AMD's X2 A Failure Over At Tom's

[Duvie]

Originally posted by: Gamingphreek
You know what... this guy sounds a lot like our good friend FelixDaKat.

-Kevin

Who are you alking about?? The OP???

 

[imipenem]

I can't believe I read every page of this thread...

 

[Duvie]

The better thread on this (more constructive) is in the cpu/ocing forum....

 

[Gamingphreek]

Originally posted by: Duvie

Originally posted by: Gamingphreek
You know what... this guy sounds a lot like our good friend FelixDaKat.

-Kevin

Who are you alking about?? The OP???

Sorry im referring to porkster

 

[Aquila76]

Originally posted by: Duvie
Why the results are clearly fvcked up again since the Intel has been offline for up to 5-6 hours, AGAIN...the fact that doesn't ellude me was at the start of this test this 2nd round did not match the 3rd round....The INtel for quite a while was leading in 3 out of the 4 test and that differed from the first 12 hours of the last weeks test where the AMD lead those 3 all the time and only blew them out after the INtel again had so much accumulative downtime....

Basically the dumbsh^t couldn't even reproduce his own results from the first time......No platform change would have resulted in the 20% differencei the CD encoding and about a 7-10% change in video encoding...

Then all of a suddne about several hours in the test the video took a nose dive and the AMD which was even blew buy to buil\d a 33% lead before the reboot and downtime for the INtel machine...

I am suspicious of the 2nd test cause of this inital hours that did not match the first test (prior to reboots there as well)......Supposed to be same board for the AMD setup but if you had noticed the ram sticks looked differrent...Just an observation and not sure...

Do you mean the AMD RAM may have been switched at some point, or that they have always looked different from the Intel RAM? If it's the former, I'm not surprised.
Honestly, anyone basing their decision on this test is underinformed at best and a blind fanboi at worst. Tom's is the only site where I've seen the Intel ahead of the AMD, and it's obviously the number of tasks. Anand's test with 7 or 8 apps showed AMD quite ahead, as does everyone else's. THG is definitely cooking the books on this one.

 

[Duvie]

I am not sure on the ram as it just looks different....just an observation...

Actually the test do not differ other sites in the fact o other site was running 4 cpu intensive apps...At I think did 2 and 3 but not necessarily 4...I am not surprised by 3 out of 4 to AMD with the encoding CDs closer and the Divx getting nothing done....

However one of the reasons the Divx gets nothing done is the default for that app I have heard is below normal or "low" so like Folding at Home it will give up all cycles to apps that need them and have a higher priority (whic is all 3 of them)...So naturally other then in between runs it likely never gets some free cycles...thus nothing gets done.....

If the changed that to normal or likely used an app like TMPGenc that is set to normal at default we could see some different results...More Divx work could be done but it would steal cycles from others and it is conceivable Intel would win more of them...winrar would likley be closer, they would win CD encoding and gaming could be slightly theirs...

 

[Sqube]

Another issue was the extremely slow Divx compression on the AMD system. Both AMD and Intel work with the same software and the applications were started in the same order. The Windows system itself determines what priority is assigned to each application. We do not use any software to influence the priorities of the individual applications during processing.

Porkster, all I can is laugh at your pitiful attempts at trolling. I saw some interesting points made in this thread, but I think I'm gonna mosey on over to the CPU version of this thread. I'm guessing you're afraid to post there because you know you'll be blown out of the water.

And I see you conveniently ignored ZeBos's post. You know, the one that pretty much shut you down completely. GG.

 

[Zebo]

I find it commendable Toms has found one area of performance advantage no other site has been able to find for the Pentium D-EE.

But should we really be that suprised? I don't doubt this Intel EE is faster in FOUR intensive tasks containing intel micro ops than any dual core X2.

Toms designed the test to show that.

After all the EE has four cores. Much like 3.2 prescott vs. a single core 4000, the 3.2 prescott *should* come out ahead in two very intensive tasks running simultanious..duvie showed that in his HT demos..due to two virtual cores for Intel vs. one for AMD... HT is intel's only saving grace.

Too bad Intel did'nt include hyperthreading on the budget dual cores or I'd buy one. As it is though it's single, double and most multithreaded performance can't come close to AMD X2 at all see sig or about 100 other reviews I linked earlier..

 

[Duvie]

What do you have a fishin pole one hand and a wirel;ss laptop in the other???? Aren't you on vacation or are you jonesing for an AT forum fix???

 

[Zebo]

Hehe ya I love AT....I'm on vacation..I'm in and out...I'm headed out again once these lazy arse brothers of mine wake up from thier tie on we got last night. cya later

 

[sandorski]

Thread title should be changed to: "Failure over at Toms, Ownage at Anandtech!"

 

[mircea]

Amongst the many things that I see with the test going wrong the one I hate the most is that when I watch the Pentium Live page Opera has to reboot too.

But seriously now, I have a few coments:
1. As stated on the test page and by many posters here this is a stress test that wants to see which CPU can cope better under the conditions and be more stable. The answer to this is clear:
AMD::::::1st round = 0 reboots; 2nd round = 0 reboots
Pentium::1st round = 4 reboots; 2nd round = 3 reboots

2. If the Pentium is HT capable it's not unfair to use it is since it exists on the chips for this exact reason. It's like saying that it's unfair that AMD uses onboard memory controller and should use a separate chipset solution so that the memory controller would be on the motherboard.
While having HT enabled is not unethical, it is posible to be affecting the stability of the system. Just look at the CPU usage charts between the two CPU's and see how the AMD is many times more constant while the Pentiums looks like a lie detector
What could be unethical is the posibility of using only HT friendly applications which is not a real world situations. IT could be I'm not acusing anyone.
But people seem to atach to much to CPU performance. So they look at the individual app and depending on their bias they choose that the most important of the 4 is the one where his/her favorite CPU is curently leading, and qualify it as a CPU win. (What is it wining I have no clue)
Because of this, and because we have no clue how many WinRAR archives + CD compression + FPS/runs in game demo equals 20 minutes of Divx compression, Tom's could adjust the AMD system task manager to have all 4 app's at normal. Just so people won't be complaining, since the CPU is already runing 100% anyways, but it's not being asigned the 4th aplication. This would be as real world as HT enabled is, since I don't think that, if anyone is interested of having 4 applications runing with equal share on the CPU and has an AMD system will dump it and go buy a Pentium, if he can change that in the task manager.

3. Knowing the performance diference between the two on each individual application from other thests and reviews the live chart seems totally wrong. Why is that so? Amongst many things already shown, I bring up another one. The AMD system which never restarted or locked has been working at 100% from the start and has counted up on every app never seemed to run away from the Pentium when it was reset and in idlle or when tom's was working and reinstalling it.
Or going to the flip coin If the Pentium is such a strong performer that it can average to keep the same pace with the AMD system even though it spent about 30% doing nothing why dont we se it's performance when runing head to head. It should be strongly rebounding after each restart to gain the headroom "necessary for the next reboot" and work that will get on it. And it if such performance was true it would also conflict with the reviews of the chips in diferent multi-task scenarios on diferent sites and including this one.

There are many things to say but I'll stop here so you don't get borred.

 

[mi1stormilst]

Originally posted by: DaveSimmons

Originally posted by: porkster
The real question is the AMD X2's lack to do the expected tasks! The AMD X2 has refused to go near the difficult thread of divx encoding which gives Warning signs to all those thinking of buying a Work-Horse computer. For many, a AMD dual core solution isn't a solution at all it would proably better to buy an older AMD CPU or goto the defacto, Intel system.

Hey troll, X2 is very capable of divx encoding but don't click the link or it might end your fanboi fantasy of intel dominance.

As an intel fanboi, you must convince yourself that four simultaneous heavy load tasks is the exact requirement of every modern CPU. Not 3, where the X2 works great, not 5, where the intel you worhsip might fall on its face. Exactly four.

Of course that means every existing single-core P4 would also be a piece of garbage in your fantasy world, but what fanboi needs consistency.

<-- typing this on my intel P4 3.2C, a very nice CPU but not an object of worship for me.

ooooooooooo you got SERVED! lol

 

[DerelictDev]

WOW i love how the thread is labelled X2 failure when overall it ran just as well or better (overall) than the intel cpu.
Also the response to the fanboy above is great ^^
http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=2410&p=14

 

[CraigRT]

Why do people still read that useless site... ??

I hate THG and take nothing they say seriously!!!

 

[dev0lution]

The test and updates IMHO lend no credibility to the methodology nor the people conducting it. It's like they went out for a pizza and came back and discovered the intel rig had crashed and then tried to explain it away in the updates. I don't trust the "live" cams and take this test with a grain of salt. Either platform has its strengths and weaknesses.

5 Boards in a day? You've gotta be kidding me. And midstream they decide to change the parameters of the test and disable SLI completely because nForce4 SLI isn't stable on the Intel platform.

And while I'd love to learn the in's and out's of phase change cooling, I don't think the effort is worth it just to run at stock Intel speeds. Intel chips are energy inefficient, which is why I'm switching to AMD....

 

[classy]

You can also get one of the Crashels, I mean Intels , over at the egg for $1200. Not Bad actually, you probably won't get a damn thing completed, but the bragging rights will be huge

 

[porkster]

Originally posted by: Soviet
GO INTEL! WOO!

Although it is strange that the AMD isnt pulling ahead in Farcry as thats what theyre speciality is, games. Two p4's "glued together" is beating AMD's more "advanced" approach to duel core.

Yeah the Intel 840EE is showing to be the best CPU in all areas. Just Tom's Hardware is such a poor site, they know nothing in the results that come from the testing.

They have restarted and tinkered with the machines so many times without resetting scores or doing system installations properly. They had the wrong fan on the P4 system and also weren't using new thermal pad/paste.

Toms Hardware, are lamers in the Amiga/ST era definition.

I guess the only thing is the test they are running is unique and is producing data that shows what you can expect out of the CPU's, if you own one on your desk.

.

 

[SlitheryDee]

Originally posted by: porkster

Originally posted by: Soviet
GO INTEL! WOO!

Although it is strange that the AMD isnt pulling ahead in Farcry as thats what theyre speciality is, games. Two p4's "glued together" is beating AMD's more "advanced" approach to duel core.

Yeah the Intel 840EE is showing to be the best CPU in all areas. Just Tom's Hardware is such a poor site, they know nothing in the results that come from testing.

They have restarted and tinkered with the machines so many times without resetting scores or doing system installations properly. They had the wrong fan on the P4 system and also wheren't using new thermal pad/paste.

Toms Hardware are lamers.

I guess the only think is the test they are running in unique and is producing data that shows what you can expect out of the CPU's if you own one on your desktop.

.

Where did you find that info?

I didn't see that in any of the updates.

Edit: the old hsf was clean in the picture but that doesn't mean that they used any non-stock thermal medium, they just cleaned off the used stuff for the pic.

 

[maximusfarticus]

They went through 6 motherboards for the Intel system.

http://www.tomshardware.com/cpu/20050603/stresstest-01.html

Yeah, for a professional CPU it sure seems stable. Give me the 4800 anyday.

 

[Genx87]

I didnt bother to read the entire thread. But considering I cant find any faults in an A64 3000+ please how am I going to find any in the X2?

Oh you mean it may not be as fast as the P4 in some tasks? Is that really a fault?

I consider a reboot 3 times a day a fault, not being the fastest at something isnt.

 

[SirPappy]

Originally posted by: porkster
The test have been restarted again and the AMD X2 is failing again.

No busines will touch these AMD X2 two-bit CPU's.

http://www.tomshardware.com/cpu/20050603/index.html

.

are you really that stupid?

or are you just paid for?

after reading this thread, I'd trust a used car salesman over what you're posting.

and b4 you call me an amd fan, Ive never owned an AMD PC. I've always owned Pentium,

but that might change after reading this thread. and I owe it all to you porkster.


thanks porkster

 

[neonerd]

fsckin troll :roll:

 

[Gamingphreek]

Originally posted by: porkster

Originally posted by: Soviet
GO INTEL! WOO!

Although it is strange that the AMD isnt pulling ahead in Farcry as thats what theyre speciality is, games. Two p4's "glued together" is beating AMD's more "advanced" approach to duel core.

Yeah the Intel 840EE is showing to be the best CPU in all areas. Just Tom's Hardware is such a poor site, they know nothing in the results that come from the testing.

They have restarted and tinkered with the machines so many times without resetting scores or doing system installations properly. They had the wrong fan on the P4 system and also weren't using new thermal pad/paste.

Toms Hardware, are lamers in the Amiga/ST era definition.

I guess the only thing is the test they are running is unique and is producing data that shows what you can expect out of the CPU's, if you own one on your desk.

.

You must be THE MOST ignorant person i have had the pleasure of arguing with on these forums. None of your arguments have ANY basis whatsoever. Additionally, you act like you have infinite knowledge and that we are all stupid or something.

Read our posts, maybe, with luck, they will, eventually, dent that thick skull of yours.

-Kevin

 

[CalvinHobbs]

four months back i had to choose intel or amd, i went for a 3500+ , i do both encoding and gaming and i have got no regret for leaving the intel path, in fact i'm looking for the amd dual core, i'm no cpu expert to undesrtand fpu things etc but if intel requires 3ghz to do what a 2.2ghz can do, the choice is not difficult for me.