Maybe a repost but still...Jesus !

Duvie

Elite Member
Feb 5, 2001
16,215
0
71
Yes that is a repost but remember this is Intel "king of spin".....Conroe whas major wattage reduction so versus the out of control prescott with tremendous leakage it may mean the chip has 1.5x the actual performance max.....There are not saying it will be 5x faster.....If conroe was 1/5th the power consumed then it would be virtually no performance gain yet the statement would be true....

intel nice new chart and tricky wording is clear sign IMO this chip is not all that it is cracked up to be.....
 

Bona Fide

Banned
Jun 21, 2005
1,901
0
0
Originally posted by: Duvie
Yes that is a repost but remember this is Intel "king of spin".....Conroe whas major wattage reduction so versus the out of control prescott with tremendous leakage it may mean the chip has 1.5x the actual performance max.....There are not saying it will be 5x faster.....If conroe was 1/5th the power consumed then it would be virtually no performance gain yet the statement would be true....

intel nice new chart and tricky wording is clear sign IMO this chip is not all that it is cracked up to be.....

Yeah, not to mention that it's a "5x" increase over the old old Northwoods...so a 2.5x increase at 1/2 power would fit their claim, and it would be a whole lot more believeable than a straight 5x increase in speed.
 

Duvie

Elite Member
Feb 5, 2001
16,215
0
71
I also see maybe what clarkey01 is saying...I cant see how the prescott beat the northwood unless it was like the p4a models with no HT or anything on the 130nm process...cause a 130nm p4c should be better then the prescot based on this chart with its tricky wording.....

By the way when is Intel going to get their arse kicked in court for their illegal doings??? Maybe need to start a new thread to see the latest....
 

clarkey01

Diamond Member
Feb 4, 2004
3,419
1
0
Originally posted by: Duvie
I also see maybe what clarkey01 is saying...I cant see how the prescott beat the northwood unless it was like the p4a models with no HT or anything on the 130nm process...cause a 130nm p4c should be better then the prescot based on this chart with its tricky wording.....

By the way when is Intel going to get their arse kicked in court for their illegal doings??? Maybe need to start a new thread to see the latest....

I wasnt debating conrole or whatever its called its the performance increase per watt for prescott over northwood which is just a sheer lie, ah well.

Saying prescott was a performance increase over nothwood then in terms of performance per watt.HA/ Intellia must of done that slide for Intel!
 

Hacp

Lifer
Jun 8, 2005
13,923
2
81
Wow Clarkey thats the first time I noticed it. Prescotts performance per watt is better than Northwoods :shocked: :shocked: :shocked:
 

exar333

Diamond Member
Feb 7, 2004
8,518
8
91
Originally posted by: Hacp
Wow Clarkey thats the first time I noticed it. Prescotts performance per watt is better than Northwoods :shocked: :shocked: :shocked:

no sh*t....im not sure how the hell that is possible..."smells like" marketing to me...

*wink*
 

akugami

Diamond Member
Feb 14, 2005
6,210
2,551
136
Well, it's probably true if you consider "using" a computer just turning it on and letting it idle all day long. As soon as you move the mouse, Prescotts performance per watt sinks faster than a mobster with cement boots.
 

Fenuxx

Senior member
Dec 3, 2004
907
0
76
It's obviously an Intel thing. The way they measure the TDP of their procs is different from AMD's, so this doesn't surprise me a bit. It's just them trying to tell us how good Prescott was. We all know different (at least, the smart ones do ;) ).
 

clarkey01

Diamond Member
Feb 4, 2004
3,419
1
0
I still look at that slide and laugh. I hope the lady AMD had undercover didnt blow her cover at IDF by LOL when she saw this.
 

ZobarStyl

Senior member
Mar 3, 2004
657
0
0
Originally posted by: munky
LOL, while we're at it, look at this picture:

http://images.anandtech.com/reviews/tra...F/2005/Fall/Day1/Keynote1/IMG_2582.JPG

Notice how one line is the mirror opposite of the other. I'd like to see what data this chart is based on...
Um, it should be? If you only have 2 choices (laptop and desktop), then as total percentage of sales goes up on one, the other goes down the same percent.

Edit: Beaten. :(

Back to subject, either the Prescott Perf/watt is a downright lie, or they are handpicking unique datapoints (i.e. the lowest power consuming Prescott vs the highest Northie). Given this need to lie to prop up their products, I'd say these new chips aren't nearly as magical as they'd like us to believe. Plus, their new marketing drive reeks of performance getting the utter backburner (like that one article posted already said). I wonder if they'll ever get the performance crown back. If they do, it'll likely be because they stop listening to their ad team and listen to their engineers.
 

Munky

Diamond Member
Feb 5, 2005
9,372
0
76
Originally posted by: TuxDave
Originally posted by: munky
LOL, while we're at it, look at this picture:

http://images.anandtech.com/reviews/tra...F/2005/Fall/Day1/Keynote1/IMG_2582.JPG

Notice how one line is the mirror opposite of the other. I'd like to see what data this chart is based on...

Because Laptop + Desktop = US Retail PC Sales?

But doesnt the amount of PC sales in total generally increase? Seems a bit too generalized and simplified to me, and again, no data to back up their claim.
 

Duvie

Elite Member
Feb 5, 2001
16,215
0
71
Originally posted by: munky
Originally posted by: TuxDave
Originally posted by: munky
LOL, while we're at it, look at this picture:

http://images.anandtech.com/reviews/tra...F/2005/Fall/Day1/Keynote1/IMG_2582.JPG

Notice how one line is the mirror opposite of the other. I'd like to see what data this chart is based on...

Because Laptop + Desktop = US Retail PC Sales?

But doesnt the amount of PC sales in total generally increase? Seems a bit too generalized and simplified to me, and again, no data to back up their claim.



The chart is depicting "out of total US RETAIL PC sales" (so this will rule out businesses for the most part) the percentage each makes up...So they are saying that somewhere around Q2 05 laptop sales made up more then half of total US RETAIL PC sales...around 52% for laptops and 48% for conventional desktops....

Total sales = 100% so the 2 lines should when added together equal 100....