. . .
Re: Alder Lake: I'm dying to see those multi-core benchmarks. I too think that they will be <Mod Edit> because of those 'efficient' cores. However, Intel will be telling many reviewers on how to test, to make them look not as bad. I suspect that an Intel 16 core (8 big, 8 small) CPU will be compared to AMDs 8 core one instead of the 16 core. Reviewers will be arguing that it is only fair to compare Intel's 8 big cores to AMDs 8 'big' cores, while in reality this will be comparing apples to oranges. When Alder Lake launches, I expect Intel's marketing and string-pulling departments to be in full BS swing.
. . .
Years ago (at least 15, maybe as much as 20) PC Mag ran an article where they set up a Windoze server and a Linux server, invited in an outside consultants/experts to configure the windoze unit, and ignored the Linux box. Just by allowing one server to be optimized for the hardware the OS was running on gave them an unfair advantage. (While the windoze server won, it was by the margin of error, and the sponsors of the event being able to dictate the parameters). PC Mag, and it's publisher, ZD Net, lost my trust in them - their willingness to be bought and paid for. I tried googling it, can't find the article and backlash over it.
In other posts to these forums I mention how Until likes to use benchmarks when it suites them, claim they are irreverent less than a year later, and when they decide to use them again, cherry pick the ones that makes them look good, ignoring the others.
I can't remember the exact quote, yet essentially, it is politicians are the only ones that can make both sides of their face look good. Seems as if Until has been taking lessons. Remember folks, never accept the blame yourself when there is someone/something else you can blame.
I beg your pardon, I am not out of shape, round is a shape. I just happen to be more in my round shape than you in your square shape.