Tom's P4 Overclocking Review

[Lithan]

I'm running a 2.26@3.8ghz. I'm more upset that he didn't point out the many flaws with the 775 setup. You'd expect that from a review of it. They are common knowledge amoung most people with a bit of expertise, but that's not exactly Tom's target audience. He goes after the noobs. And he's getting a bunch of them to sink a great deal of money into an inferior system because intel puts the squeeze on him to get their crappy new generation selling.

Powerful is easy to understand. A Corvette is powerful for a production car. A P4 @ 3.7 GHz is powerful for a desktop CPU. A child can grasp that.

I've already mentioned that power is subjective. He offered no frame of reference for what he called "very powerful". More over, he stated that p4's weren't powerful before. It's a canned tagline that is utter crap and has nothing to do with the asus boards capabilities. I don't know how you can debate that.

 

[Elcs]

Lithan, if it makes you feel better, Tom is comparing a P4 to a P4... stock Vs. overclocked.

A comparison against an AMD model is not required even though it may have been useful.

This is a review of a feature of a P4 board. Last time I checked, AMD chips didnt fit into Intel boards to access this feature. Performance was not the major issue in this case, it was an exercise to see how well the feature worked. Benchmarks were only used to show us what we can perhaps expect from Intel in the possibly near future.

 

[carlosd]

Where the hell are the A64 CPU's in this review. Is intel afraid?
When you launch a new product you compare it with the best, and the most powerfull processors are Athlons 64. You don't know nothing about testing. I am an electronics enginneers, and you don't compare your new developments with your own products, it is stupid and meanigless technically, but form the point of view of the marketing it is a smart move.

 

[Lithan]

When you tell people a product is "Very powerful" when a superior, more affordable product is available... yet you make no mention of this product, that is not keeping the reader's best interests in mind. The article itself isn't the problem. It's his blatantly biased promotion of the product at the end. You review something, you give pro's and con's. And being overpriced and underpowered seems a con you might want to mention after you listed it's 'pro' as being "very powerful". Being able to clock to 3.7ghz, doesn't change the fact that the setup is inferior to alternatives. Something along the lines of a "close but not there yet" or "step in the right direction" comment, seems fitting, as that would be much more accurate that simply labeling the setup "very powerful".

 

[Elcs]

Originally posted by: carlosd
Where the hell are the A64 CPU's in this review. Is intel afraid?
When you launch a new product you compare it with the best, and the most powerfull processors are Athlons 64. You don't know nothing about testing. I am an electronics enginneers, and you don't compare your new developments with your own products, it is stupid and meanigless technically, but form the point of view of the marketing it is a smart move.

Did you even read any part of that review? It doesnt sound like it.

ASUS released a BIOS which allows certain multiplier tweaks on certain Prescott cores. They werent showing off a new Intel processor, just using new features to overclock old ones.

 

[lookouthere]

REPOSTText

 

[Ackmed]

Originally posted by: oldfart

Originally posted by: clarkey01
Toms Review

No A64 benchmarks lol and he goes " The benchmarks are self-explanatory. With DDR2-710, FSB1066 and a 3.72-GHz CPU clock speed, the P4 without a doubt becomes very powerful again. "

Thats like saying " A 3Ghz celeron becomes very powerfull when paired up to the celeron 266", apples to apples, A64 (3800+/fx 53) with no overclocking would still beat a 4ghz P4 in most test and with a bit of overcloking (2.6Ghz-2.8Ghz) it would wipe the floor with it.


FX 55/4000+ Out 11th of October btw, has Intel even got a 3.8Ghz part out yet ?

Why must everything always be an AMD Vs Intel or nVidia Vs ATi thing? Maybe it was just an article to test overclocking on this particular setup with the new unlock feature? It wasn't meant to compare one brand Vs another. You can do that kind of a review you know.

So, a P4 @ 3.72 GHz is not a powerful CPU?

He said "again". So I guess Toms didnt think the P4 was powerful before this? How hypocritical.

 

[Stormgiant]

Yes, this is not new stuff....

You've all seen that "bug" talked a couple weeks ago, were some board with some BIOS recognises a 3.2E as a 2.8E..

They just making the bug and official way to overclock more...

About the AMD peeps, you're just getting paranoid.... Jesus


I don't like Tom's for many years now, he is indeed a lot of biased... but, in this "review" don't try to get rabbits out of the Hat..


Peace dudes...

 

[masshass81]

Originally posted by: Lithan

That statement is refering to the performance of the processor. It is a "review" of the p4 775's performance. So your arguement is invalid. The facts are simple. He declares a processor very powerful without actually proving anything to make it more powerful than a dog turd.

LOL! :laugh:

 

[Drayvn]

Ok Tom said the P4 overclocked was AGAIN powerful, against what, saying AGAIN powerful means u are either comparing it to the stock which means the stock is being compared to the stock competition too.

Also it can mean that the P4 had a powerful CPU, which was compared to the competition, it beat it, and now its more powerful than that.... so if thats the thinking then hes comparing it against the A64 processor isnt he?

 

[Viditor]

Guys, it's THG...that means that it's a fairly worthless piece anyway. Let's move on...

 

[iwantanewcomputer]

guys, guys, keep the blows above the belt

first of all this review is just of the asus bios unlocking potential, and tom is perfectly valid in not comparing it to amd64's, although i think this could have made the review better, it's not a terrible loss

second of all, get it strait people. this new bios unlocks the mltiplier of the processor, not the chipset's overclock lock which was i believe 10% fsb increase. this means that you can lower the multiplierr below the stock multiplier like you can on amd 64's the overclock unlock has been around before

thirdly, we all know that tom is always intel biased. i'm sure the tests are done validly, but tomshardware definatly plays up intel more than amd

he says the p4 becomes a powerful cpu again...this means that he is quietly admitting that it has been weak, comment on if it really is powerful if you like

 

[CaiNaM]

lol.. quit being a tool lithan.. your cpu is all powerful and there is no denying that, so sleep well and leave us alone. not everything has to be an arugment. sheesh...

 

[AWhackWhiteBoy]

there are a lot of toolboxes on this forum...

 

[Zebo]

I stopped reading that Intel mouth piece a long time ago.. Also, Remeber everything they write has to be translated to Engish too which can easily loose some meaning in the process.

 

[AdamK47]

Tom didn't mention that the 14x multiplier "feature" is on the s478 P4 3.2E and 3.4Es. They can be unlocked with some motherboards with certain BIOS versions.

 

[DrMrLordX]

Aww, let's keep all the blows below the belt. It makes for shorter fights and funnier facial expressions. If you don't believe me, go watch a tape of Bowe vs Golota.

As far as the article goes, think of it this way: Intel isn't exactly releasing scads of new processors for sites like Tom's to review. Heck, neither is AMD. They've got to write about SOMETHING. I, for one, much prefer even relatively dull articles such as the aforementioned rather than their silly game reviews.

 

[Concillian]

Personally I like the review. I wish someone would do a similar review for the A64 so people could get an idea of what faster memory speeds actually buy them vs. faster CPU speeds. It's something I haven't seen in a while for either platform.

It's great to look at the differences between 3.72 / 533 , 3.72 / 667, and 4.0 / 533 and what applications benefit from memory speed and what benefit from CPU speed.

 

[Jeff7181]

I believe by "again" he was referring to Socket 775 BEFORE the overclock lock could be bypassed. Meaning... before, the Socket 775 platform was limited in what you could do with it so it wasn't a very good choice for overclockers. Now that the lock can be bypassed, the Socket 755 Pentium 4's is again a valid choice for overclockers. It's powerful in it's overclocking ability, thanks to this new motherboard.

 

[Jeff7181]

Originally posted by: Stormgiant
Yes, this is not new stuff....

You've all seen that "bug" talked a couple weeks ago, were some board with some BIOS recognises a 3.2E as a 2.8E..

They just making the bug and official way to overclock more...

About the AMD peeps, you're just getting paranoid.... Jesus


I don't like Tom's for many years now, he is indeed a lot of biased... but, in this "review" don't try to get rabbits out of the Hat..


Peace dudes...

Yes... we'll have no magic being performed around here...

 

[Zebo]

Originally posted by: Jeff7181
I believe by "again" he was referring to Socket 775 BEFORE the overclock lock could be bypassed. Meaning... before, the Socket 775 platform was limited in what you could do with it so it wasn't a very good choice for overclockers. Now that the lock can be bypassed, the Socket 755 Pentium 4's is again a valid choice for overclockers. It's powerful in it's overclocking ability, thanks to this new motherboard.

astute observation...some 50 posts later.

 

[Lithan]

Yeah. So he's saying 3.6ghz*1.15 is slow, 3.72ghz is very powerful. Sounds like a load of bull to me.

 

[clarkey01]

you got a point there Lithan, stuff it, Its THG, even if it is Pro Intel the style and takes he give are of no good (CPU), he said the 3400+ didnt desrve its name and YAYAYAYAHJASDHKJASHJFHKJQSHGLJAHGLKADF;LGK;LDKG;LKLAD; I LOVE INTEL.


I am not anti Intel, I wouldnt have a 2.8c in one of my rigs if I was.

Forget this thread anyhow, more intrested in the althon 90 nm core threads that are about.

 

[Lithan]

Yeah. If they start clocking good... I'm buying a 939 rig methinks.

 

[AdamK47]

Originally posted by: Lithan
Yeah. So he's saying 3.6ghz*1.15 is slow, 3.72ghz is very powerful. Sounds like a load of bull to me.

He's saying that 3.72GHz with a 1066 bus and DDR2 710 is faster than 3.6GHz with an 800 bus and DDR2 533. You did read the article, right? If you did you would have known that the lower multiplier was the whole point in getting the rest of the system running faster.