RCaron :
Paul Acorn
You cannot in all seriousness give any award to any Intel CPU considering the security flaws that they all have.
Even with respect to gaming. how can a gaming CPU be good if someone can poke into your computer and at any time to :
1) Slow down your computer
2) Steal your passwords, banking information, and investments
3) Restart your PC while you're playing your game.
Meltdown, with the ME bug can do this. With the AMT bug they can do it from anywhere.
Until Intel fixes these bugs.. which is still in progress, what you are saying is:
Tom's Hardware believes that these two CPU's are the best you can buy for gaming. We don't consider gaming security, computer security, financial security, or any sort of data security or integrity for the operating system.
Is Tom's seriously saying that? Do you believe that these unpatched CPU's are worth more than one that functions properly?
Do you see the ridiculousness that you're writing as an Intel fanboy? This is ludicrous. You dragged Tom's Hardware name through the mud with this nonsense.
Intel and Tom's Hardware ARE NOT ASSOCIATED. Tom's Hardware should have NO interest is covering or propping up Intel sales. If you were truly interested in providing an unbiased review then you'd at the very least not give an award to what can only be called a work in progress with respect to Intel's CPU's.
Intel doesn't have a single properly functioning CPU on the market.. AND YOU GAVE THEM AN AWARD????
YOU GAVE THEM TWO!!!! ???
Seriously, do you know when this article was posted?
Have you gotten over yourself yet?
The exploits were only recently found, so how can an article pre-dating that, garner such extreme ire from you? Maybe you can let us in on the real reasons....
Okay, i think we understand you have an issue with the performance of Intel chips as a result of the flaws, and maybe one or two of your points are relative (i'm still trying to figure out which ones exactly), but I guess, there has been no real testing yet of the pre/post patched systems, although that will happen. Seemingly, it hasn't/doesn't impact gaming too much. The slowdown seems to be mostly related to various drops in performance in certain scenarios, but hasn't been established yet what impact there may be on gaming.
Despite your protestations, I think the results at the time of this article are pretty accurate. You may disagree with that, and that's your choice, but the coverage on Tom's for the Best CPU were accurate at the time.
Regardless, the impact of these exploits are unknown (or at least not fully verified) So you can surmise all you want about what the potential effects of the exploits are, but we just don't know yet, exactly.
The patches are rolling out, so when everything is updated, and can be tested, we will know more. Until then, there is no point in rollicking Tom's for doing their job, as they see it.
It could be argued either way, that there is a bias, or not. I guess Tom's, like every other website covering hardware/tech have to get revenue from somewhere so that they can cover the costs of providing the service. Do they get sponsorship etc, or advertising revenue for promoting new products from the Intel/AMD? Well we don't know, but it's likely. But that's life. Such is the commercial, advertisement filled world we live in. They need to make money somehow to provide the service to us readers.
Stop venting, and just take it easy. Your anger is of no benefit, to you or to Tom's.
Peace out!
