What is it with all the Phenom "sucks" responses....

[harna]

Hi.

I'm looking to buy a CPU. I want to know what one to buy.

Can someone please tell me which CPU has the best looking box?

Q6600 or athlon X2 3800.

Thanks.

Always go for the "X" Factor TC. lol

 

[spoonboy]

You do realize this is a website and forum for computer enthusiasts, right?

hard to tell alot of the time lol

 

[harna]

I don't think the AMD Phenom is that awful useless processor some on here like to make it out to be. It appears to offer solid performance, but it's disappointing that AMD fell short of the kind of performance Intel Quads offer. Will the average computer user notice the difference? maybe in some Encoding tasks, but in games and general usage probably minimal.
The problem is the Phenom 9600 is priced in the same range as the better Q6600, so there's little point purchasing for a new system. I'm not sure AMD can afford to do this, but the Phenoms really do need to drop in price.

Little point perhaps, but what about single core AM2 owners, they would be silly to ignore it, good speed, four cores, can't miss. The main point here is that no one buys simply a CPU, you select a platform, and if that meant I could sneak in a better GPU I'd slap the Phenom in. If you can't get a Phenom up to the task on today's software you really do need to buy a Mac or toaster or something. The Phenom spanks today's software around the gills and then some, ok it falls behind the mighty C2D, but hey, there's only ever going to be one leader. Phenom phobia makes absolutely no sense at all.

 

[JonnyRock]

This post is long, I was board, the spelling may be bad, and the punctuation scary. I did ramble on a bit, and so if you read it though to the end I will not refund you!!!!! **You have been warned**

I have been building computer systems for people for far too many years, and ran my own IT Company for about 5 years. Whenever someone comes to me and says “I want to buy a computer…” more times than not I have to stop them and then ask them two questions.

What do you want to do with the computer? And what is your budget?

When it comes down to it these are usually the only two things that the average Joe Bill Bob Spears really considers or cares about. Yes he will sometimes sits and listens to his friends and his mates at working going on about how much better this component or that component is compared to another. He may even read a review from a site I have never heard of. But once you get them to tell you what they need and not what they think they need, you can sell them anything and they will not care.

Most people don’t even know what brand of motherboard they have in there computer nor do they care about this. If the thing works and does exactly what they want it to do then they are happy. This, to me, is “subjective performance”. Good luck trying to come up with a way to measure this “subjective performance”.

I have never yet had anyone come back to me and tell me that the PC I sold them was crap or that the PC configuration I put together for them was not what they wanted. And I have sold many different PC configurations, from office PC’s and gaming system to servers.

To these people benchmarks are irrelevant as the system is doing exactly what they want it to do. Does this mean that they are irrelevant to me? Not at all, knowledge is power. The more information one can have/get about a given subject the better prepared you are to make decisions or comment about that subject.

For me benchmarks are a useful tool in determining how different hardware compares to each other. Benchmarks and performance testing done by reputable sources can be a very good indication of what to look for and what to look out for. They have there place and this is there home. Well one of them anyway.

When you login to these forums, and others that are similar, you enter a world where people do look at things like benchmarks and do take performance into account.

I think its great to have people come in here and say that they don’t care about these things, because to a large degree these things don’t matter at all as its all just data and info to those that want it or to those who use it for what ever reason.

If you don’t care about performance or benchmark results but want to make a point about something great, but don’t start threads like this and then complain or be surprised when people give you a shove or two when you start to ramble on about how useless these things are to you.

I think the AMD Quads do what they say they are going to do. That is multitasking, and they do that pretty well from all that I have read, just not as well as the INTEL quads. They are over priced, and right now AMD CPU’s do not perform well at all compared to INTEL CPU's.

So they are not for everyone. I will not be buying one for my gaming rig but I might consider one when I upgrade my file server. That is if AMD get there pricing right here in the UK.

Where is chicken!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[keithlm]

Can you find a website that has subjective benchmarks?

Yes, they can be benchmarked. However, because there would be no value or reliability in a subjective benchmark, we use objective ones.

You didn't actually respond to the information provided in my post; but rather go off on your tirade against anything that you deem worthy of responding to; ignoring anything that might be contrary to your position.

To me this indicates that you would rather just have a one sided debate. (It also indicates you may have difficulty with reality.)

It would be good to constructively discuss methods of creating new benchmarks or modifying old benchmarks to start revealing some of the aspects of different systems that you seem to consider subjective. Some of the subjective aspects discussed on these forums that you somehow want to dismiss or belittle could actually be measurable.

BTW... when people actually start doing these types of conglomerated benchmarks... and these new benchmarks actually allow objectively measuring these aspects I will remember these forum posts. I will be amused. I will laugh at you.

Unless you believe that your favorite CPU will perform very badly at these tasks. Then perhaps you should keep up your tirade which also appears to also have the goal of distracting people from the discussion.

 

[TechnologyCoordinator]

So in other words, you not going to answer my questions or provide an example of a subjective benchmark that would have any value to a hardware ethusiast, or heck, even a consumer.

Nice try fanboy, stop using BaronBS nLogic and nDeflect.



I look forward to the day you can "remember" this post and shove in my face benchmarks about how good your PC smells and how you liked the color of the box.


Here's a challenge for you: Breifly describe a subjective benchmark for processors. How would it work? What questions would you ask the consumer? Would you pick consumers that are running the same applications?

Imagine this benchmark: Is your computer fast enough?

Grandma: Yes! I love it!
Mother: Well, it seems alright, it always works.
Kid: I can't play Oblivion, this computer sucks!


They could all be talking about the exact same computer and get different responses. Thus, no value because the opinions are subjective.

You didn't actually respond to the information provided in my post; but rather go off on your tirade against anything that you deem worthy of responding to; ignoring anything that might be contrary to your position.

To me this indicates that you would rather just have a one sided debate. (It also indicates you may have difficulty with reality.)

It would be good to constructively discuss methods of creating new benchmarks or modifying old benchmarks to start revealing some of the aspects of different systems that you seem to consider subjective. Some of the subjective aspects discussed on these forums that you somehow want to dismiss or belittle could actually be measurable.

BTW... when people actually start doing these types of conglomerated benchmarks... and these new benchmarks actually allow objectively measuring these aspects I will remember these forum posts. I will be amused. I will laugh at you.

Unless you believe that your favorite CPU will perform very badly at these tasks. Then perhaps you should keep up your tirade which also appears to also have the goal of distracting people from the discussion.

 

[cnumartyr]

Here is a subjective Benchmark for ya.

2 Black Box Computers with "Brand A" and "Brand B" written on them. They already have Crysis loaded and have the same graphics card and the same budget.

PLAY! Whichever one you prefer wins! Personally I'm a fan of Pepsi, but that's because it's difficult to Benchmark sodas. Fortunately in something like this we can Benchmark.

We don't have aesthetics (spelling? lol) to compare. It's not a car.

We have: Performance, Price, Price/Performance, Power Consumption, and Performance/Power Consumptions. All of these can be measured with numbers.

Seriously, the only subjective test I can think of is the Brand A and B thing. The tests will range from surfing the web to gaming. It won't be a hard numbers thing (no frame rates). Just a "do you notice a difference."

 

[TechnologyCoordinator]

Why measure game performance subjectivly when you can measure it in absolute, defined terms.

I don't see the benefit.


I agree with you.

Pepsi VS. Coke has to be subjective, if your testing taste. But nutritional information is very objective.




Keith would propose this for Coke Vs. Pepsi nutrition:

Which brand tasted like it had less calories?
Which brand tasted like it had less sugar?
Which brand tasted like it had.... etc...

Why test if it tasted like it had more calories when there is a scientific method to find the actual number?

 

[cnumartyr]

Why measure game performance subjectivly when you can measure it in absolute, defined terms.

I don't see the benefit.

2 Things here:

1) Sarcasm. I'm a fan of benchmarks.

2) The primary argument I hear in favor of AMD vs Intel is "You aren't going to notice 10 FPS anyways."

 

[rallyimprezive]

Wow the posts are getting long.

 

[TechnologyCoordinator]

2 Things here:

1) Sarcasm. I'm a fan of benchmarks.

2) The primary argument I hear in favor of AMD vs Intel is "You aren't going to notice 10 FPS anyways."

LOL, I picked up on the sarcasm. It just drives me nuts that some fanboy wants to measure the feel-goodness of a computer.

Of course, if AMD had the best product Keith would be quoting benchmarks left and right. He's only arguing his position to support the conclusion that he always tries to reach.

 

[keithlm]

So in other words, you not going to answer my questions or provide an example of a subjective benchmark that would have any value to a hardware ethusiast, or heck, even a consumer.

Nice try fanboy, stop using BaronBS nLogic and nDeflect.

I look forward to the day you can "remember" this post and shove in my face benchmarks about how good your PC smells and how you liked the color of the box.

Here's a challenge for you: Breifly describe a subjective benchmark for processors. How would it work? What questions would you ask the consumer? Would you pick consumers that are running the same applications?

Imagine this benchmark: Is your computer fast enough?

Grandma: Yes! I love it!
Mother: Well, it seems alright, it always works.
Kid: I can't play Oblivion, this computer sucks!

They could all be talking about the exact same computer and get different responses. Thus, no value because the opinions are subjective.

Thank you for your emotional response. Do you believe it helps you in a debate? It definitely shows that my previous comments were correct. Thank you for your support!

If you want you may go back and read my post where I suggest some benchmarks. I guess you forgot to read that post... when you were trying to obscure, deflect and distract from the actual discussion.

 

[keithlm]

Keith would propose this for Coke Vs. Pepsi nutrition:

Which brand tasted like it had less calories?
Which brand tasted like it had less sugar?
Which brand tasted like it had.... etc...

Thank you again for your support on verification of my comments two of my posts back.

 

[cnumartyr]

LOL, I picked up on the sarcasm. It just drives me nuts that some fanboy wants to measure the feel-goodness of a computer.

Of course, if AMD had the best product Keith would be quoting benchmarks left and right. He's only arguing his position to support the conclusion that he always tries to reach.

It's fun isn't it?

I guess we can subjectively decide.. well which socket is sexier? Which processor has the shinier IHS? Which processor feels best when rubbed against your skin? Some prefer it prickly.

Good point on the Pepsi vs Coke thing... lol.

It's like with cars. I'm a fan of performance, tell me the 1/4 mile time. I don't care what it looks like. There are others who wouldn't want an "ugly" car no matter how fast it was. Unfortunately for AMD fans, this isn't the case.

On the other side of it, the HD3870X2 is looking like a great card and I will be going back to ATi for my next build.

 

[TechnologyCoordinator]

Thank you for your emotional response. Do you believe it helps you in a debate? It definitely shows that my previous comments were correct. Thank you for your support!

If you want you may go back and read my post where I suggest some benchmarks. I guess you forgot to read that post... when you were trying to obscure, deflect and distract from the actual discussion.

This is what you wrote:

Run a virus scan of all files WHILE you run other benchmarks. Or maybe run a two copies of Prime95 while you run the other benchmarks. Maybe run Prime95 AND a virus scan while you run other benchmarks. Maybe run a game in a window on a second monitor WHILE you run 3dMark. While running these multiple benchmarks you could switch between the windows every 30 seconds or so. You get the idea. Stuff that would be easy to reproduce. Of course how to convey the results might be difficult.

Those are OBJECTIVE benchmarks, assuming that the data you're obtaining is measured in something like "TIME" or "FRAMES PER SECOND".

As long as it is run the same way on each computer and the output is measurable, it's objective.


Allow me to explain it for you:

Objective = measurable
Subjective = opinion, not measurable


Objective = How long does it take the computer to run X, X, X, and X (what you suggested)
Subjective = Is the computer fast enough?


Objective = Coke has 85 calories
Subjective = Coke tastes good

 

[yomamafor1]

TC, don't argue with him. If someone wants to support their favorite company to the max, regardless of method (kind of like abinstein), then what you're really doing is wasting your energy and time.

Don't argue logically with illogical people. Its no use.

 

[TechnologyCoordinator]

TC, don't argue with him. If someone wants to support their favorite company to the max, regardless of method (kind of like abinstein), then what you're really doing is wasting your energy and time.

Don't argue logically with illogical people. Its no use.

You know the old saying, I am blue in the face, and also done arguing with him.

 

[cnumartyr]

Thought I would help clear the air some. So we atleast have the same definitions.

Benchmark - Computers. an established point of reference against which computers or programs can be measured in tests comparing their performance, reliability, etc.

Subjective - taking place within the mind and modified by individual bias; "a subjective judgment." a : relating to or determined by the mind as the subject of experience <subjective reality> b : characteristic of or belonging to reality as perceived rather than as independent of mind c : relating to or being experience or knowledge as conditioned by personal mental characteristics or states

Objective - not influenced by personal feelings, interpretations, or prejudice; based on facts; unbiased: an objective opinion. Based on observable phenomena; presented factually: an objective appraisal.


So.. lets see. I can't think of anything that would be actually subjective except for the obvious Fanboy preference for AMD over Intel despite the clear performance wins for Intel. There are some valid reasons to go AMD, and I want another one (45nm Phenom probably.. as long as it's not SOI). Looking at it Objectively, Intel wins most benchmarks hands down. Sorry kids.

 

[keithlm]

Those are OBJECTIVE benchmarks, assuming that the data you're obtaining is measured in something like "TIME" or "FRAMES PER SECOND".

As long as it is run the same way on each computer and the output is measurable, it's objective.

Ah.. but if used in a correct manner these objective benchmarks CAN be used to measure something that can only be discussed in the abstract as a "subjective" aspect of the system at this time.

For example: How well does a system task-switch when running many jobs. Does it hesitate? Stutter?

We can sit here and have many people describe their experiences... but it is all subjective.

Or we can attempt to create a new type of benchmark that might allow measurement of these aspects of a system. Perhaps you can't measure "stuttering". But if you can run the right mix of benchmarks together... it is possible that this unmeasurable aspect will show up in the performance of one of the benchmarks.

In short... we want turn a subjective aspect into an objective measurement.

 

[TechnologyCoordinator]

Or we can attempt to create a new type of benchmark that might allow measurement of these aspects of a system. Perhaps you can't measure "stuttering". But if you can run the right mix of benchmarks together... it is possible that this unmeasurable aspect will show up in the performance of one of the benchmarks.

In short... we want turn a subjective aspect into an objective measurement.

Ok, now we're getting somewhere. I agree with your last statement. You want to find an objective way to measure multi-tasking.


You could give the benchmark a name that sounds subjective: "Multi-tasking user experience.", but measure it scientifically.


I wouldn't oppose a benchmark like that, as long as it is measured in a scientific way, not by a human saying, "well, uhhh, it seemed like this one stuttered less."

 

[keithlm]

TC, don't argue with him. If someone wants to support their favorite company to the max, regardless of method (kind of like abinstein), then what you're really doing is wasting your energy and time.

Don't argue logically with illogical people. Its no use.

Actually my suggestions don't support any company.

Please show me one of my posts where I have not been logical.

Actually I am getting exhausted trying to explain logical ideas to people (such as yourselves) that happen to be bereft of logic.

 

[rallyimprezive]

Buying AMD now is like buying a Ford Focus. Its ugly and slow, but it does get the job done. Kinda.

 

[TechnologyCoordinator]

Actually my suggestions don't support any company.

Please show me one of my posts where I have not been logical.

Actually I am getting exhausted trying to explain logical ideas to people (such as yourselves) that happen to be bereft of logic.

I think we were frustrated because of a misunderstanding of terms.


My point was that there is no benefit to measure something subjectively when you can measure it objectively.

You can back and said, no, here's a good subjective benchmark, but then described a objective one instead.

And the rest was history.



We're not saying that your suggestions (in this thread) support any company, but your history on this board has been one of support and promotion of one company, that happens to make inferior products.

 

[keithlm]

Ok, now we're getting somewhere. I agree with your last statement. You want to find an objective way to measure multi-tasking.


You could give the benchmark a name that sounds subjective: "Multi-tasking user experience.", but measure it scientifically.


I wouldn't oppose a benchmark like that, as long as it is measured in a scientific way, not by a human saying, "well, uhhh, it seemed like this one stuttered less."

A lightbulb. Eureka.

I do not and would not condone anything less than a repeatable benchmark.

If there were pauses between task switching that could be measured with a stopwatch... that would be acceptable. (But I suspect that any pauses would be short enough to be irritating... but long enough that you would notice them.. so we sould have to find something else.)

 

[TechnologyCoordinator]

A lightbulb. Eureka.

I do not and would not condone anything less than a repeatable benchmark.

If there were pauses between task switching that could be measured with a stopwatch... that would be acceptable. (But I suspect that any pauses would be short enough to be irritating... but long enough that you would notice them.. so we sould have to find something else.)

Agreed.

Ahhhh, a feel-good moment.


I don't like the stopwatch idea (it adds a human element), but I'm sure a program could be written to manage the whole thing.