/ a high-end Intel one, only because it wanted to use Crossfire... how can anyone doing such comparison convince others that he doesn't have any hidden agenda behind it?
Conclusion: if you quote 100 bad reviews, you get 100 bad results, not any better.
and you happily go and quote a non directly related Anandtech review and do intraplolation and judge from there and i should trust you? wow! you are too much into sharikou blog, dude! you catched a choose-n-pick-AMD-favoured decease.
since you voided all the site references that i gave and the one you gave (anandtech) ... i still proved my point that you gave the comparison saying 4600+ beat E6400 (which in reality is not true) by shooting from the air, which is worse than the review sites that you claim to be biased (at least they spent effort do all the biased review that you claimed)
AnandTech's first and second reviews are NOT consistent to each other. In particular, in the first review, where the main star was E6700/X6800, E6300 performed rather poorly compared to its second review, where is main role is E6300 & E6400.
And here is the paragraph quoted for you which i assume that you 'missed' it (intentionally or unitentionally)
The E6300 numbers in this review are a bit higher than in our last review because we are using a B1 stepping E6300, compared to the A1 stepping E6300 used in our previous article. The A1 CPU we used in the last article was a pre-production chip, while the B1 CPUs we're using here today are production CPUs that offer slightly better performance in some cases. All other Core 2 and Core 2 Extreme CPUs in this article are all B1 or later.
Conclusion: if you quote 100 bad reviews, you get 100 bad results, not any better.
Alternative conclusion: If there are 100 reviews out "in the wild" that you disagree with the test setup, the majority of the public is seeing 100 reviews that are telling them they should buy the "other chip".
You may not like the test methodology, but the overwhelming press conclusion has been that Conroe is the current performance, performance/watt, and performance/price leader. Like it not, the vast majority of the buying public is making their decisions based on these reviews. High end, corporate, and technical buyers tend to have their own test suites and benchmark them before making a purchasing decision.
And no, you can't blame Intel for this one, as AMD does the same thing when they can get away with it. Welcome to Marketing 101!
"Conroe is the current performance, performance/watt, and performance/price leader."
Conroe's leader in -
1) performance, certainly;
2) performance/watt, maybe;
3) performance/price, doubtful (do factor in motherboard & upgradability)
"And no, you can't blame Intel for this one, as AMD does the same thing when they can get away with it. Welcome to Marketing 101!"
To be blunt, such marketing 101 is what I call bullshit 101. This type of lesson 101 is effective only because idiots are buying. Yes, you're saying that most buyers are stupid, and that I agree.
What I also agree w/ you is that there are a (much smaller) number of websites out there benchmarketing in favor of AMD. Those are BS, too. But they (those websites) probably feel justified to do so by the vast presence of other Intel-pumping sites. This is a vicious cycle that stupify consumers toward the destruction of innovation of this industry (look at how rediculous ViiV or Live are at this moment... you got a few fixed advertising channels with low quality that cost $1k + subscription fee?).
I'd again recommend a good article on Conroe's cheating tips used by many reviewers (probably with some hidden agenda of theirs). It's a bit long, but people who want to get truth (instead of 'marketing 101') and do meaningful processor arch discussion really need to be educated.
"The A1 CPU we used in the last article was a pre-production chip, while the B1 CPUs we're using here today are production CPUs that offer slightly better performance in some cases."
No I didn't read that part (I said before that I didn't read them in detail, though you seem to - intentionally or unintentionally - missed my comments). But what AnandTech said actually makes things worse.
It is simply adding yet another variable to the tests - different MB (and probably memory settings), differnet software versions (some of them), and now different CPU stepping.
Does AnandTech imply that the different MBs and all others having no effect on performance? How does it know, given other varying parameters, that stepping B1 didn't actually reduce performance compared to stepping A1 (and the performance loss was picked up by other variables), where a reliability bug was fixed instead?
A bad review/comparison is a bad review/comparison, no matter how you sugar-coat on it. Now, as I said, maybe it's just AnandTech being lazy not careful; maybe it would show the same results have it used the same quality of MBs and all (for example, a good SLI for both AMD and Intel). But until then, it's conflicting results simply do noto convince.
"since you voided all the site references that i gave and the one you gave (anandtech) ... i still proved my point that you gave the comparison saying 4600+ beat E6400 (which in reality is not true)"
I based my initial claim on AnandTech's first review. As I said in my first comment, even that review was favoring Conroe.
If you think that's air because your second AnandTech review was conflicting and IMO discredited, then I was probably shooting from the air.
Let's just say the initial AnandTech review I quoted was misleading, because the E6300 was old and had poorer performance. Let's also assume, all reality in your favor, that E6400 outperforms X2 4600+ by 5% in average. Please go to say www.pricewatch.com and tell me the price difference of CPU+MB combo for E6400 and X2 4600+. No kidding! Is that really... more than 20%??
What I also agree w/ you is that there are a (much smaller) number of websites out there benchmarketing in favor of AMD. Those are BS, too. But they (those websites) probably feel justified to do so by the vast presence of other Intel-pumping sites.
so, at least you can prove your claim with these AMD sites right? give us the link then. if not, what makes you if not shooting from the air to say that 4600+ is better than E6400 in perf per value?
while you gave all sort of reasons that other review should voided or nt trusted, do you realized that you were doing something worse?
Edward said...
"I'd again recommend a good article on Conroe's cheating tips used by many reviewers (probably with some hidden agenda of theirs)."
WOW!!!
Edward this is a conspiracy theory, plain and simple. They do not like the fact that C2D is beating K8 and have reduced themselves to bashing most review sites.
I say this because of the source, AMDZone, I read alot of the responses and almost everyone of them were pro AMD anti Intel.
This link has the makings of a conspiracy theory written all over it, and for you or anybody to trully believe all or any of it is ridiculous.
Lets look at the big picture...
"... Typical cheats include not testing for the effect of cache,"
Part of the architecture, moving on...
"testing without showing raw data,"
Conspiracy theory, or can you point me to a review where they show the raw data?
"failing to upgrade earlier results,"
This I agree on completely, but not retesting every benchmark, just those that are relevant and pertaining to the current test.
"leaving out comparison data,"
This I do not remember on either of the reviews he talks about.
"OC against stock,"
This could be taken either way, I think its to show the capabilities of C2D, they could have set it up differently, maybe a seperate review.
"low memory timing, and slanting the tests by price or clock."
Almost all the test I looked at had the best Corsair memory in them, and the price and the price per clock/performance per clock comparisons are established by the results.
"Another subtle cheat occurs when C2D is only compared with P4 because the gains are larger."
How many reviews have only shown it against its previous generation?
And if you were to find the articles they are probably saying something to the effect of "performance over the previous generations"...
Almost all of his staements are out of context and only stated to flame Intel.
The article is a complete waste of time.
Please go to say www.pricewatch.com and tell me the price difference of CPU+MB combo for E6400 and X2 4600+.
wow, you are giving me a site that offers 5 intel motherboards combo (which ranged from 393 to 533) and 59 AMD mothrboards combo(which range from 309 to 788). and then you pick the lowest one to compare without even loking at the motherboard features.
be real dude. i do not think that you would agree if i compare the "top notch" (as of the site) motherboard combo 533 vs 788 without looking at the motherboard features right?
is admitting your claim on 4600+ beating E6400 for the perf over value is false, a difficult thing to do?
Anyway, one credit for you here is that you are one of the few here that try reasoning, without easily calling others as intel fanboy, moron, low IQ, when seems to be losing out in argument. And to me, you seems to have some technical background too.
"wow, you are giving me a site that offers 5 intel motherboards combo (which ranged from 393 to 533) and 59 AMD mothrboards combo(which range from 309 to 788). and then you pick the lowest one to compare without even loking at the motherboard features."
IIRC, I said in my first (or close to) comment that 1) to compare the prices you have to factor in the chipset, i.e., memory controller; 2) to compare performance # of app types is more important; 3) AMD X2 has betteer upgradability (this might be a bit overclaim since a brief research showed that some Conroe MB can upgrade to Kentsfield, too).
That said, back to your point above: how do you materialize a better performance/price value while you cannot buy a combo with low price tag?
Beside, the reviews you quoted ARE comparing the top-notch Intel MB to a immature AMD MB to say the least; the memory timings are too slow, the results are not consistent... blah blah blah. These sites then use only CPU price to show E6400's cost effectiveness. I wouldn't say they were trustworthy; I only assumed they were for the argument.
"so, at least you can prove your claim with these AMD sites right?"
I don't know how you come up with this from my comments. My claim was there are sites benchmarketing in favor of AMD. Isn't that plain and simple enough?
"give us the link then. if not, what makes you if not shooting from the air to say that 4600+ is better than E6400 in perf per value?"
1) E6400's performance superiority over X2 4600+ is biased (MB, memory timing) toward Intel and inconsistent in all 3 reviews you quoted.
2) E6400 CPU+MB is 25% more expensive than X2 4600+
3) If you want to have upgradability with E6400, prepare to pay more.
These aside, I was shooting from the air.
http://blogs.sun.com/roller/page/HPC?entry=new_sun_x64_world_record
This will shut everybody up about woodmistake. Opteron rules.
Post a Comment
<< Home