Tomshardware actually says something good about AMD ?

[Markfw]

Futuremark developed this synthetic benchmark. Like Sandra, its results may have little to do with real-world performance. It, too, is used for quick comparisons between several systems. In practice, the Pentium D 840 is definitely not faster than the Athlon 64 X2 4800+, calling the usefulness of this benchmark into question.

From their CPU article, the mother of all CPU's. Earlier in the article there was a lot of crap that I don;t agree with, like saying AMD systems are not stable, but at least one time they tell thr truth.

 

[RichUK]

LOL Tom?s has lost its love for the synthetic benchies WTF :shocked:

They still suck ass im sorry to say.

 

[Diogenes2]

Link to the article ?

 

[Markfw]

Here is the page I quoted from.
There are lots of very untrue statements in this article IMO, but at least the one I quoted above is true !

 

[AkumaX]

also "Sisoft Sandra is a very popular benchmarking program. Part of its draw is that users receive a performance rating for their computers within seconds. Since this is a synthetic benchmark, it sometimes yields results that seem out of touch with reality. "


yeah actually i did see that, but that won't stop Intel fanboi's from pointing out how much more 'theoretical' performance (if any) Intel has over AMD

 

[Soulkeeper]

pretty comprehensive round up, like usual good graphs/benchies from tom

 

[Zap]

Originally posted by: AkumaX
yeah actually i did see that, but that won't stop Intel fanboi's from pointing out how much more 'theoretical' performance (if any) Intel has over AMD

Hey, don't dis "theoretical performance." I often daydream of "theoretical performance" with supermodels and pr0n stars. :evil:

 

[n7]

Originally posted by: Zap

Originally posted by: AkumaX
yeah actually i did see that, but that won't stop Intel fanboi's from pointing out how much more 'theoretical' performance (if any) Intel has over AMD

Hey, don't dis "theoretical performance." I often daydream of "theoretical performance" with supermodels and pr0n stars. :evil:

:laugh:

 

[Zebo]

Toms is so FOS. They say something, very nebulus, just enough to plant a seed, about unstable.. meanwhile they threw everything at a NF4 + X2 setup for two weeks and could'nt get it to crash once. Riiight.. why They never document or be specific during reviews??? Maybe cause we can check thier BS?? If they are talking about Via 8XX well X2's did'nt work at one time in them not sure if they ever fixed it but neither would Toms idiots they are. Geez I can't stand that site after Tom sold it. Tom was the man - since selling, everything but monitor reviews are garbage.

Check out an old Tom review he was funny and always gave specifics:AMD Processors Vs. Intel Processors - Facts and Lies..

"AMD Processors are significantly less expensive than Intel processors although they are at least on par in terms of performance. - FACT"

"AMD processors are incompatible. - LIE

Not that the average guy who just heard that phrase would know what the heck 'incompatible' is, but it sounds really bad, doesn't it? Well, even the people who do know that 'incompatible' means that a product wouldn't work reliably with other components (which of course is bad) are wrong if they accuse AMD's Athlon or Duron processors of it. In our labs we are testing all kinds of Athlon platforms with all kinds of different components and I can definitely say that I cannot see any difference between the compatibility of AMD products and platforms compared to the same from Intel."

"Chipsets for AMD processors are inferior to Intel chipsets. - LIE

Yeah, sure, the earth is flat and politicians are honest ... I am still amused when I see people posting the above message in news groups or as their response to articles. How many more times does Intel need to screw up their chipsets (i820, MTH, ...) until you guys get the message? . . . Incompatibilities are more a problem of the motherboard BIOS than of the chipset right now. Thus both chipset makers, Intel as well as VIA, are actually in the same situation."

 

[Acanthus]

Originally posted by: Zebo
Toms is so FOS. They say something, very nebulus, just enough to plant a seed, about unstable.. meanwhile they threw everything at a NF4 + X2 setup for two weeks and could'nt get it to crash once. Riiight.. why They never document or be specific during reviews??? Maybe cause we can check thier BS?? If they are talking about Via 8XX well X2's did'nt work at one time in them not sure if they ever fixed it but neither would Toms idiots they are. Geez I can't stand that site after Tom sold it. Tom was the man - since selling, everything but monitor reviews are garbage.

Check out an old Tom review he was funny and always gave specifics:AMD Processors Vs. Intel Processors - Facts and Lies..

"AMD Processors are significantly less expensive than Intel processors although they are at least on par in terms of performance. - FACT"

"AMD processors are incompatible. - LIE

Not that the average guy who just heard that phrase would know what the heck 'incompatible' is, but it sounds really bad, doesn't it? Well, even the people who do know that 'incompatible' means that a product wouldn't work reliably with other components (which of course is bad) are wrong if they accuse AMD's Athlon or Duron processors of it. In our labs we are testing all kinds of Athlon platforms with all kinds of different components and I can definitely say that I cannot see any difference between the compatibility of AMD products and platforms compared to the same from Intel."

"Chipsets for AMD processors are inferior to Intel chipsets. - LIE

Yeah, sure, the earth is flat and politicians are honest ... I am still amused when I see people posting the above message in news groups or as their response to articles. How many more times does Intel need to screw up their chipsets (i820, MTH, ...) until you guys get the message? . . . Incompatibilities are more a problem of the motherboard BIOS than of the chipset right now. Thus both chipset makers, Intel as well as VIA, are actually in the same situation."

Just call out a little BS, horrible chipset bugs in intel chipsets are recalled, horrible chipset bugs fron NV/VIA/SiS are not.

 

[F1shF4t]

Originally posted by: AkumaX
also "Sisoft Sandra is a very popular benchmarking program. Part of its draw is that users receive a performance rating for their computers within seconds. Since this is a synthetic benchmark, it sometimes yields results that seem out of touch with reality. "


yeah actually i did see that, but that won't stop Intel fanboi's from pointing out how much more 'theoretical' performance (if any) Intel has over AMD

In theoretical performance like adding 1+1 a milion times a p4 will always be faster cause of higher clockspeed, unless someone can tell me the usefulness of this its useless.
Seems the same thing which these "theoretical" benchmarks do. I guess they are usefull when u want to see pretty numbers after buying a cpu which doubles up as a heater