Intel Philanthropic Peer-to-Peer Program

[Guest]

I just downloaded this P2P software that supposedly helps the search for a cure against cancer. Now, of course I understand that intel is not *that* philantropic as not to try to use this program to do some marketing.. but I cant help being a bit upset by the "device information" part.

First off, I run this program on 500 Mhz Celery laptop, a P3 1 Ghz and a 1 ghz Atlhon. The "processor performance index" shows a number as how your computer compares to "average high desktop", of course being a P4 1.5. What bothers me, is that they simply compare clock speeds.. showing my P3 2X as fast as my Celeron, and identical to the Atlhon setup. This is yet one other way of intel to market Mhz as performance. I would have been a *lot* fairer to show how many units the machine calculates per hour (more interesting also)..

Then you have the network part.. I have Xircom 10/100 Mbit LAN card that operates at 100 Mbit.. this gives me a score of 19/100 compared to an intel PRO 100 Man... ? uh ???? Not sure what they are comparing.. but could someone show me a 500 Mbit UTP network card ?

Then they also compare available memory and allocated harddisk space, that simply makes no sense.. Overall, my Atlhon scores 32 to 100 for the reference P4.. what a joke. I wouldnt be surprised if it actually performed as good as the P4.

.. just thinking, that maybe I shouldnt post this message, as we risk yet another AMD vs Intel flame thread....

 

[Guest]

What's yer point loser kid. Cause im reading and im not seeing it. Just shut yer monkey mouth for once do some good for the world. Geeze some people.

SPUDMUFFIN

<font color=blue>Just some advice from your friendly neighborhood blue man </font color=blue>

 

[Guest]

>>Just some advice from your <b> friendly </b> neighborhood blue man

Maybe I am the one who is missing something here...

 

[Guest]

<A HREF="http://forumz.tomshardware.com/modules.php?name=Forums&file=faq&notfound=1&code=1" target="_new">http://forumz.tomshardware.com/modules.php?name=Forums&file=faq&notfound=1&code=1</A> some people.. indeed.. ;-)

 

[Guest]

Oh you love me!!! Good little monkey man yes come here ill scratch your ear. AAhh thats a good mankey man heres a banana.

SPUDMUFFIN

<font color=blue>Just some advice from your friendly neighborhood blue man </font color=blue>

 

[Guest]

Did you fall on your head as a child?

 

[BuGaLoU]

dude, really, calm down. I think your missing the point here, the program is to study protien reactions, not accuratly benchmark your computer. So intel products are the spot light in the comp info... Big deal... Intel promoted this whole thing and I'm sure they just wanted some advertising in return. I heard about thisprogram through intel, and if not for them I wouldn't of ever DLed it.

If you buy a new comp based on the scores in this program your a moron anyways... Therefore the advertising in this program is irrelevant to intellegent people.

 

[AeroSnoop]

bbaeyens I agree with you. I was thinking the same thing when I installed it on my Athlon 1.2. For one it labels my Athlon a "AMD K7 1200" which is totally bogus because for the comparison it writes out the whole "Intel(c) Pentium4(c) 1.5GHz". And how it rates my chip as being only 80% of the reference chip is just ridiculous too. Let's see who pumps out the packets faster .

On to the network portion. A little confused here as well. On my machine at work it shows my 3com as being 90% of the reference Intel NIC. At first I was thinking this is ridiculous. First off let me say that Intel puts out fine NICs, but to rate a 3Com lower than an Intel? It is my speculation that 3Com's NICs are just as good if not better than Intel's, but I'm sure that Intel people speculate the same in favor of Intel. Let me also point out that I have an Intel PRO/100B NIC in my machine at home, which only got a 20% rating of the reference Intel NIC so I just laughed and shrugged it off.

The memory and storage area is just messed up. It does not make any sense at all and I don't see the purpose for it anyways.

 

[Guest]

You should be lucky to get such a high rating on your network card, my D-Link got only a 6... probably due to I'm on a slower 128kbps line to the Internet in Taiwan. think this speed is your connection to their server and not your network card, which seems more reasonable.
Basically the HDD is how much space you are willing to allocate for the cancer reseach (like a donation).
Some of the units I can do really fast, while others take 2-3 times longer time, you get more points for those I understand, but still. Some people average 1000points/unit, while I average about 100points/unit...

 

[DarkPhire]

I think one thing that needs to be pointed out is United Devices is aware of the point's being skewed. None of the benchmarks are actually rated fairly. So you guys should calm down. CPU's are rated in mghz, not by speed, memory is rated in mbytes, not by speed, harddrive space is just harddrive space. The network speed is ... dont ask me, im on A campus wired to 3 T-1's. Connected on netgear 10/100 mpbs. Im rated about 13-50. While my friend connects on dial up is rated around 650. His computer is a pentium III 733 and turns out about twice as many points as mine while mine has more hours and work units(t-bird 750), turning out less points. His overall machine rating is 200 because of the network rating of 600. Ive heard of a pentium 133 turning out more points then a 1.5 ghz machine simply because of network rating. I presume that they see this and their working on a fix.

anyways i thought that would shed some light
--DarkPhire