Intel "insults INQUIRER readers' intelligence"

Page 3 - Seeking answers? Join the Tom's Hardware community: where nearly two million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
They are NOT decieving anyone, the mhz speed of the processors is NOT hidden. The performance rating is NOT tauted as mhz. I fail to see ANY deception in amds marketing.


As for your example, cpus cant kill you, and there is nothing performance wise different between an amd cpu at 1700+ and a p4@1.7ghz (except for the fact the amd system is STILL faster.)


I would see amds actions as wrong if either they
A: Overblew the numbers.
OR B:Hid the mhz rating of their processors from the public.


They do NEITHER.
Click to expand...
Huh? You mean AMD dropped their requirement that XP motherboards not list the true speed of the processor in MHz? I haven't heard that one yet, last I knew it was STILL REQUIRED FOR MOTHERBOARD MANUFACTURERS TO HIDE THE SPEED OF THE CPU from being displayed at POST. And WHY, oh WHY, do you think they INSIST they remain hidden?

What's the frequency, Kenneth?
 
Actually MHz is the biggest contributor to heat!
Click to expand...
ROFL, I think he lost his basis for an argument with this statement. This is getting stupid. Your comparing processors to engines, to pies, to whatever you can think of that isn't relevant to the discussion. Your basic assumption is that the PR system is a load of bullshit; is evil and manipulative and shouldn't be used, right? Well how does Intel fair when they built their own little PR system right into the chip? Netburst architecture my ass, THAT is deception. For the sake of carrying on these ridiculous analogies: Let's say that both companies start out selling 8 hot dogs in a pack--> AMD is selling 6 better tasting hot dogs saying it tastes just as good as 8; Intel on the other hand takes its 8 hot dogs and makes them filler, sure there are still 8 but most of the hot dog is just empty space. Bottom line: AMD thinks you won't notice the two missing hot dogs, and Intel tricks you into thinking nothings changed. No one is a winner, and both sides aren't pretending like there way is right (or at least I hope not, or that would be not only bad intellectual discussion, but a lack of technical knowledge).

P.S. To my credit, I think the hot dog analogy is a very good one as it actually portrays both sides of the debate fairly accurately.

Hard work often pays off in time, but laziness always pays off now.
 
mmm, peanuts. yum.
And WHY, oh WHY, do you think they INSIST they remain hidden?
Click to expand...
could it maybe be too that they want it like that to avoid confusion? i mean if i was joe public and got an amd cpu that was advertised as an XP1900+ then i saw on the screen no sign of an XP1900+ i might start to wonder, not about the actual speed, but whether or not i got an actual XP1900+. also the actual speed is easily accessible for the people that want to know and for those that wouldn't, i don't think they would even understand what their looking at when the system posts. if it's a matter of the consumer's interest at the point of purchase, then i think some responsibility should rely with the retailer themselves. that, i would think, would be one of the reason's someone would be into computer hardware retail.

happiness is finding a stick of ram in your mail.
 
I have to use analogies in order to make little minds like yours understand big concepts. Leave my wiener out of it. Heat has little to do with capabilities of the actual achitecture, we all know the P4 is an inefficient design, not heat wise, but performance wise.

What's the frequency, Kenneth?
 
Only when it's convienient for proving your case!
Click to expand...

and it did...

when i said MHZ is uslees alone i meant - its uslees for perforemnce... not heat

i also said (in all of my posts) that intel chose the high MHZ way insted of IPC so its taking the penlties of heat.
 
I think it's more likely that they want to hide the truth. Otherwise BIOS would say XP2000+ at 1667MHz. I remember when the Cyrix 6x86 would give a BIOS message like that.

What's the frequency, Kenneth?
 
You have to prove they are to make the claim, otherwise its your oppinion. AMD has stated their reasons and their methods for the pr rating, you call them liars, you make the claim, not me.

"The Cash Left In My Pocket,The BEST Benchmark"
No Overclock+stock hsf=GOOD!
 
actually, it was a discussion at the fact that intel and the inquirer were bitch-fighting. which is still pretty funny. "we don't comment on other products, but while im writing this i might as well.." hehe

Hard work often pays off in time, but laziness always pays off now.
 
They do not publically hide their mhz speeds, what the mobo says at boot up is trivial. Their roadmaps show mhz speed, and the information is widely available.

"The Cash Left In My Pocket,The BEST Benchmark"
No Overclock+stock hsf=GOOD!
 
Huh? Then why is AMD basing their prices on the PR rating instead of the MHz? Have you actually SEEN what their PR rating has done to their price structure? It went UP!
Click to expand...

No, the chips available then are still cheap, the new chips are cheaper than their intel counterparts STILL. Prices are going up across the board, did you want amd to sell the axp2000+ for 80 bucks and go under in a few quarters?

"The Cash Left In My Pocket,The BEST Benchmark"
No Overclock+stock hsf=GOOD!
 
could it maybe be too that they want it like that to avoid confusion? i mean if i was joe public and got an amd cpu that was advertised as an XP1900+ then i saw on the screen no sign of an XP1900+ i might start to wonder, not about the actual speed, but whether or not i got an actual XP1900+. also the actual speed is easily accessible for the people that want to know and for those that wouldn't, i don't think they would even understand what their looking at when the system posts. if it's a matter of the consumer's interest at the point of purchase, then i think some responsibility should rely with the retailer themselves. that, i would think, would be one of the reason's someone would be into computer hardware retail.
Click to expand...

Summed up nicely MB.

"The Cash Left In My Pocket,The BEST Benchmark"
No Overclock+stock hsf=GOOD!
 
I have to use analogies in order to make little minds like yours understand big concepts.
Click to expand...

I dont know, but if that was directed at everyone, and not just the replyeee(if you felt he insulted you first) that is bad form, insulting those you are having a discussion with is in very bad taste crash.

"The Cash Left In My Pocket,The BEST Benchmark"
No Overclock+stock hsf=GOOD!
 
AMD has stated their reasons and their methods for the pr rating
Click to expand...
. And you believe them? I bet you believe in Santa, the tooth fairy, easter bunny, and that the moon is made of green cheese. Their intent is obvious, they simply had to come up with a cover story to avoid claims to the truth. Go into Best Buy, and if you find an Athlon system, ask them what speed it is. Remember that these people are more educated on the subject than their customers, and I bet they still quote the PR rating as the MHz!

Anyone else getting hungry?

What's the frequency, Kenneth?
 
i also said (in all of my posts) that intel chose the high MHZ way insted of IPC so its taking the penlties of heat.
Click to expand...

It is crash, as iib says above, intel chose higher mhz and less work, therefore when they choose to claim their p4@1.4 is cooler than the amd1.4ghz therefore amd chips run cooler, if you want to look at it by temp per hertz, they are right, but that view is as corny as mhz=performance. The only valid measurement of anything in comparison between 2 archetectures, is heat/performance. Everything else is pointless. Thats what Im stating and thats where I stand.

"The Cash Left In My Pocket,The BEST Benchmark"
No Overclock+stock hsf=GOOD!
 
i agree with what you are saying. but does the fault lie with amd or the lack of experience and/or bias of the salesperson?

nope, i just ate a peanut pie :wink:

happiness is finding a stick of ram in your mail.
 
And you believe them? I bet you believe in Santa, the tooth fairy, easter bunny, and that the moon is made of green cheese.
Click to expand...


It dosent matter what I believe, the intent and meathod they claim works, they may be trying to make people get confused over pr ratings and mhz, but their defense is airtight, case dismissed.


Even if it WERE true, they are NOT trying to steal from anyone, or lie to anyone, everyone agrees if the pr ratings are in comparison to p4's the axp's are rather underrated.


IMO it is not an issue, it is not evil, it is not dishonest, and it does not hurt anyone. Mb summed up my feelings on the subject well.


and if you find an Athlon system, ask them what speed it is. Remember that these people are more educated on the subject than their customers, and I bet they still quote the PR rating as the MHz!
Click to expand...

A: best buy employees are hardly computer gurus, they in my experience are generally morons.
B: if they did claim it was mhz, it would be THEIR lie, not AMDS'S
c: Websites have advertised the pr rating as mhz and amd has contacted them about it.(if i recall, early on i read it in the register).


So again, your argument is not against the pr ratings, but their misuse. A misuse even if amd intended they do not condone.

"The Cash Left In My Pocket,The BEST Benchmark"
No Overclock+stock hsf=GOOD!
 
Customers are more likely to take what they see at face value than perform an investigation into a companies ethical practices or product performance, that's just what AMD and Intel are both counting on

What's the frequency, Kenneth?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom