• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Pabst [tomshardware] is pretty mean to Intel....

D

dowxp

Diamond Member


<< I wonder if Intel's wacky P4 television commercial is symbolizing what goes on in the brains of Intel's decision makers. In medical school I learned about the effects of LSD and other hallucinogens, and the blue, white and orange stuff that Intel's puts on our television screen seems to be rather close to the visual experiences you have after heavy consumption of the just mentioned drugs. Let's be honest, what else could possibly explain Intel's recent decision to launch a 'value' Pentium 4 chipset that chains its 'netbursting' super processor to the good old PC133 SDRAM memory? >>



Jeez. he doesnt even give any credit to them! at the end...



<< Crack pipe or what? >>



=(
 


<<

<< I wonder if Intel's wacky P4 television commercial is symbolizing what goes on in the brains of Intel's decision makers. In medical school I learned about the effects of LSD and other hallucinogens, and the blue, white and orange stuff that Intel's puts on our television screen seems to be rather close to the visual experiences you have after heavy consumption of the just mentioned drugs. Let's be honest, what else could possibly explain Intel's recent decision to launch a 'value' Pentium 4 chipset that chains its 'netbursting' super processor to the good old PC133 SDRAM memory? >>



Jeez. he doesnt even give any credit to them! at the end...



<< Crack pipe or what? >>



=( >>





LOL Tom Pabst is perhaps the most Biased against Intel of any of the major reviewers I've ever seen and has been for well over a year. The easiest evidence can be displayed in Tom's 2 articles on the first amd and intel mobos. While Tom praises AMD for their innovation in their board he plays down the minimal performance gain. HOWEVER, when Intel's board came out it was a slam fest for Tom even though the performance gain was just as large as AMDs.

Tom is biased against Intel there is no doubt. He is a disgrace to online reviewers.

 


<< LOL Tom Pabst is perhaps the most Biased against Intel of any of the major reviewers I've ever seen and has been for well over a year. The easiest evidence can be displayed in Tom's 2 articles on the first amd and intel mobos. While Tom praises AMD for their innovation in their board he plays down the minimal performance gain. HOWEVER, when Intel's board came out it was a slam fest for Tom even though the performance gain was just as large as AMDs.

Tom is biased against Intel there is no doubt. He is a disgrace to online reviewers. >>


Tom's 2 articles on the first amd and intel mobos? are you talking way back or are you talking last year? When the AMD 760 chipset came out he said that the performance gain was only 10% and didn't merit a purchase because of the extra cost of DDR. The reason he liked the board was because he was comparing it to shoddy DDR offerings from VIA and ALi. It was EASILY the best of the three. With the new Intel chipset based on SDR RAM he is just saying that it performs POORLY against the current competition (which it does) and he wants Intel to make a good decision and let DDR solutions go out for the P4. He is practically begging for Intel to make this happens. Reading that article I can only think that he wants to see Intel make the changes necessary to appeal to the tech savvy readers out there who know that the benefits of P4 have yet to overcome the extra cost involved. He is trying to talk for his readers and that article definitely says what I would like to say to Intel. Pull your head out and start making decisions that make sense instead of making cheap solutions that aren't any good. Who's biased? You're biased against Tom for some reason. He has repeatedly said that the new Intel chipset coupled with DDR could be the next BX board. He is still singing the praises of the stability and versatility of the OLD BX board. Which, by the way, was an Intel offering. He wants the AMD DDR solutions to work too, look at his hopeful praise of the SiS 735 and the nForce. He wants Intel to return to its former glory and wants viable solutions from both AMD and Intel so that capitalism and competition can reign supreme and the buyer can't lose. Probably ain't gonna happen, but he can dream can't he? Anyway, I have ranted and raved long enough and defended Tom even though I don't know the man. He might a little more skewed than others, but that's his perogative. Don't read his stuff if you don't like it. Actually, considering your comments, you probably don't read his stuff all that well. BTW I don't like the Blue guys commercials either and I thought is was a funny way to point the article, but humor is lost on some...
 
I agree with Nelson, most of you doods who own a P4 are the pissy ones, but when AMD was getting slammed for the K6 back in the day, it was ok for you to laugh. Now the Tables have turned and you can't accept remarks given about its performance. What did you expect tom or anand or any other reviewer to say about the P4's performance with SDRAM? If it wasn't good enough to be a price/performance contender against its comeptition with RDRAM(as far as FPU performance goes) then what made you think that an SDRAM solution should of been praised?
 


<<

<< LOL Tom Pabst is perhaps the most Biased against Intel of any of the major reviewers I've ever seen and has been for well over a year. The easiest evidence can be displayed in Tom's 2 articles on the first amd and intel mobos. While Tom praises AMD for their innovation in their board he plays down the minimal performance gain. HOWEVER, when Intel's board came out it was a slam fest for Tom even though the performance gain was just as large as AMDs.

Tom is biased against Intel there is no doubt. He is a disgrace to online reviewers. >>


Tom's 2 articles on the first amd and intel mobos? are you talking way back or are you talking last year? When the AMD 760 chipset came out he said that the performance gain was only 10% and didn't merit a purchase because of the extra cost of DDR. The reason he liked the board was because he was comparing it to shoddy DDR offerings from VIA and ALi. It was EASILY the best of the three. With the new Intel chipset based on SDR RAM he is just saying that it performs POORLY against the current competition (which it does) and he wants Intel to make a good decision and let DDR solutions go out for the P4. He is practically begging for Intel to make this happens. Reading that article I can only think that he wants to see Intel make the changes necessary to appeal to the tech savvy readers out there who know that the benefits of P4 have yet to overcome the extra cost involved. He is trying to talk for his readers and that article definitely says what I would like to say to Intel. Pull your head out and start making decisions that make sense instead of making cheap solutions that aren't any good. Who's biased? You're biased against Tom for some reason. He has repeatedly said that the new Intel chipset coupled with DDR could be the next BX board. He is still singing the praises of the stability and versatility of the OLD BX board. Which, by the way, was an Intel offering. He wants the AMD DDR solutions to work too, look at his hopeful praise of the SiS 735 and the nForce. He wants Intel to return to its former glory and wants viable solutions from both AMD and Intel so that capitalism and competition can reign supreme and the buyer can't lose. Probably ain't gonna happen, but he can dream can't he? Anyway, I have ranted and raved long enough and defended Tom even though I don't know the man. He might a little more skewed than others, but that's his perogative. Don't read his stuff if you don't like it. Actually, considering your comments, you probably don't read his stuff all that well. BTW I don't like the Blue guys commercials either and I thought is was a funny way to point the article, but humor is lost on some... >>


I found it funny too. SDRAM on the P4 just cuts off its nutz and ain't even worth it. It brings the 1.7 down to Tualatin levels at times:Q
 


<< SDRAM on the P4 just cuts off its nutz and ain't even worth it... >>



NFS4 speaks not with 'forked-tongue' 😛
 
Toms antipathy towards Intel goes back a few years- if I recall correctly to about the time that the &quot;original&quot; K6 came out. Tom's comments at that time PO'ed the folks at Intel to the point where they threatened legal action, and to make shut down his site, etc etc.

Obviously, theres no love lost here. In a way, Intel can thank Dr Pabst for coming up with the PIII 1.13 problem- may well have saved them some money had they completely released that chip to the general public.

OH, BTW, IMO he's dead on with his critique of the commercials- what's the PR department smokin? The Blue Man Group ads are amongst the stpidest I've ever seen- makes the AMD Athlon ad look high-brow in comparison
 
That's because Intel deserves the hashing they are getting... &quot;Oh, let's Slam on TOM for being the one with the balls to give it to them!&quot;

shesh...



THG Rox.
 
Tom has always let his criticisms shine through. Maybe it's due to english not being his first language. Maybe it's due to his personality. I don't think he's ever intentionally mislead anyone. Though his words are often biting, they also do hold a ring of truth to them. Sometimes he just gets carried away and forgets to look at the positive aspects of some products (and they almost always exist...but 64-bit SDRAM on a P4....well, maybe that's one of the ones without a positive aspect 😉)
 
Does anyone else ever wonder if old Tom Pabst is becoming manic-depressive? His rational and conclusions in some of his latest articles could be considered a little ?harsh?.
The point is, I am an AMD fan, but this article is just a little to much, it sounds to me like he needs to get out and get laid or something.
 
I respect Tom as a reviewer, he almost always has the best benchmarks. And to be honest he is speaking his opinion, something alot of reviewers are afraid to do. How boring would it be to see all reviewers do and say the same thing! I enjoy his articles, and if you don't like his opinion thats fine, thats what he is supposed to do, give his opinion! I think what he says alot of people are thinking they are just afraid to say it!
 
Good ol Tom seems to dig at everyone. I've been following him off and on since Anand was still in nappies and AnandTech wasn't even around. (Well the nappies part might be a tad exagerated.)

From what I've learn't about Tom is that eventually everyone seems to get their share of the &quot;You suck&quot; to &quot;Great Job&quot;. He does frequently seem very harsh, but I give him a break as often in these cases the product has done something plain dumb and foolish. Intel and their PC133 memory bus. Come on, I can o'c my super socket 7 system to almost that speed and that is 3 years old.
 


<<

<< LOL Tom Pabst is perhaps the most Biased against Intel of any of the major reviewers I've ever seen and has been for well over a year. The easiest evidence can be displayed in Tom's 2 articles on the first amd and intel mobos. While Tom praises AMD for their innovation in their board he plays down the minimal performance gain. HOWEVER, when Intel's board came out it was a slam fest for Tom even though the performance gain was just as large as AMDs.

Tom is biased against Intel there is no doubt. He is a disgrace to online reviewers. >>


Tom's 2 articles on the first amd and intel mobos? are you talking way back or are you talking last year? When the AMD 760 chipset came out he said that the performance gain was only 10% and didn't merit a purchase because of the extra cost of DDR. The reason he liked the board was because he was comparing it to shoddy DDR offerings from VIA and ALi. It was EASILY the best of the three. With the new Intel chipset based on SDR RAM he is just saying that it performs POORLY against the current competition (which it does) and he wants Intel to make a good decision and let DDR solutions go out for the P4. He is practically begging for Intel to make this happens. Reading that article I can only think that he wants to see Intel make the changes necessary to appeal to the tech savvy readers out there who know that the benefits of P4 have yet to overcome the extra cost involved. He is trying to talk for his readers and that article definitely says what I would like to say to Intel. Pull your head out and start making decisions that make sense instead of making cheap solutions that aren't any good. Who's biased? You're biased against Tom for some reason. He has repeatedly said that the new Intel chipset coupled with DDR could be the next BX board. He is still singing the praises of the stability and versatility of the OLD BX board. Which, by the way, was an Intel offering. He wants the AMD DDR solutions to work too, look at his hopeful praise of the SiS 735 and the nForce. He wants Intel to return to its former glory and wants viable solutions from both AMD and Intel so that capitalism and competition can reign supreme and the buyer can't lose. Probably ain't gonna happen, but he can dream can't he? Anyway, I have ranted and raved long enough and defended Tom even though I don't know the man. He might a little more skewed than others, but that's his perogative. Don't read his stuff if you don't like it. Actually, considering your comments, you probably don't read his stuff all that well. BTW I don't like the Blue guys commercials either and I thought is was a funny way to point the article, but humor is lost on some... >>



I specifically said the FIRST DDR board for both AMD and Intel. IF you go back you will see the difference in similar reviews. You claim it was far back yet this latest thrashing Tom gives the P4 is nowhere else mirrored with other professtional reviews. You talk about his praise of the BX board but you left out he slammed the i815 chipset which was clearly superior when itself was overclocked as the BX was to 133. He called that board a disgrace when everyone else said it was a great board. He's bias pure and simple. Go back and read as I stated before the FIRST DDR board reviews not the AMD board but the FIRST DDR board reviews for both AMD and Intel. Next time please read more carefully.

And I think the Blue Men are stupid as well, dont assume next time it will get you into trouble.
 


<< I agree with Nelson, most of you doods who own a P4 are the pissy ones, but when AMD was getting slammed for the K6 back in the day, it was ok for you to laugh. Now the Tables have turned and you can't accept remarks given about its performance. What did you expect tom or anand or any other reviewer to say about the P4's performance with SDRAM? If it wasn't good enough to be a price/performance contender against its comeptition with RDRAM(as far as FPU performance goes) then what made you think that an SDRAM solution should of been praised? >>



Actually, I never even gave the K6s a thought so there goes your theory.

And I dont believe I'm &quot;pissy&quot; for asking for an unbiased review from good old Tom. Anadtech and Sharky have both been able to give unbiased opinions for quite some time now. Only Tom holds onto the bias.

Btw, I'm VERY happy with my system. After reading your response I'm not so sure you are so happy with yours.
 


<< Toms antipathy towards Intel goes back a few years- if I recall correctly to about the time that the &quot;original&quot; K6 came out. Tom's comments at that time PO'ed the folks at Intel to the point where they threatened legal action, and to make shut down his site, etc etc.

Obviously, theres no love lost here. In a way, Intel can thank Dr Pabst for coming up with the PIII 1.13 problem- may well have saved them some money had they completely released that chip to the general public.

OH, BTW, IMO he's dead on with his critique of the commercials- what's the PR department smokin? The Blue Man Group ads are amongst the stpidest I've ever seen- makes the AMD Athlon ad look high-brow in comparison >>



We think they are stupid yes. But I doubt Intel is catering to us in those commercials. We already are educated enough to know what to buy but most are not.

The blue guys cater to the warm and fuzzy audience who know jack about computers execpt what they see on telelvision. Thats their audience, the undecided.
 


<< Actually, I never even gave the K6s a thought so there goes your theory. >>




I never gave the p4 a thought. Just like the K6 for you *back in the day,* a pos like that might just not exist.
 


<< Tom has always let his criticisms shine through. Maybe it's due to english not being his first language. Maybe it's due to his personality. I don't think he's ever intentionally mislead anyone. Though his words are often biting, they also do hold a ring of truth to them. Sometimes he just gets carried away and forgets to look at the positive aspects of some products (and they almost always exist...but 64-bit SDRAM on a P4....well, maybe that's one of the ones without a positive aspect 😉) >>



I tell you what, if you can show me more than one article that praises Intel and more than one that slams AMD, I'll consider he's trying to be unbiased.

Good luck LOL
 


<< I respect Tom as a reviewer, he almost always has the best benchmarks. And to be honest he is speaking his opinion, something alot of reviewers are afraid to do. How boring would it be to see all reviewers do and say the same thing! I enjoy his articles, and if you don't like his opinion thats fine, thats what he is supposed to do, give his opinion! I think what he says alot of people are thinking they are just afraid to say it! >>



LOL he was so biased that a few months ago he was still using benchmarks over a year old because he didn't want to give the P4 an &quot;unfair advantage&quot; LOL Thats just clear cut bias.
 


<<

<< Actually, I never even gave the K6s a thought so there goes your theory. >>




I never gave the p4 a thought. Just like the K6 for you *back in the day,* a pos like that might just not exist. >>



One liners can be amusing. Too bad it makes up your entire posts.
 
wow. somebody critisizes one liners with a one liner. Good times folks. If and when I find a thread where I might be able to add some usefull insight before everyone else jumps on it, I happen to do so. I happened to be sleeping at this early hour, but I'm glad you have been monitering my habbits so closely.
Oh, and BTW, I didn't believe making unmerited personal comments were the norm for polite forum behavior.
 


<< I tell you what, if you can show me more than one article that praises Intel and more than one that slams AMD, I'll consider he's trying to be unbiased. >>


Well, I had to go into the archives, but here is one article that is anti-AMD and maybe a little pro-intel from first quarter of 2000. Need I remind anyone about the huge MPEG-4 debate that raged a while back on Tom's Hardware? With SSE2 optimized Mpeg-4 encoders the P4 was able to knock the socks off of AMD. That is even in the most recent article that we are discussing here. AMD programmers were unable to give optimizations that were as good as these ones for Intel. He merely said it like it was and admitted that Intel had the better processor for MPEG-4 encoding. Pay attention to the last page of the article I linked to. In one paragraph he said that he just wanted fair competition.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top