Intel CPU rating: SU7300 gets 4 stars, i3 gets 3 stars, Class Action anyone?

[deputc26]

I was reading a Future Shop flyer and was surprised to see an i3 system given only 3 stars, continuing to read I was quite surprised to see an SU7300 get four stars.

Non tech savvy people like ~70% of people over 40 would be deceived into thinking that SU7300 is faster than i3-330 when of course i3 is a little over twice as fast at most tasks as well as in raw floating point performance.

Also i3 are insane undervolters, .9v at max clock, but even without that I think i3 still wins performance/watt over SU7300.

Here's the ratings:
http://www.intel.com/consumer/products/processors/ratings.htm

Class action lawsuit anyone?

 

[TuxDave]

I think it is because the SU7300 star rating was relative performance against an older generation and the i3 is rated among the i3/i5/i7?

(not defending Intel's rating system or anything)

 

[deputc26]

I think it is because the SU7300 star rating was relative performance against an older generation and the i3 is rated among the i3/i5/i7?

(not defending Intel's rating system or anything)

Right that makes sense. The problem is that there is no differentiation in flyers/adverts so *if* that is the case the uninformed customer has no way of knowing it.

 

[shabby]

FS screwed up the star rating, go sue!

 

[Maximilian]

Seems fair, SU7300 gets two thumbs up and the i3 gets a gold star, wheres the problem?

 

[deputc26]

Seems fair, SU7300 gets two thumbs up and the i3 gets a gold star, wheres the problem?

Couldn't agree more (well SU is a good low power chip for those 1/2 netbook 1/2 real laptop type products), if only the opposite wasn't being advertised.