finally upgrade time....

[Crashman]

This is your desparate attempt to show I'm somehow prejudiced against THG, when I've pointed out similar problems at other sites.

<font color=blue>Only a place as big as the internet could be home to a hero as big as Crashman!</font color=blue>
<font color=red>Only a place as big as the internet could be home to an ego as large as Crashman's!</font color=red>

 

[Crashman]

Easy, I pulled it out of my ass. I had to take a crap real bad after the garbage you've fed me. The "formulas" I refer to are tables. They are based on human factors. People decided on the model numbers, not machines.

The "several formulas" I refer to are several tables that try to compensate for various factors such as core type and clock rate. I already explained that. The XP rating system isn't computer generated, it's man made. The little program tries to take all those factors into consideration.

Programing should be that complicated. XP1500 plus as a base, 66MHz per 100 XP numbers, add 300 for Barton core. There's your basic "formula". How do you determine an XP2400+ rating for an underclocked XP2500+? Look at the speed based on the original system and add 300 points.

And that original post looks great to me, what's wrong with it? The article you linked to said they were trying to base their real numbers on the Northwood which hadn't been released yet. That would imply they were guessing. But that has no relavence to the Thunderbird on which AMD CLAIMED FALSELY the XP rating system was based on.

Intel makes false claims too. In fact they claimed on national TV that the Celeron would make your internet faster. So now that I've mentioned both companies making false claims, you still claim I'm biased. But I've mentioned other problems with Intel in the past, you simply ignored that. And in the end it proves you're biased. Isn't this a nice world we live in?

<font color=blue>Only a place as big as the internet could be home to a hero as big as Crashman!</font color=blue>
<font color=red>Only a place as big as the internet could be home to an ego as large as Crashman's!</font color=red>

 

[darko21]

Re: BIOS get's it's XP number from a table. AMD tells companies what speeds and cores represent what model numbers, and the companies plug that value in.

And that has to do with what? who cares how they get it in.


Re: I'm telling you, it's all smoke and mirrors, based on estimates made by people, not machines. Most of the estimates are good...the early ones were low, the last ones were high, and the ones in the middle were just about right.

You are all smoke and mirrors. It's based on a benchmarck formula created by people. to compare cpu's relative performance. You know this... I fully explained it to you in the previous <A HREF="http://forumz.tomshardware.com/hardware/modules.php?name=Forums&file=viewtopic&p=174908#174908" target="_new"> thread </A> so the xp rating formula was more or less relivant but the p4 improved dramaticaly with extra cach and quad pumped fsb. I did thoughly explain that to you why repeat it now.

Re: I already told you that I build mostly AMD systems for my clients. You said it was irrelavent. Then you say I hate AMD. You make no sense. Which is how you prove to everyone else that in spite of your good use of words, you're still trolling.


I did not know that. sounds like your clients are smarter than you when it comes to value. I only ever remember you recommending axp in the last few months. and I don't troll you called me a liar based on nothing.... Don't make that mistake again.


Re: This is your desparate attempt to show I'm somehow prejudiced against THG, when I've pointed out similar problems at other sites.

Yeah I'm desperate..! You calling me a liar based on nothing was desperate.


as to the last post you just made... looks like you have been busy google searching trying to make it appear you know what you are talking about... NO.. yeah I think so.

You fool


If I glanced at a spilt box of tooth picks on the floor, could I tell you how many are in the pile. Not a chance, But then again I don't have to buy my underware at Kmart.

 

[darko21]

Re: Programing should be that complicated. XP1500 plus as a base, 66MHz per 100 XP numbers, add 300 for Barton core. There's your basic "formula". How do you determine an XP2400+ rating for an underclocked XP2500+? Look at the speed based on the original system and add 300 points.

its how the bechmarks favor or disfavor the extra cache. You want to explain to your children why an xp2500 barton smokes a thoughbred 2600 in these benchies?

<A HREF="http://www.anandtech.com/cpu/showdoc.html?i=1927&p=4" target="_new"> Business Winstone 2004 </A>


<A HREF="http://www.anandtech.com/cpu/showdoc.html?i=1927&p=10" target="_new"> C & C Generals: Zero Hour Performance </A>

If I glanced at a spilt box of tooth picks on the floor, could I tell you how many are in the pile. Not a chance, But then again I don't have to buy my underware at Kmart.

 

[darko21]

Re: But that has no relavence to the Thunderbird on which AMD CLAIMED FALSELY the XP rating system was based on.

The xprating "formula" was based of the tbird. I think I have thoughly explained this to you like 5 times now! how many more times to to drill it into your pea sized brain?

Look at it this way idiot. If amd did not exist and intel had the p3 but for some wacked out retarded reason they wanted to introduce a low ipc (with no competion) high MHz cpu. But said to themselves how will we ever let the public understand why we charge 50% more for a p3 @ 1.4 over a p4 @ 1.4 giz...... I know lets introduce a benchmark formula so idiots are not confused by the MHz myth.... Then the media say what the heck you call this this a 1700+ but it only runs @ 1.4 MHz how on earth can you justify that. AHHH says intel you are nothing but uninformed folish media. Maybe i am foolish and uninformed but how on earth did you ever get 1700+ with a 1.4 giz cpu.

Well uninformed media we took a (((( P3 )))) ran a bunch of bechies to come up with a formula to compare.

Yes but intel won't stupid fools think that a p3xp1600+ should be twice as fast as a p3 at 800.

Yes media there may be the odd retard around that might think like that but what rating system could be perfect. We are try to show the public what they are getting performance wise.

If I glanced at a spilt box of tooth picks on the floor, could I tell you how many are in the pile. Not a chance, But then again I don't have to buy my underware at Kmart.

 

[dhlucke]

anybody want a peanut?

<font color=red>___________</font color=red>
<b><A HREF="http://www.subservientchicken.com/" target="_new">Get chicken the way you like it!</A></b>

 

[P4Man]

>Oh, and you can lie by mistake.

LOL! I'm not a native English speaker, so lets check the <A HREF="http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=lie" target="_new"> dictionary </A>
lie² n.
* A false statement <b>deliberately</b> presented as being true; a falsehood.
* Something <b>meant </b> to deceive or give a wrong impression.

Well.. I guess by your own definition of a "lie", <b>you just lied yourselve..</b> ! "by mistake" of course. Liar. Oh, the irony.

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

 

[Crashman]

Oh, that's rich, the forums biggest idiot telling almighty Crashman that he's schooling him. If you'd have taken less time to make accusations and more time to ask the right questions you'd have gotten this information from the outset. The XP rating system never was accurate in regards to the P4, it was underating performance as compared to the P4 at the beginning, and slowely got closer and closer to P4 performance near the middle, because the scale was wrong. The XP1600+ didn't get it's name because it was 100 P4 MHz faster than the XP1500+, it got it's name because it was 66MHz faster than the 1500+. The 1700+ didn't get it's name from testing either, it got it's name purely on the bases that it was 66MHz faster than the 1600+. Same deal on the 1800+. And the little piece of software that you can download tries to equate what you have with those numbers.

The problem is, the 1500+ was 1333MHz. That's 88%. That means for the scale to be even, AMD would have had to make the 1600+ 88MHz faster. And the 1700+ 88MHz faster yet. As opposed to 66MHz faster. That's why the P4's caught up, the scale was not accurate.

It's like if I told you that in order to convert celsius to farenheit you should multiply by 2 and add 30. That would actually appear to be fairly accurate at some temperatures, but not at others. Instead of calling it the Crashman Formula, I would rather tell people the more scientifically accepted method, multiply by 9/5 and add 32. That appears to be accurate at MOST temperatures, instead of just a few.

And you say I hate AMD because they told a lie. Because you say it's not a lie when they tell you the scale is based on the T-Bird...when it's really based on the P4. I just showed you the math, but if you need more schooling, let me know.

<font color=blue>Only a place as big as the internet could be home to a hero as big as Crashman!</font color=blue>
<font color=red>Only a place as big as the internet could be home to an ego as large as Crashman's!</font color=red>

 

[Crashman]

Weeeee, it must be recess, let's play the benchmark game! You show me benchmarks that favor your lopsided point of view, I'll show you benchmarks that show you mine, and we can continue to argue while nobody sees the overall picture. Sorry to spoil your fun, but this teacher needs to grade papers now.

<font color=blue>Only a place as big as the internet could be home to a hero as big as Crashman!</font color=blue>
<font color=red>Only a place as big as the internet could be home to an ego as large as Crashman's!</font color=red>

 

[Crashman]

Overclock an unlocked T-Bird 1400 to 1600MHz using multipliers only and prove to me the 1600+ is just as fast. Popular cores for that include AXIA, AVIA...and a newer one I can't remember now. I don't care how many times you try to explain a myth, it's still just a myth. Kind of like the myth that a P4 1500 was faster than a PIII 1400, but not as bad.

<font color=blue>Only a place as big as the internet could be home to a hero as big as Crashman!</font color=blue>
<font color=red>Only a place as big as the internet could be home to an ego as large as Crashman's!</font color=red>

 

[Crashman]

Thanks for the dictionary reference

<font color=blue>Only a place as big as the internet could be home to a hero as big as Crashman!</font color=blue>
<font color=red>Only a place as big as the internet could be home to an ego as large as Crashman's!</font color=red>

 

[darko21]

Re: Oh, that's rich, the forums biggest idiot telling almighty Crashman that he's schooling him.

and idiot statments like that speak volums about your character.. ALMIGHTY CRASHMAN? what a joke!

Re: If you'd have taken less time to make accusations and more time to ask the right questions you'd have gotten this information from the outset.

You almighty crash called me a liar based on nothing which is why I got defensive!

Re: The XP rating system never was accurate in regards to the P4

It was not perfect but a valid atempt. AMD did set it up humbly to compare because the knew northwood would improve. Thus xp 1800+ beat p4@ 2000 MHz bet you did not call amd liars then..

Re: it was underating performance as compared to the P4 at the beginning

Yes I have fully expilained this to you in the past in this <A HREF="http://forumz.tomshardware.com/hardware/modules.php?name=Forums&file=viewtopic&p=174908#174908" target="_new"> thread </A>

Re: and slowely got closer and closer to P4 performance near the middle

Yes I have fully expilained this to you in the past in this <A HREF="http://forumz.tomshardware.com/hardware/modules.php?name=Forums&file=viewtopic&p=174908#174908" target="_new"> thread </A>

Re: because the scale was wrong.

What are you talking about? idiot.

Re: The XP1600+ didn't get it's name because it was 100 P4 MHz faster than the XP1500+, it got it's name because it was 66MHz faster than the 1500+.

No almighty retard.. here is why its a formula.. AMD's new model rating is based on 14 benchmarks that represent 34 applications of the three fields 'visual computing', 'gaming' and 'office productivity' quite feeding your children BS

Re: The 1700+ didn't get it's name from testing either, it got it's name purely on the bases that it was 66MHz faster than the 1600+.

No almighty retard.. here is why its a formula.. AMD's new model rating is based on 14 benchmarks that represent 34 applications of the three fields 'visual computing', 'gaming' and 'office productivity' quite feeding your children BS... There is room for error thus the plus in the rating but it's always faster than previous #s or p4a b c or certinaly p3 to p4

Re: Same deal on the 1800+. And the little piece of software that you can download tries to equate what you have with those numbers.

No almighty retard.. here is why its a formula.. AMD's new model rating is based on 14 benchmarks that represent 34 applications of the three fields 'visual computing', 'gaming' and 'office productivity' quite feeding your children BS...

Re: The problem is, the 1500+ was 1333MHz. That's 88%. That means for the scale to be even, AMD would have had to make the 1600+ 88MHz faster.


Are you really that stupid? or are you just trying to make me feel sorry for you..


Re: And the 1700+ 88MHz faster yet. As opposed to 66MHz faster. That's why the P4's caught up, the scale was not accurate.

You stupid almighty retard amd knew the northwood would improve the formula was generous to compensate for the expected improvment with the "future northwood. but the later p4c improved that much again the formula could not then change unless you called it something else like a64. I have explained this to you over and over what the ***** is your major malfunction?


Re: It's like if I told you that in order to convert celsius to farenheit you should multiply by 2 and add 30. That would actually appear to be fairly accurate at some temperatures, but not at others. Instead of calling it the Crashman Formula, I would rather tell people the more scientifically accepted method, multiply by 9/5 and add 32. That appears to be accurate at MOST temperatures, instead of just a few.


No almighty retard you are simply a confused idiot with a big ego... the xprating formula is based on 14 benchmarks that represent 34 applications of the three fields 'visual computing', 'gaming' and 'office productivity maybe they put a mathmatical equation to it for future cpu's but it beats the hell out what intel was offering nothing but confusion with high misleading MHz.


Re: And you say I hate AMD because they told a lie.

I dont know why you almighty retard hate amd but they never lied it would seem only you did.


Re: Because you say it's not a lie when they tell you the scale is based on the T-Bird...when it's really based on the P4.

No almighty retard, it was just like amd said based on the tbird to compare to the p4 of the day! get that though your pea sized brain.


Re: I just showed you the math, but if you need more schooling, let me know.


You just showed all that you are a retard. including all your children.


If I glanced at a spilt box of tooth picks on the floor, could I tell you how many are in the pile. Not a chance, But then again I don't have to buy my underware at Kmart.

 

[darko21]

Re: Weeeee, it must be recess, let's play the benchmark game! You show me benchmarks that favor your lopsided point of view, I'll show you benchmarks that show you mine, and we can continue to argue while nobody sees the overall picture. Sorry to spoil your fun, but this teacher needs to grade papers now.

what kind of childish drivil is that? LOOSER


If I glanced at a spilt box of tooth picks on the floor, could I tell you how many are in the pile. Not a chance, But then again I don't have to buy my underware at Kmart.

 

[darko21]

Overclock an unlocked T-Bird 1400 to 1600MHz using multipliers only and prove to me the 1600+ is just as fast. Popular cores for that include AXIA, AVIA...and a newer one I can't remember now. I don't care how many times you try to explain a myth, it's still just a myth. Kind of like the myth that a P4 1500 was faster than a PIII 1400, but not as bad.

I can't believe this stuff is beyond your comprehension.. Frigging amazing how stupid you truly are..

If I glanced at a spilt box of tooth picks on the floor, could I tell you how many are in the pile. Not a chance, But then again I don't have to buy my underware at Kmart.

 

[darko21]

Thanks for the dictionary reference

But you won't admit you were wrong.. will you? Just dance around it as usual crash stuff.

If I glanced at a spilt box of tooth picks on the floor, could I tell you how many are in the pile. Not a chance, But then again I don't have to buy my underware at Kmart.

 

[Crashman]

My major malfunction is that no matter how many times you tell me something that's not true, I won't believe it. Saying it more doesn't make it true. You seem to think that if you try something 100 times and it fails, it just might work on the 101'st attempt.

<font color=blue>Only a place as big as the internet could be home to a hero as big as Crashman!</font color=blue>
<font color=red>Only a place as big as the internet could be home to an ego as large as Crashman's!</font color=red>

 

[Crashman]

You want me to say I understand, ok, I pat you on the back and tell you I understand. But that still doesn't make it true.

<font color=blue>Only a place as big as the internet could be home to a hero as big as Crashman!</font color=blue>
<font color=red>Only a place as big as the internet could be home to an ego as large as Crashman's!</font color=red>

 

[darko21]

Your major malfunction is that you are an almighty retard with a monsterous ego.

Waste of space.

If I glanced at a spilt box of tooth picks on the floor, could I tell you how many are in the pile. Not a chance, But then again I don't have to buy my underware at Kmart.

 

[darko21]

Re: You want me to say I understand, ok, I pat you on the back and tell you I understand. But that still doesn't make it true.


OMG I don't believe it!!! pigs are now flying around my room.

If I glanced at a spilt box of tooth picks on the floor, could I tell you how many are in the pile. Not a chance, But then again I don't have to buy my underware at Kmart.

 

[Crashman]

I still say I was cornered into calling it a lie. Which is like saying I only shot you because you were pointing a gun at me. At that point I only had 2 options: Say it was the truth or a lie. Black or white. Intent be damned. I knew you'd be here though. You know why? Because you're just pathetic enough to look for any way to prove I'm wrong at anything. It's funny, because I've been wrong before, I answered several questions wrong on my Calc final. But then again, I was never that great at Calc. I'm not an expert at everything, just the stuff that makes you angry.

<font color=blue>Only a place as big as the internet could be home to a hero as big as Crashman!</font color=blue>
<font color=red>Only a place as big as the internet could be home to an ego as large as Crashman's!</font color=red>

 

[darko21]

You are half way there crash, Keep going you will feel better.

If I glanced at a spilt box of tooth picks on the floor, could I tell you how many are in the pile. Not a chance, But then again I don't have to buy my underware at Kmart.

 

[Crashman]

Oh, and I would apologize to the author for using such a harsh word concerning his oversight, except that I don't think he's reading this thread. You'd better call him in...or tell your mom, either one will do.

<font color=blue>Only a place as big as the internet could be home to a hero as big as Crashman!</font color=blue>
<font color=red>Only a place as big as the internet could be home to an ego as large as Crashman's!</font color=red>

 

[Crashman]

Why do you keep posting if everything you're saying is a waste of space?

<font color=blue>Only a place as big as the internet could be home to a hero as big as Crashman!</font color=blue>
<font color=red>Only a place as big as the internet could be home to an ego as large as Crashman's!</font color=red>

 

[Crashman]

I'd better rephrase that before you intentionally misinterpret it like you do other things I've said:

I understand you, but that doesn't mean I BELIEVE you.

<font color=blue>Only a place as big as the internet could be home to a hero as big as Crashman!</font color=blue>
<font color=red>Only a place as big as the internet could be home to an ego as large as Crashman's!</font color=red>

 

[darko21]

You know what crash I was about to say somethig nice but I changed my mind.

I am done with this thread. But MAKE NO MISTAKE if you ever call me a liar again I will jump on you like a kangaroo. and when I disagree with you on amd or intel or whatever I expect you to keep an open mind and discuss it as adults. yeah I can be wrong but I will admit it when I am. It's not really hard to do NOBODY knows everything in this industry.

really sad that so many threads have been ruined by our petty aurguing.

If I glanced at a spilt box of tooth picks on the floor, could I tell you how many are in the pile. Not a chance, But then again I don't have to buy my underware at Kmart.