Results 1 to 5 of 5
Thread: Tom's Hardware Guide CPU Charts
11-16-05, 11:23 AM #1
Tom's Hardware Guide CPU Charts
Check out this awesome CPU chart I found on toms hardware guide.
This is a great way to compare Apples to oranges...hehehe.
I selected the fastest AMD on their website, and the fastest Intel, then I selected each benchmark program to see which is really faster... Pretty cool. Thanks TOM!!
11-16-05, 11:44 AM #2
That is a pretty cool chart Thanks for the link.
I wish they had the Dual Cores on there too (AMD's X2 and Intel's 8xx).
11-16-05, 11:12 PM #3
- Join Date
- Jun 2005
- The Cockpit
Add to that the fact that Tom's Hardware can lead the reader into any conclusion he wants, and only arrives at those conclusions based on what they are being paid.
I've said this before, and it's the truth. If you said "cat" that site would write up a review that would make it "dog" for the right price, and would give you all the "reasons" why it was "dog". If "dog" gave them more free stuff, or more kickbacks, then dog it is, and "cat" be damned!
One of the biggest blunders of all time I saw on there was an Intel CPU review that was so negative I thought I crossed into a parallel dimension where everything was opposites. After going back to the first page I saw why...there was an AMD logo right at the top of the article right beside the title! LOL Yeah...mmmhmmm.
You see alot of bias on the net, and everybody has their favorites, but dang that was blatant and was unprofessional.
I saw the same kind of thing last week too on another site and was shocked. That is really unethical. Advertising a product that is in direct competition with the one you are reviewing in the same review. Listen to that. It even sounds ridiculous when I read that. LOL
Anyhow, back to the topic... I don't even visit Tom's anymore. In fact, it's like a pest I wanna swat. It just keeps popping up from time to time and won't go away.
.....Now where's that flyswatter? <evil grin>
11-17-05, 01:07 AM #4
The only useful benchmark IHMO is the stuff you normally run on your puter.
For me it is folding (work , office stuff run fine on my old pIII 1Ghz).
ATM, P4's rule in folding, and 8xx's especially .... but only because current high points folding WU's are optimized for intel machines (due to compiler).
However, if your main use for your machine is to run benchies against other's results, then i guess TomH's comparisons might be useful.
I guess that is why i like folding ... easy to measure.
And while i spend lots on cpu's and mobos and some on mem, my highend folders are running $10 ati rage 8MB pci cards ... and only cuz i havn't spent the time to get them running headless on linux.
So each to their own ... one man's benchmark is often irrelevant to another's.Main Rig - p5b-d, E6600@3.15
Folding rigs - usually linux-64:
2xQ6600 B3 @3.0, 3.1 p5w64, DS3
4x Q6600 GO @ 3.1-3.3 on p35-DS3R/DS3L, p5k
4x x3210 B3 @3.0-3.1 on DS3 rev 3.3
x3220 B3 @3.0 on g33-ds2r
3x E6600 @2.8-3.5 on p5b, ds3, p5w64
E6320 @ 3.15 on ds3
1x930 c1 @4.0 on p5wd2-E
Folding for OCF Team 32 as pete_scout
11-17-05, 01:12 AM #5
- Join Date
- Oct 2001
- Columbia, SC 29063
Nasgul, I can see you feel rather strongly about this.
You make many good points and wise comments.
I have not paid much attention to reviewers for several years. Most are idiots using flawed methodology and biased to their opinion whether it be for money, subconscience or other reason. I take them with a grain of salt and learn from my own experience.