Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

FrFan

Biased Intel processors tests ?!

Recommended Posts

The Dishonesty of Overclocking

Mainstream review sites on the web are very much as magazines used to be. They are places where people can go to find out things, however, they are much more immediatley available than any magazine ever was. Like magazines however they often carry an aura of expertise and credibility. However, we've had both good and bad magazines in the past. Review sites are similar in that the fact that they exist does not guarantee balance, thoroughness, or professionalism. It is easy to find mainstream review sites like Anandtech, XbitLabs, and Toms Hardware Guide that claim to provide balanced reviews of current procesors. This has become a two horse race between near monopoly, Intel and underdog, AMD.

Read more here :

http://scientiasblog.blogspot.com/2006/08/dishonesty-of-overclocking.html

and here: http://www.ppcnux.com/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=6552

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The Dishonesty of Overclocking

Mainstream review sites on the web are very much as magazines used to be. They are places where people can go to find out things, however, they are much more immediatley available than any magazine ever was. Like magazines however they often carry an aura of expertise and credibility. However, we've had both good and bad magazines in the past. Review sites are similar in that the fact that they exist does not guarantee balance, thoroughness, or professionalism. It is easy to find mainstream review sites like Anandtech, XbitLabs, and Toms Hardware Guide that claim to provide balanced reviews of current procesors. This has become a two horse race between near monopoly, Intel and underdog, AMD.

Read more here :

http://scientiasblog.blogspot.com/2006/08/dishonesty-of-overclocking.html

and here: http://www.ppcnux.com/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=6552

That was a great read IMO, the only problem was getting past the computer jarggin...it just shows how reviews are manuplated, especially in the comp chip market.

-Grant

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's too simplistic to say that the tests are bogus....

What's going on is the chips are getting faster, but the improvements aren't always reflected in the old metrixs..

Used to have a norton benchmark which told you how fast your computer was compared with an old XP..... Then when the 486 came out they put a math coprocessor on the cpu chip and that old Norton benchmark became less usfull because the math co-processor didn't effect their number...

Now every time a chip comes out their are new features, improved onchip cache, enlarged registers, etc... So both chip makers AMD and Intel try to promote the metrix which best captures their chips properties... Since AMD is mainly focused on boosting clock cycles with a static chip architecture and instruction set, they typically opt for the legacy metric. Since Intel has literally redesigned their chip from scratch several times since they branched away from the joint AMD architecture they tend to promote new and different benchmarks.

We tend to think of it like a car race, which car crosses the finish line first is all we care about...... But it's more complicated than that and their is no agreed upon track to base "speed" on. Clock speed? But slower clocked chips with improved L2 or L1 cache provide better performance.

The latest war is over the duel or quad core... Intel isn't improving clock speed anymore.. Now they're improving concurent processing with their multiple CPU architecture... So if your timing how quckly your computer can compute 10000000 digits of pie, duel core doesn't help a bit. AMD wins.. But if your wondering how fast your computer playes the latest multi threaded game, Duel core rocks....

on it goes..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.