Tom's Hardware is becoming more biased...
According to the newest article, even with all the spiffy little benchmarks run and the Intel proc (in both RDRAM and DDR) taking the lead on many of them, their is that AMD is still better. Now, how is that so? I have never been a fan of benchmarks, and certainly not of Tom's Hardware for the last couple of years, ...
According to the newest article, even with all the spiffy little benchmarks run and the Intel proc (in both RDRAM and DDR) taking the lead on many of them, their conclusion is that AMD is still better. Now, how is that so? I have never been a fan of benchmarks, and certainly not of Tom's Hardware for the last couple of years, but I think this clearly points out their bias toward the Intel product. The bottom line is that Intel put out a processor that can be clocked faster AND runs all those stupid little benchmarks faster. Yet, in the closing statement you see:
Quote:In the benchmark results, the Athlon XP 2300+ cannot quite keep pace with the Intel Pentium 4/3000, but the values that we measured are very impressive. In order to outperform the Intel Pentium 4/3000, AMD must switch over to 0.13 Micron in order to enable higher clock speeds. According to our laboratory results, with a speed of 1933 MHz, AMD can reach the performance of a Pentium 4/3000 based on DDR SDRAM. This clock speed can only be achieved by the new Athlon XP with the Thoroughbred core, which is expected soon.
Yet, at the top of the very same page, AMD is crowned as "The Stronger Performer". Huh? AMD will have to convert to another process to keep up in the clock speed race, *yet* they have the better CPU? What do you guys think?
Quote:In the benchmark results, the Athlon XP 2300+ cannot quite keep pace with the Intel Pentium 4/3000, but the values that we measured are very impressive. In order to outperform the Intel Pentium 4/3000, AMD must switch over to 0.13 Micron in order to enable higher clock speeds. According to our laboratory results, with a speed of 1933 MHz, AMD can reach the performance of a Pentium 4/3000 based on DDR SDRAM. This clock speed can only be achieved by the new Athlon XP with the Thoroughbred core, which is expected soon.
Yet, at the top of the very same page, AMD is crowned as "The Stronger Performer". Huh? AMD will have to convert to another process to keep up in the clock speed race, *yet* they have the better CPU? What do you guys think?
Participate on our website and join the conversation
This topic is archived. New comments cannot be posted and votes cannot be cast.
Responses to this topic
Hey, clutch, you know the KG7 is a AMD761/Via 686B combo.
BTW, what was your exact config? I'm troubleshooting a guys rig that has the KG7 in it...
BTW, what was your exact config? I'm troubleshooting a guys rig that has the KG7 in it...
I know about the southbridge, hence the Via reference. It kept "finding" the Southbridge when we got the second processor and motherboard combination.
As for the config, all it had was an Athlon XP 1600+, a GeForce2 MX 200, and a Netgear NIC. I swapped out the NIC, video card, and memory but that had no effect on it. I went looking for the hybrid drivers first (for the 4-in-1s), and then tried the regular ones from Via. They had no effect on either the reboot or the bizarre hardware discovery at each boot.
As for the config, all it had was an Athlon XP 1600+, a GeForce2 MX 200, and a Netgear NIC. I swapped out the NIC, video card, and memory but that had no effect on it. I went looking for the hybrid drivers first (for the 4-in-1s), and then tried the regular ones from Via. They had no effect on either the reboot or the bizarre hardware discovery at each boot.
Thanks. Hopefully, I'll have better luck getting this mobo to work than you will.
Nope. Couldn't even install Windows even with switching out everything. I told him to get a board by Asus or MSI...I've never had trouble from any company I've used save Abit. That's the last straw for Abit. The KG7 is apparently a very bad board overall.
A reputation that has been over hyped in my experience. They're okay, but I have other vendors I'll take any day over Abit. I just haven't been very impressed with Abit's efforts for Intel or AMD, and I think I'll be avoiding Abit from now on.
i agree abit sucks
tyan is my pick
tyan is my pick
So far, the only motherboard manufacturer that I am actually happy with is EPoX. The Abit system I put together had some kind of an IDE issue and I had to put the hard drive as Single for it to work. I can't stand Tyan. I've never found a board of their's that works like it should. ASUS is good if you wait a year after they release the board. Intel's boards are over-priced. SuperMicro makes a good dual-processor board, but that's about it. Most of the others out there I won't even consider.
abit is one of the best for overclocking
i just had a bunch of bad experiences with them
Tyan on the other hand is a dream and if you don't care about overclocking then they are just about the best you can get. Supermicro and Intel boards are good also.
i just had a bunch of bad experiences with them
Tyan on the other hand is a dream and if you don't care about overclocking then they are just about the best you can get. Supermicro and Intel boards are good also.
Tyan is an excellent company. I wanted some OCing options along with stability, so Asus fit the bill, and now AOpen is doing just as well. The best motherboard I've ever had was the Tyan Trinity 400. Via-based, true, but the most stable board I've ever used.
Abit is nice if you want to fool around with your system, but I want to have it work the first time, rather than play with it.
As far as chipsets go, I never had good luck with the BX for some odd reason--and I wasn't overclocking either. However, the 815 chipset would be my pick if I were to get one based on an Intel chipset. I've been very impressed with my dad's TUSL2-C (815EP B-Step) for an Intel chipset.
Here's mobo companies I'll buy from again: Asus, AOpen, MSI, Tyan.
Here's mobo companies I'll avoid: Abit, FIC, Soyo.
Here's ones I have no experience with: EPoX, Iwill, DFI.
Abit is nice if you want to fool around with your system, but I want to have it work the first time, rather than play with it.
As far as chipsets go, I never had good luck with the BX for some odd reason--and I wasn't overclocking either. However, the 815 chipset would be my pick if I were to get one based on an Intel chipset. I've been very impressed with my dad's TUSL2-C (815EP B-Step) for an Intel chipset.
Here's mobo companies I'll buy from again: Asus, AOpen, MSI, Tyan.
Here's mobo companies I'll avoid: Abit, FIC, Soyo.
Here's ones I have no experience with: EPoX, Iwill, DFI.
I may have to in the future as I've heard very good things about them. Right now, I don't have a very good reason to upgrade, but maybe next time.
This guy is definatelly getting money from companies after he writes his articles.I mean you can tell that in this particular one, he didn't know what he was talking about did he?!
It sounds like "I'll say in my website that you've got the best CPU/mobo/gfx card or whatever, and you'll give me one for free since i am advertising you."
Sounds quite real to me.I never trust articles from only one source. If you want an overall info about a product, try forums first where people are not going to lie to you because they won't have any benefit from it, and also try to locate many articles/reviews about it, where statistically you will have a better idea of what's going on.
It sounds like "I'll say in my website that you've got the best CPU/mobo/gfx card or whatever, and you'll give me one for free since i am advertising you."
Sounds quite real to me.I never trust articles from only one source. If you want an overall info about a product, try forums first where people are not going to lie to you because they won't have any benefit from it, and also try to locate many articles/reviews about it, where statistically you will have a better idea of what's going on.
I'd like some free stuff too, for reviewing so I don't have to shell out of my pocket. New hardware=fun.
