x86-64 on Prescott!
- Thread starter Pentium
- Start date
Why? How do you know anand's is a creditable site? Toms? How do you know any site is creditable??
No site is 100% credible, but I trust Anandtech and Tom's Hardware a heck of a lot more than Van's Hardware... Maybe you should read a few of the articles on the site to understand why. The guy is obviously an AMD zealot, so he skews everything to make things fit his point of view...
Case in point COSBI... putting aside whether an Athlon 2200+ could beat a P-4 2.53 GHz by 200%, how does a 1.7 GHz Celeron beat a 2.53 GHz P4 when the Celeron is only a crippled P4?
-Ice
van smith isn't a moron.... he just hates intel (with a passion) for some unknown reason.
And I don't think there's a less credible site on the web, than van's. I'd trust the National Enquirer before van's.
And I don't think there's a less credible site on the web, than van's. I'd trust the National Enquirer before van's.
LOL!
Actually, Pentium, I believe it was recently announced that Intel would not have x86-64 on Prescott. I don't have a link, but if I stumble across one, I'll post it. Their reasoning was their Deerfield and Madison would finally bring IA-64 to workstations, and that the Prescott was plently fast enough to compete with the Hammer in the desktop arena.
I asked van about his sources and well.. read for yourself " I have been in this business for a long time and have an established reputation. As such, I have many contacts with very, very good credentials. The source(s) here has(have) asked to remain anonymous.
I probably have more information on Prescott and Tejas than 99% of the people inside Intel itself.
Regards,
Van"
I probably have more information on Prescott and Tejas than 99% of the people inside Intel itself.
Regards,
Van"
First
Lifer
- Jun 3, 2002
- 10,518
- 271
- 136
Van is just a conspiracy theorist in the extreme. He's a damn intelligent guy though.
In regards to the topic, Van posted his theory that Intel would announce support for x86-64 sometime in June or July of this year (go here). Well, all I have to say is we'll see if Van's right by Thursday next week.
In regards to the topic, Van posted his theory that Intel would announce support for x86-64 sometime in June or July of this year (go here). Well, all I have to say is we'll see if Van's right by Thursday next week.
I agree, Van Smith is a raving, frothing-at-the-mouth AMD zealot with an inflated opinion of himself. I really wouldn't trust his "news", as he tends to twist each article to favor AMD's position.
GEEZ People, please! Van is not a crock or AMD zealot or crap like that! Just 'cause Intel is making a hybrid chip doesn't make him a raving-AMD biased looney!
Vans is only as bad as Tom's site. Everyone knows Tom lives about 2 doors from Intel, and they give him lots of nice things to test etc. Even the article names are biased and negative "AMD chasing Intel once again" was the theme of one I read.
Lots of sites are run or sponsored by companies, and of course they're going to give slightly favourable reviews. who would slag of a sponsor thats paying you money?
I trust Anandtech though. Their articles always seem very professional and pretty non baised, hard to find any better reviews for most things.
Just a few, Mark
Lots of sites are run or sponsored by companies, and of course they're going to give slightly favourable reviews. who would slag of a sponsor thats paying you money?
I trust Anandtech though. Their articles always seem very professional and pretty non baised, hard to find any better reviews for most things.
Just a few, Mark
For those who think van isn't a raving Intel hater, I have a challenge for you.
Try and find one single positive thing about Intel, that van has written. Show me where he has praised ANYTHING that Intel has done.
(And if you do actually find something... Remember how difficult it was to find.)
Try and find one single positive thing about Intel, that van has written. Show me where he has praised ANYTHING that Intel has done.
(And if you do actually find something... Remember how difficult it was to find.)
alexruiz
Platinum Member
- Sep 21, 2001
- 2,836
- 556
- 126
Originally posted by: Duvie
That doesn't show he is not credible....Maybe he is a moron!!!!
Guys, you MUST check the updated results. The test is sensitive to screen display resoilution and color depth... the P4 had 1024x768, 32 bits while the celeron had 800x600, 16 bits. The Athlon that beat the P4 had also lower color depth. In the update the results are -as expected- much closer.... the P4 even edges the Athlon is some tests.
I agree he is biased to AMD, but no way he is a moron. Yes, he hates Intel, but the guy knows his business..... only that he lets too much passion go into the reviews
And how exactly does Intel having x86-64 help Van's position, it'd be more of a disadvantage if you ask me.
Tom being Intel biased? Oh please. Tom Pabst was the most vocal against Rambus and Intel's support of rambus. He consistently criticized intel in the days of the i820 up until the i845ddr. His articles do have weird names, but they are only based on the article's conclusion. Overall, I think he is less biased the a lot of review sites.
I love it when COSBI says a low speed classic athlon can beat a tualatin with 512K cache. And sorry, if you write a "CPU" benchmark where screen resolution matters so much, you really shouldn't call it a CPU benchmark.
Tom being Intel biased? Oh please. Tom Pabst was the most vocal against Rambus and Intel's support of rambus. He consistently criticized intel in the days of the i820 up until the i845ddr. His articles do have weird names, but they are only based on the article's conclusion. Overall, I think he is less biased the a lot of review sites.
I love it when COSBI says a low speed classic athlon can beat a tualatin with 512K cache. And sorry, if you write a "CPU" benchmark where screen resolution matters so much, you really shouldn't call it a CPU benchmark.
Intel's acceptance of x86-64 would be the first time AMD has been in a leading role and Intel had to liscense the technology from AMD. That's a huge thing. More so than the actual x86-64 extensions themselves. 64-bit, as of right now for the consumer market, is nothing but hype. However, Intel becomming a follower is a very significant thing.
Tom himself may not be biased, but his subordinate reviewers tend to be. Van Smith--well, he originally wrote for Tom's. That's where a lot of THG's Rambus hatred came from in the P3-vs-Athlon days, and probably a lot of the anti-Intel sentiment as well. Now Van has left THG and hates that site almost as much as he hates Intel, and there's a Frank something-or-other at THG who seems to be rather Intel biased. I'm not sure what to make of Omid Rahmat, but he seems to be on a personal crusade against AMD supporters (though not necessarily against AMD). It's just a little crazy over there right now.
In the world of the internet wait for confirmation my multiple sources until you believe anything, period....
Also, regardless if you see updated results in his testing he still is a moron not to check that crap before...especially when it was so noticeable...He wants it so bad he believed the obviously bad numbers....
Either that or he likes to mislead ppl....
Also, regardless if you see updated results in his testing he still is a moron not to check that crap before...especially when it was so noticeable...He wants it so bad he believed the obviously bad numbers....
Either that or he likes to mislead ppl....
I believe it was tom himself who wrote a lot of the pro-AMD articles during Van's days at THG. Now that the p4 is on top, tom has definitely backed off his pro-AMD stance. As for Omid, he's just an editorial guy, nothing to do with hardware.
THEY ARNT! They dropped yamhill .... the prescott can smack the hammer without yamhill...
SSXeon
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 24K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 19K
-
-
-
Facebook
Twitter