CNET Article

[dunklegend]

<A HREF="http:// www.cnet.com/4520-6022_1-6217968-1.html?tag=nl.e501 " target="_new">http:// www.cnet.com/4520-6022_1-6217968-1.html?tag=nl.e501 </A>

 

[slvr_phoenix]

<A HREF="http://www.cnet.com/4520-6022_1-6217968-1.html?tag=nl.e501" target="_new">Clicky that works.</A>

And highly unsurprising. AMD beats Intel in single-core setups, so why would we expect anything differently in dual-core? (<i>Especially</i> when Intel underclocks their DC offerings while AMD does't.)

<pre><font color=purple><i>Jesters do oft prove prophets.</i> -Regan in
King Lear (Act V, Scene iii) by William Shakespear</font color=purple></pre><p>@ 187K -> 200,000 miles or bust!

 

[P4Man]

And just why would they include a watercooled overclocked P4EE in these charts.. hmmm ? And claim the X2 cant be overclocked ? surely not to mislead anyone just glancing over the charts ? Surely not because intel is an investor in Cnet

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

 

[slvr_phoenix]

Possible. But then based on this review and others, it just looks to me like CNet reviewers are lazy SoBs and do generally bad reviews. Besides, they already say that AMD is thoroughly trouncing Intel. If they were going to mislead anyone because Intel is an investor then you'd think they'd at least find better ways to do it. **ROFL**

<pre><font color=purple><i>Jesters do oft prove prophets.</i> -Regan in
King Lear (Act V, Scene iii) by William Shakespear</font color=purple></pre><p>@ 187K -> 200,000 miles or bust!