First REAL Barcelona Benchmarks

Page 4 - Seeking answers? Join the Tom's Hardware community: where nearly two million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar


Why do I need to find it?

You were constantly claiming the benchmarks weren't real, and how they have to be rigged and/or the sites were paid by Intel. Most people here at that time couldn't believe the results either, but those people took the results with a grain of salt. When the CPUs were released to the public and ran like those benchmarks, your tune changed to "limited supply", or "paper launch", cause there was none to get (even though Intel said only the X6800 were available at launch - which they were, and the rest would come in Aug/Sept - which they did). When they became available, you ranted on about how the 4X4 would stop C2D cause it would be a much better platform, and how you were gonna get one. We must've read about your 4X4 build for months, then you changed your tune, cause memory was too expensive, or some other reason.

So, why do I need to find your post again?
 


Can you blame him? Look at these SIMULATED benchmarks from Intel:

intelsimulatedbench1np7.jpg


Have a good look at the last paragraph below, where it says
"Results have been simulated..."

intelsimulatedbench2xp4.jpg
 


It doesn't look to me like Intel was trying to pass this off as any type of reliable benchmark, just "No guarantees but looking good" literature. Read the second frame... they almost flat-out tell you to take it all with a grain of salt and to wait for 3rd party benchmarks before deciding.



 


And what was Intel comparing there? Two of their OWN processors, not a competitor's. BIG DIFFERENCE there, slick.

They are simulating High-k differences, not processors.
Also, AMD SIMULATED results against an actual product. Do you see that on your slide you presented? NOPE.

Also, it's nice that it took AMD a day or two to add that little "simulated" statement on their slides, after people questioned it. Hmm....
 


Just for clarification for all here. BM did exactly as NmDante has said. This is indeed a correct and factual statement.

BM,

The reason you post so sporatically is because you have very little to offer this community. Especially at this time where Benchmarks and data for your very favorite company are ill/missing.

Please understand that BM has and likely will always be an AMD Fan. Notice I did not use the expanded version of that.

The rest of us here will wait patiently (or not:)) for the third party results. If they are good I certainly will look at purchasing a Phenom when they release. If they are not what is expected, I will likely go with Intel. It is really that simple. Although I know it is even more simple for you BM. You will buy an AMD just because and then you will try to justify your purchase or lack there of "as mentioned above".

If these words sound/seem somewhat harsh GOOD. They were meant to be.

To forum newbs who might read this please feel free to review ANY of my posts and you will see that I am about linking to the data as much as possible. All the while encouraging others to make up their own minds based on the facts/data. I even go so far "nearly always" to say "please do not listen to me, do the research from the data provided and make up your own mind".

I posted this way to inform anyone who might not have heard about our forum BM (since he has been mostly absent) so they fully understand where he is coming from when he posts. It is not from a point of view of "your best interest" but a point of view of "AMDs best interest".
 
Parrot,

I fully agree. The above Intel slides hold as much credibility as the AMD slides do (none).

Simulated anything is nice, but having run simulations as a systems architect it is just that, simulated data. You really need a skilled arch to get near the correct results for the deliverable (in all fairness my experience is modeling software results on a specific platform NOT specifially modeling the hardware itself).

So again I will wait for the third party results.
 
Anybody notice that since JumpinJack left BM has been mostly absent?

It seems that BM only kept coming back was to respond to Jack, or so it seems to me. Things that make you go mmmmm.
 



You only "sporadically post"?????? Shall I go back and find the post in which you claim you 'are one of the most prolific posters on THG' or are you going to deny that too? So which is it? You are a "prolific" poster, or you only post "sporadically"?

Memory can be a dangerous thing. You may not remember that which you posted, but other people do.
 
Those who say that AMD/ATI were not trying to be the fastest simply do not understand the marketplace.

There are really only two ways to make money in the computer industry:

1) - Make it cheaper than the other guy

and/or

2) - Have a product nobody else has.

In the real world, an E6550 and an x2-6000+ are, give or take a few % points depending on the benchmark, for all intents and purposes, interchangable. - They will be priced in the market place, in roughly similar fashin. If Intel charged $1000 for an E6550, everybody would buy x2's and the other way around.

Why does Intel charge $1000+ for a QX6850...?

Because they can - AMD has no equivalent - Intel has a true monopoly if you want the fastest CPU on the planet for your PC

Even Hector Ruiz (despite rumours to the contrary) is NOT an idiot and knows that if your best prodyct is equal to the other guys midrange, you're either dead, or at least in trouble, ESPECIALLY with AMD being a process generation behind Intel.

Barcelona was supposed tobe a dominant product, if may or may not turn out that way.

XT2900 was supposed to retake the crown, it didn't.

These are screwups, not plans, and if you think differently, you are just not aware of how the market place works.
 
Getting back to the original topic, it seems that some of you have a much looser idea of what a "REAL" Barcelona benchmark than I do.
 



Thats a valid point, but I dont think many people think AMD is pulling a Snapple and aiming to be #3 in a 2 competitor marketplace.

I certainly agree ATI was aiming to take the # 1 spot with the 2900, but the question still remains, was it a stepping stone for the Uarch to the neext node, or did they really expect it to crush at the current node, since a lot of info seems to indicate that the design will perfrom well once its scaled down.

As for K10, it all remains to be seen. I agree they at least were planning for it to outperform the competition, but all the information (or rather disparaging lack of) indicates its not going to do that when it debuts, and will take at least another 2 or more quarters to mature into a competative product in terms of bottom line performance. Its going to do AMD little good if they pull offf a 10% clock advantage if the best they can produce only clocks to 58% of the competitions best. The only thing they can do there is price it competitively, and based on their gain of 4% of the market, but only 1/2% gain in market revenue, they cant really afford to go any cheaper then they already are.

At this point, with the debt of the ATI aquistion and losses of the past 2quarters, K10 is a life ring and AMD will float or sink as K10 floats or sinks
 


After the hubbub about Jack and the others, I stopped posting for awhile. I used to post AMD news everyday. I HAVE NEVER SAID Core 2s benchmarks were fake. That's what Jack did to make me look bad post things that he couldn't prove about me.

That's why I slowed. It's not worth it. Neither are you. Make up some more stuff.
 



You're LYING. PERIOD! I never had an opinion except to say that they must have really improved their prefetching or were using a form of RHT.

STOP LYING. Show everyone this. If you don't YOU'RE LYING FOR FUD.
 


Yeah Baron nobody is telling the truth about your love for AMD.

You wanted proof of your stance "as provided by you" so here it is:

http://www.tomshardware.com/forum/241005-28-makers-july

The link above is provided so that everyone understands that I am NOT quoting him "OUT OF CONTEXT".

The following quote is a little past half way down the page. Now for YOUR WORDS:

Smarter Choice? Isn't that AMDs marketing line? I'm typing this on a Turion andit seems to actually work fast enough that I don't wait for much. I never buy the newest and fastest when it comes to PC parts.

Besides, I think I hate Intel. I used to think it was the ridiculous fanboys, but I realized it's because they kinda suck and don't act like the market leader. They act like Tony Soprano.
Click to expand...

So go ahead Baron, try and convince us you do not have an agenda.

Back OT,

I will wait for real results, and as always NOT JUST REAL RESULTS from "one source". \
As far as I see it the information provided by some are skewed toward their favored, but are somewhat usable in creating a trend toward the correct answer. As in any multi point trend analysis you will obviously need to throw out the outliers.
There are always going to be people painting too rosy of a picture and those who paint doom and gloom. Usually the truth falls somewhere in between.
 


PS... Baron you and I both know that this is just one of many many of these type of responses.

What you did not think your past responses were available?

 


Fine.

You never believed any of the C2D results, no matter what site or tech orginization did them. They were all Intel pumpers, and tried to spread FUD (as you like to use) for their own reasons.

So, sure, we are all lying, BM. You win. Yay for you.

Happy now. Now maybe you can sporadically post again.

Oh, and here you go with the Brood thing... :cry:

:pfff:
 


As in typical BM fashion, when confronted with reality, he starts typing short sentences in capital letters. Next, comes the threats to tattle to mommy.

As mentioned before, anything stated now about performance is purely speculation. Along those lines, I also do not think that powerpoint slides from either company constitute legitimate benchmarks.

my $.02
 
Posted on 08-09-2007 at 09:51:06 PM profilShow BBCodeMPFavoris
Inform the moderators about this message


BaronMatrix wrote :

You're LYING. PERIOD! I never had an opinion except to say that they must have really improved their prefetching or were using a form of RHT.

STOP LYING. Show everyone this. If you don't YOU'RE LYING FOR FUD.



Fine.

You never believed any of the C2D results, no matter what site or tech orginization did them. They were all Intel pumpers, and tried to spread FUD (as you like to use) for their own reasons.

So, sure, we are all lying, BM. You win. Yay for you.

Happy now. Now maybe you can sporadically post again.

Oh, and here you go with the Brood thing...
Click to expand...


So find that. you can't. It's just like before. So I guess it wasn't Jack. I have never said anything about "paid pumpers." That should be an easy term to find.

Stop lying to impress your girlfriends.
 



Can you comprehend the English language, or do you just like to read bits and pieces and not complete sentences?

Here's what I wrote:
"You never believed any of the C2D results, no matter what site or tech orginization did them. They were all Intel pumpers, and tried to spread FUD (as you like to use) for their own reasons."
Now, where in there did I say you said that? Hmm... Maybe that supposed IT education doesn't include comprehension.

So, let me help you understand what I wrote.
First, I said you never believed any of the results, no matter what site or tech org did them. Pretty simple to understand. Now, I think this is where you got confused. See the word "They", it's not a shorten version for "you said they". It means that I was referring back to the site or tech orgs, that I was talking about in the previous sentence (I underlined them so you can find them easier). There, maybe that will help you understand a little better. 😗 Maybe if I did it on a powerpoint presentation, it would be easier for you to understand what I wrote.

Oh, and I won't go looking for your old posts, cause that's stupid. Anyone who was around during the initial Core 2 Duo launch remembers what you were posting, so no need to go looking for it.

I don't need to impress my girlfriend (I only have 1, thank you). She thinks you're about the goofiest person on the 'net, she especially likes your Chirstian M. Howell alter ego. She said you make no sense most of the time, although your "almost made out with a girl on the dance floor" had her laughing for hours. I tend to agree with her opinion.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom