Another Conspiracy-So Called Editor's Award Biased towards Intel?

mata2974 · Oct 25, 2004

http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=18896

Interesting read. I completely agree with the author here. $$$ changing hands or what?

fateshammer · Oct 25, 2004

That mess is hardly surprising, but interesting read nonetheless. Now we can put Anandtech up there together with TomsHardware as 'Best Entertainment Sites'. What made me chuckle was the author's phrase "performance-challenged" in reference to the Intel platform. That marketspeak could have come right out of the marketing nitwits at Intel, who fairly recently gave the world "Thermally-Advantaged" chassis. :beer:

DanIdentity · Oct 26, 2004

WHY is The Inquirer complaining that the Asus P5AD2 was awarded the editor's choice award even though it performed worse than an Athlon 64 board? The article where the Asus board was given editor's choice was a comparison of P4 boards, not P4 vs A64 boards. The editor's choice award in that article indicated that the Asus board was the best of the P4 boards tested in that specific article. It has NOTHING to do with any A64 boards whatsoever.

What a joke.

Ssetre · Oct 27, 2004

Dan calm down, Amd Droids need to clign to the hope that Intel will always suck. Intel's aren't performance challenged. A P4 will stomp an A64 in encoding or any business oriented task. The P-M's are just an extension of that where they outstripped the IPC of the Athlon's.

cack01 · Oct 27, 2004

DanIdentity said:
WHY is The Inquirer complaining that the Asus P5AD2 was awarded the editor's choice award even though it performed worse than an Athlon 64 board? The article where the Asus board was given editor's choice was a comparison of P4 boards, not P4 vs A64 boards...

I agree. The Inq article sounds more like a witch hunt then objective reporting. I would like to believe and hope there are more factors in an "editor's choice award" then just the performance numbers. i.e. price, features, suppport.

mata2974 · Oct 27, 2004

I guess you Intel guys what you fail to realize is that these "artificial" awards will keep the price of those Intel offerings artificially high and you will continue to pay high price for a mobo and CPU that is "inferior".

Captain Newbie · Oct 27, 2004

On Marketing being allowed to make engineering decisions as fateshammer said:

Marketing has been doing the engineering for Intel for a long time now. See also overextended architectures and frequency wars.

That said, the key in making a purchase decision is to read around and ask people with experience with the product (ergo, OC) about it. Word on the street tends to be more accurate.

Avg · Oct 27, 2004

Ssetre said:
Dan calm down, Amd Droids need to clign to the hope that Intel will always suck. Intel's aren't performance challenged. A P4 will stomp an A64 in encoding or any business oriented task. The P-M's are just an extension of that where they outstripped the IPC of the Athlon's.

Calm down, let's not lower the level of the forum and start calling people names. As we als know each chip is better at something like the p4 is good at enconding and the A64 is good at games. To tell you the truth the guy who wrote the article didn't stop to think before writing, but he does have a point, and I've seen it myself these review websites giving awards where the product didn't deserve it, and I guess if you take the intel name and amd you can get more of a general idea.

Ssetre · Oct 27, 2004

That is true marketing has run Intel's CPU division for many years.

Also I am not an Intel person I run an Athlon XP and I run a P4.

I will agree with you on that, AMD's are good at games and P4's are good at encoding. I didn't mean any insult and if it was taken that way I am sorry.

I will also stick to the fact that money controls hardware sites. They rely on advertising and free hardware. You can't bite the hand that feeds you and expect to get fed very often.

PhobMX · Oct 27, 2004

i dont want to flame either but yes intel has been shooting right to their feet recently: preshot, lga and no pentium-m for desktop (not even dual core) is exactly opposed to their speed race marketing...

im happy with my intel setup right now cuz i know its better than average axp ocs in pretty much everything (though i know it was more expensive), but now i want an a64, so absolutely no bias here. For me de difference in encoding speed is not a factor, its no the same to wait 15 more minits for an encode than waiting for a frame to load...

my .02

DanIdentity · Oct 31, 2004

Ssetre said:
That is true marketing has run Intel's CPU division for many years.

Also I am not an Intel person I run an Athlon XP and I run a P4.

I will agree with you on that, AMD's are good at games and P4's are good at encoding. I didn't mean any insult and if it was taken that way I am sorry.

I will also stick to the fact that money controls hardware sites. They rely on advertising and free hardware. You can't bite the hand that feeds you and expect to get fed very often.

Sigh, Intel's CPU division is no where near ruined. In Q3 this year they posted revenue of 8.5 billion, while AMD posted 1.2 billion. Sure doesn't look ruined to me.

9mmCensor · Oct 31, 2004

DanIdentity said:
Sigh, Intel's CPU division is no where near ruined. In Q3 this year they posted revenue of 8.5 billion, while AMD posted 1.2 billion. Sure doesn't look ruined to me.

Not financially. But technically they seem to be slipping.

method().man · Nov 1, 2004

http://www.ocforums.com/showthread.php?t=340211

I'm not gonna jump to conclusions and say Anand is in bed with Intel, but these sure are some odd articles...

Another Conspiracy-So Called Editor's Award Biased towards Intel?

mata2974

Member

fateshammer

Member

DanIdentity

Member

Ssetre

Member

cack01

Member

mata2974

Member

Captain Newbie

Senior Django-loving Member

Avg

Senior Member

Ssetre

Member

PhobMX

Member

DanIdentity

Member

9mmCensor

Disabled

method().man

Member

Similar threads