Intel's playing catch-up

[NMDante]

It's funny how people will go to great lengths to defend their favorite brand, including personal insults

Intel offers popular products that many here use (including me), but because of their current popularity this forum has turned into the school playground mentality. I see all too often that posters who say anything pro AMD routinely ganged up on. I've also seen a return, to marking down of AMD posts.

Hmmm....are you sure it's anything pro AMD or the added comments in those pro AMD threads that are getting attention.

Let's see, there is a poster who constantly calls Intel "Inhell", yet that's fine. There is a poster who likes to claim predatory pricing whenever possible. There is a poster who likes to call Intel evil, and AMD masters.

Oh, no. It can't be that people are ganging up on those particular items, and not the thread about AMD. Look at the thread about the 790 series motherboards being available. Any "ganging up" going on in there? Same with the "Which AMD CPU is better for gaming?" thread. Wow, if any thread should have a bunch of Intel fanboys ganging up on a thread, it would be that...but it didn't happen, huh? Why not? I mean, it's strictly pro AMD in that thread, where is the ganging up?

It's always fact, If it's pro Intel it seems

And it's also a fact that you see, only those things you want to see.

 

[jimmysmitty]

^Meh I don't even want to try. Hell they are trying to label turpit pro Intel even though he rarely posts and when he dos he backs everything he ever states up with links.

 

[speedbird]

^You didn't see it when they were specifically marking down anyone who didn't agree with the AMD fans did you?

Does it really matter though? two wrongs don't make a right do they

 

[outlw6669]

 

[skywalker9952]

jimmysmitty turpit has yet to post a link backing up any claim he has made in this thread. Your argument, like his, is null.

 

[jimmysmitty]

Does it really matter though? two wrongs don't make a right do they

Then why did you bring up the other marking downs?

jimmysmitty turpit has yet to post a link backing up any claim he has made in this thread. Your argument, like his, is null.

And yet you agree with thunderman who also did not provide a link. You say his argument could be valid yet turpits could not. Double standard much?

BTW I can link many post by turpit that do link mounds of facts but you can easily search the forums.

 

[The_Blood_Raven]

To Skywalker: It is always a good idea to argue with a moderator, politely.

I am kind of surprised everyone is so angry at Thunderman, he was not being serious, that's pretty apparent.

Just look:

All too little to late and a failure...AMD will have Deneb, that is backwards compatible with AM2+ Motherboards. Intel requires current Core2 users to replace their whole platform including the use of expensive DDR 3 Memory. Intel will stop overclocking on all but their High-end Chips....Enthusiasts will switch to 45nm AMD black edition CPU's.

Nehalem is a flop! Deneb has already impressed technical experts!

Support the Masters AMD! Evil must not win (Intel)!

AMD4Life!!

Ok so you can take all the ridiculous things he said, though some were slightly true, and say he is spreading FUD. The only problem is the way he presented it. He has gone out of his way to make it apparent that his post is not serious, there is your unproven facts, blatant lies, forceful opinions, and then there is some silly remarks about good and evil based on CPU manufacturers... I am pretty sure they call this SARCASM.....

 

[Scotteq]

BR - You remember that REALLY annoying kid in grade school... You know the one: Every day or three he's do some stupid sheeyat like shoot a paper clip at you, or call you some stupid name, or whatever. You tell him to stop. Ask nicely. Even use reason and show him why he's wrong. But he thinks it's funny that he's getting on your nerves. So he keeps it up. Maybe finds something different, just to keep things interesting. Never stops.


Every day.. Something stupid..
Every day.. Something stupid..
Every day.. Something stupid..
Every day.. Something stupid..
Every day.. Something stupid..
Every day.. Something stupid..
Every day.. Something stupid..
Every day.. Something stupid..
Every day.. Something stupid..
Every day.. Something stupid..
Every day.. Something stupid..
Every day.. Something stupid..
Every day.. Something stupid..




and then.....






One day you grab him by the back of the head and smash his face into a door twenty or thirty times.


Does a rubber band launched paper clip deserve a broken face??

Clearly, No


But do 737 rubber band launched paper clips deserve a broken face?

Maybe not. But it's surely enough to goad someone into kicking your a$$.

 

[keithlm]

No one here will gang up on anyone who prefers AMD. When posters repeatedly post false and misleading information as fact in an effort to smear which ever brand is not their favourite is when someone will get a lot of negative responses.

Really?

Can you please point out how my advocating that a reviewer use the most optimal ram supported by one certain brand's CPU in a benchmark is either false and misleading OR an effort to smear the other brand? Or perhaps can you explain how having multiple people jump on my case for advocating that fact could not be described by using the term "ganging up".

OR:

Maybe you could explain how me not agreeing with an Intel fan posting a guess about what voltage a Phenom would need to run at a certain frequency is somehow an effort to smear Intel. Or you can explain how it was not "ganging up" to have multiple people jump on my case and demanding that I needed to prove that the guess was wrong even though it was not based on anything tangible other than the other person's opinion?


My point is this: People get so biased that they somehow forget to look at reality, common sense, and logic. And it gets worse when 3 or 4 other people join them somehow thinking that by adding more people that share the same opinion to the conversation that somehow makes that opinion correct.



SIDE NOTE: And I have noticed that in many threads the request for "proof" is nothing more than a tactic used by people to twist common sense and logic around to fit their opinion; as if someone not providing a link to "proof" will warp reality and suddenly make the other side's opinion "correct". (And/or if "proof" is not provided they will then attempt to belittle and ridicule the other person even if that person advocated something more logical and sensible.)

The current state of this forum is that it really is not worth posting or attempting to communicate about anything but Intel products. AND you can't say anything negative about Intel. Ever.

 

[Grimmy]

keithlm... I think you like being ganged up on.

So... where's the phenom rig + intel rig plus your benchmark result for you to share with us?

 

[keithlm]

keithlm... I think you like being ganged up on.

So... where's the phenom rig + intel rig plus your benchmark result for you to share with us?

Actually I get tired of people ganging up just because they get exhausted and realize that I'm not going to back down on something that is as obvious as the memory issue.

(As I alluded to in the last post... they use the "gang up and request proof for something that doesn't need proof" tactic. Then when no proof is provided they will resort to ridicule. It is very predictable. I actually think that they believe this tactic disproves something.)


Which benchmark result are you talking about? I'll be getting a nice new shiny SB750 to play with soon so everything will change dramatically. Been waiting since February for this new board.



BTW: Here are some phoronix results using this garbage Gigabyte motherboard I currently have.

9850 at stock. (Ganged memory.)
http://global.phoronix-test-suite.com/index.php?k=profile&u=keithlm-27451-18901-9006

Q6600 at stock.
http://global.phoronix-test-suite.com/index.php?k=profile&u=anon-974-21617-2086

 

[Grimmy]

Which benchmark?

Why don't you buy the rigs.. do benchmarks, and provide your own proof?

Seems you won't take anyone's word when they provide a link, or even the sites that provide benchmarks, because they don't provide the kind of hardware you think needs to be used in benchmarking.

Ahh... in my opinion... I don't think they get exhausted, I think they think your hard headed, and that there is no point in going on.

edit:

Gahh... all that scrolling.

 

[keithlm]

Which benchmark?

Why don't you buy the rigs.. do benchmarks, and provide your own proof?

Seems you won't take anyone's word when they provide a link, or even the sites that provide benchmarks, because they don't provide the kind of hardware you think needs to be used in benchmarking.

Ahh... in my opinion... I don't think they get exhausted, I think they think your hard headed, and that there is no point in going on.

Oh I see where you get your misconceived notion.

It is because of my opinion that any professional benchmarker that uses less than optimal memory in a test is system is running that system at a handicap and is being biased.

It has nothing to do with being hard headed. It has to do with being correct.

 

[NMDante]

Which benchmark?

Why don't you buy the rigs.. do benchmarks, and provide your own proof?

Seems you won't take anyone's word when they provide a link, or even the sites that provide benchmarks, because they don't provide the kind of hardware you think needs to be used in benchmarking.

Ahh... in my opinion... I don't think they get exhausted, I think they think your hard headed, and that there is no point in going on.

DING, DING, DING!!!!

We have a winner!!!

 

[Grimmy]

Oh I see where you get your misconceived notion.

It is because of my opinion that any professional benchmarker that uses less than optimal memory in a test is system is running that system at a handicap and is being biased.

It has nothing to do with being hard headed. It has to do with being correct.

Your system:

Processor: AMD Phenom 9850 Quad-Core Processor @ 2.51GHz (Total Cores: 4), Motherboard: Gigabyte Co. Ltd. GA-MA790FX-DS5, Chipset: ATI RD790 Northbridge only dual slot PCI-e_GFX and HT3 K8 part, System Memory: 3955MB, Disk Space: 29GB, Graphics: ATI Radeon HD 4800 Series, Screen Resolution: 1680x1050

Q6600 system:

Processor: Intel Core 2 Quad CPU Q6600 @ 2.40GHz (Total Cores: 4), Motherboard: Unknown, Chipset: Unknown, System Memory: 2012MB, Disk Space: 50GB, Graphics: GeForce 7300 SE/7200 GS/PCI/SSE2 (450/500MHz), Screen Resolution: 1280x1024

Heh... oh ya.. that' professional.

I'm done.

 

[keithlm]

Your system:

Processor: AMD Phenom 9850 Quad-Core Processor @ 2.51GHz (Total Cores: 4), Motherboard: Gigabyte Co. Ltd. GA-MA790FX-DS5, Chipset: ATI RD790 Northbridge only dual slot PCI-e_GFX and HT3 K8 part, System Memory: 3955MB, Disk Space: 29GB, Graphics: ATI Radeon HD 4800 Series, Screen Resolution: 1680x1050

Q6600 system:

Processor: Intel Core 2 Quad CPU Q6600 @ 2.40GHz (Total Cores: 4), Motherboard: Unknown, Chipset: Unknown, System Memory: 2012MB, Disk Space: 50GB, Graphics: GeForce 7300 SE/7200 GS/PCI/SSE2 (450/500MHz), Screen Resolution: 1280x1024

Heh... oh ya.. that' professional.

I'm done.

Since I don't really look at the video benchmarks because they don't work well because of drivers for NVidia or ATI... and none of these benchmarks uses large amounts of memory it doesn't matter.

Besides: this is the only full "universe" result for a Q6600 available.

(It seems this benchmarks suite is not very popular with Intel users for some reason.)

There are no universe results available for the Q9450 at stock frequencies only at 3.3Ghz. (After I have my sb750 board we'll see how they compare.)

And i find it VERY humorous now... you are going to argue about the amount of memory?? I argue about something that is actually important and will affect results but I get dismissed... but you want me to consider the amount of memory available when all of these benchmarks could be run with 1Gb of ram? You are pathetic.

 

[Grimmy]

You said... optimal memory.

I don't even know what chipset the Q6600 is using, nor does it tell me much about the ram. Only highlighted the video cards to even see that the systems are apparently not evenly matched.

But anyhoo... I'll go back to my world, you can stay in yers.

 

[keithlm]

You said... optimal memory.

I don't even know what chipset the Q6600 is using, nor does it tell me much about the ram. Only highlighted the video cards to even see that the systems are apparently not evenly matched.

But anyhoo... I'll go back to my world, you can stay in yers.

Yep... go back to putting your head under the sand.

Soon I'll have a SB750 board and we'll see how this thing works against the Q9450 and maybe Q9550 if any Intel user ever gets around to benching it.

BTW: You are the one that asked for some restults. I provide some and you immediately ignore them. Typical.


OH GREAT GRIMMY: Is it acceptable for me to compare my lowly Phenom 9850 with 4Gig of ram and a 4850 with a Q9450 at 3.3Ghz with 8Gb of ram and an 8800GT overclocked to 600/900 using a X48 chipset??? (After I get my new MB.)

Would that be acceptable to you? (BUT WAIT... WHAT IF I LEAVE IT IN THE DUST... then you'll have to recant.)

 

[jimmysmitty]

Um I don't see how a mobo with the SB750 is going to magically make a CPU run faster clock per clock. Maybe yea it will OC better whoopie.

Also using 4GB in one system and 2GB in another is fair to you? I mean come on you were complaining about them not using 1066MHz memory over 800MHz memory yet them using only half the RAM is fine? And yes more memory can make a difference. You can't run it OPTIMALLY on 1GB if you run it on Vista considering Vista takes about 700MB stock.

And I would hope in gaming that your system beats the Intel system. The Intel system has a much older card that is easily whomped by a 4850.

In the rest, non memory intensive I would expect you to have a challenge. Memory intensive then yes you should do much better.

Wow.

 

[keithlm]

Um I don't see how a mobo with the SB750 is going to magically make a CPU run faster clock per clock. Maybe yea it will OC better whoopie.

Also using 4GB in one system and 2GB in another is fair to you? I mean come on you were complaining about them not using 1066MHz memory over 800MHz memory yet them using only half the RAM is fine?

Wow.

I guess you didn't read everything I posted above. Oh well your loss.

Are you going to pretend that the amount of memory is more important than the memory speed when using an operating system and benchmarks that can run equally well with 1Gb of ram? Maybe even 512Mb?

Wow. Pathetic that you have to resort to that belittlement.

OH BTW: PHORONIX RUNS ON LINUX so your "vista" blah blah blah garbage means nothing. Please learn about what you are talking about before you post. That's also why I easily just choose to not really take the games as being important because Linux drivers for video are not mature.

 

[jimmysmitty]

^Hey if you think that having 4GB doesn't give any advantage thats your opinion. Memory speed is useless unless the benchmark is synthetic and test the memory performance which in turn gives no real world benefit.

Last time I checked Windows XP would do better with mor Physical RAM instead of having to rely on Virtual RAM that is much slower. You can have the fastest RAM in the world but if you only have 1GB then you are bottlenecking your system greatly.

 

[yomamafor1]

Ahh.. here we go again.

http://www.simhq.com/_technology2/technology_125a.html

In this review, both systems use exactly the same DDR2-1066 RAMs. Does it change much? Doesn't seem so to me.

 

[keithlm]

^Hey if you think that having 4GB doesn't give any advantage thats your opinion. Memory speed is useless unless the benchmark is synthetic and test the memory performance which in turn gives no real world benefit.

Last time I checked Windows XP would do better with mor Physical RAM instead of having to rely on Virtual RAM that is much slower. You can have the fastest RAM in the world but if you only have 1GB then you are bottlenecking your system greatly.

Uh yeah. Right. Okay. Fine. You do realize you have no idea what you are talking about don't you?

Please read up above... a few posts back... where I point out that THIS IS THE ONLY "UNIVERSE" result available on the Phoronix database for a stock Q6600. If someone had 4Gb of ram I would have pointed to THAT result set. But there isn't one. But that's not important because memory size doesn't matter in this case.

But as I also said... Intel users don't seem to post full result sets on Phoronix. It might have something to do with the fact that the most of the benchmarks are REAL applications that are BUILT and OPTIMIZED for the system they are running on... either AMD OR INTEL. (So they have to run in a level playing field. Some people do NOT like that.)

Ahh.. here we go again.

http://www.simhq.com/_technology2/technology_125a.html

In this review, both systems use exactly the same DDR2-1066 RAMs. Does it change much? Doesn't seem so to me.

Ah here we go again: If it provides ANY gain then it is enough to matter. Period. You may also put your head in the sand and ignore reality... but that's your choice.

 

[yomamafor1]

Ah here we go again: If it provides ANY gain then it is enough to matter. Period. You may also put your head in the sand and ignore reality... but that's your choice.

Of course, if you choose to continue to ignore the fact that using faster RAMs do not, in any way, affect the outcome of the review, then its your choice.

 

[keithlm]

Of course, if you choose to continue to ignore the fact that using faster RAMs do not, in any way, affect the outcome of the review, then its your choice.

Oh... you think I care about the outcome of the REVIEW for some reason.

I don't care about the review. I care about the RESULTS. You seem to not understand that.