Burnt to a Crisp :D :D

[AGodspeed]

*WARNING*


This thread has been the victim of massive flame dumping. It will now be shut down.

In the future, make sure to outfit your threads with the proper flame retardants, as AT members LikeLinus, etc. are major hazards.

 

[WyteWatt]

Yep that sure is a bunch of FUD.

 

[ST4RCUTTER]

Interesting.

It's certainly incongruous with the benchmarks found on the major computer hardware review sites. I can see how the P4 would easily outperform the Athlon if they tested the 2.2Ghz against the Athlon 2000+ but not the 2.0A.

It's also interesting that Intel failed to mention the shift in processor types (P3 to P4). When AMD used Mhz to claim superiority, they based it on the P3 which had similar IPC and pipeline length when compared to the Athlon. The Pentium 4 had lower IPC, but could run at a higher frequency due to the 20-stage pipe. By now, everyone knows what this does to overall performance, even Intel. AMD didn't shift to the PR ratings until it became clear that people thought raw Mhz equaled total performance...which it doesn't.

 

[Duvie]

That is the type of business practice of intel I can't stand....What a bunch of crap!!!

I guess I will spit now whenever I say the name of my computer...p4 northwood (spit)

 

[JellyBaby]

I'm still getting a P4 1.6A.

 

[Mem]

I guess I better sell my AMD XP 1700+ & then buy a 1.7Ghz P4 ,lol Intel wish I did that .

 

[NFS4]

LOL, that's some funny stuff

I'm still looking to either get a Northwood or Hammer. The Athlon is dead to me now

 

[christoph83]

I'm not exactly siding with intel on this one but where exactly is all the FUD? They have quake III listed as the 2ghz being 5% faster when on most websites I'm seing the 2ghz northwood being 8-9% faster, for example tom's review here. So their numbers are actually lower on that test. The other tests I cant seem to find much stuff on the net for. Havent seen someone bench with sysmark2002 with these processors. Just looks like to me intel picked applications that favor their processor just as how amd would do the same thing to show its performance. All those dates appear to be accurate they just seem to be bringing up the point that the PR rating somewhat confuses people and doesnt exactly equate to the performance they say it will. This seems like the same sort of stuff we see from both of these companies marketing divisions.

 

[nagger]

Well me tinks that Intel r getting a bit desperate...

The Northwood P4 (although being faster and more powerfull than the current Athlon XP's) is currently almost 2x more expensive than the Athlon XP, and when u buy you don't get 2x the performance.

I bought Intel processors since my 286 @ 12.5 (Turbo Mode) and last year I opted for a TB @ 1.33 GHz, which was 50% cheaper than the 1.5 GHz P4 and performance wise my TB beat the crap out of that P4 anyday of the week and twice on Sunday. The 'problem' of Intel right now is that the 'White-box' builders r selling more AMD's than Intel processors. I see that here in Portugal at the three stores I buy my stuff from, one of them for instance sells something like 1 P4 for every 6 Athlons, and that is only the beginning. Once the 'Top-Dogs' like Dell, HP, Compaq and IBM put some backing into AMD, Intel will really be in big trouble cause their products (although marginally better performers than AMD's) r too expensive right now.

 

[Jeff7]

"MHz is a factual and consistent attribute of processor performance."

Uh, what? What's that about misleading customers? It's only consistent among the same model number of processors. That's like saying that a 1GHz 386 processer is the same as a 1GHz T-bird. Why bother making any core enhancements if the MHz rating alone is a consistent rating? That statement is false.

 

[christoph83]

The Northwood P4 (although being faster and more powerfull than the current Athlon XP's) is currently almost 2x more expensive than the Athlon XP, and when u buy you don't get 2x the performance.

You must not have heard of the 1.6A and 1.8A.

 

[AGodspeed]

 

[WilsonTung]

Is this even for real? I mean, it wouldn't take me that long to get some intel graphics, photoshop them a bit, and make my own pdf.

 

[christoph83]

AGodspeed did you even read the quote I was directing that line at?

 

[imgod2u]

The benchmarks are obviously false, but then again, does anyone expect anything else? Common people these are benchmarks released by the company who produces the winning chip, why is it surprising that they are inaccurate?
You guys are blowing this way out of proportion. Does AMD's cheap PR attempt make their AthlonXP's bad processors? Geez people you act like you're actually surprised corporate marketing lies all the time.

 

[DAPUNISHER]

It would appear the processor wars are heating up once again and the propaganda machines of both companies are in full swing. This is becoming more entertaining than the "Burger wars" of years past.

 

[AGodspeed]

 

[Derango]

<< Is this even for real? I mean, it wouldn't take me that long to get some intel graphics, photoshop them a bit, and make my own pdf. >>



Thats exactly what I was thinking.

 

[formulav8]

Sad Intel has to do this

 

[nagger]

I was talking about the current pricing for the P4a 2GHz and the Athlon XP 2000+ here in Portugal, BTW.

But the pricing holds true for all the Northwoods here:

ATHLON XP1600+ 161,60 ?
ATHLON XP1800+ 224,00 ?
ATHLON XP2000+ 370,70 ?

PENTIUM 4 1600 MHZ 326,10 ?
PENTIUM 4 1800 MHZ 406,30 ?
PENTIUM 4 2000 MHZ 553,00 ?
PENTIUM 4 2200 MHZ 1.054,70 ?

This price list is available here in PDF format from one of the best e-commerce sites in Portugal.

 

[LikeLinus]

This isn't even known to be true. Why in the world are you even posting this, if not for flame bait? There is obviously NO need to be posting this (other than flame). Pretty pointless if you ask me.

Nice try though? BAH

 

[jcmkk]

He probably just found it humorus, and was pointing out how Intel is a hypocrit. They say that AMD is misleading and confusing people, when their data is misleading. Although, I'm sure AMD does the same thing. You should also note who you are talking about. AGodspeed is a Platinum member and is very informative.

 

[Carrot44]

Anybody care to duplicate what they did?

Guess its time to throw out my XP1800 get Rambus 800 Ram a P4 2.0 and bla bla bla

Ken

 

[FishTankX]

Mwahaha.. ok.. i'm not a staunch intel defender, but intel has been working on getting it's secret weapon out that will blow the AthlonXP2000+ away in terms of performance. It makes a 2.0A beat a 2100+ Athlon in terms of performance. Infact, it could make a 1.8A beat an AthlonXP 2100+ in terms of performance. Ready for the bomb?

SSE2.

If SSE2 optomization is used properly, the P4 leaves all of AMD's offerings far and away behind, atleast in current society. And you better pray to God, all you AMD supporters, that SSE2 takes off. Pray very hard. For there is one secret weapon that AMD is gonna use to even the battlefield.

Stealing SSE2 to use in the hammer.

Intel aint publishing FUD, they're just showing off they're P4's awesome capabilties once properly optomized.

So all of you nay sayers that say that there's no way the P4 could perform like that...

Welcome to
"Streaming Single Instruction Multiple Data Extensions V2.0"

 

[Novgrod]

I appreciate the link anyway; sorry you've been accosted

It could be worse, though: intel could be trying to take down balloons of the opposition, force RDRAM on its p3, or it could be selling faulty 1.13 ghz p3s

Then again, it's no worse than Nvidia's (internal) sheet about the evils of the kyro II.

Here's to hating the real evil PR--intel's public relations. muahaha that wasn't so clever.