Why is Anandtech 'hatin' on the XP3200+ so much?

[imported_Pablo]

Originally posted by: AMDHardcoreFan
Intel fans can be intel fans.

What can we do. Its all opinion. you guys at Anandtech are too woried about stats on paper...**whooo my game went from 234 FPS to 244!!! thats incredible*** kinda deal. If I cant see an difference with the human eye, theres no point upgrading in my opinion.


like I said everyone has there own rights, and I persoanlly beleive Jeff thinks your dissing AMD. Thats his opion and hes entitled to it.

remember theres always fans of the other product so on professional sites like these you have to be equal minded.

w00t for closemindedness!!!

 

[Lonyo]

Some people are just stupid

 

[Strych9]

Originally posted by: jeffrey

Originally posted by: tagej
I personally don't give a lick about Intel vs AMD vs whoever else, I don't care about the companies. I care about objective information on the performance and features of hardware. AT has always delivered that.

I'm a little surprised to, that the Athlon 3200+ has not been covered, other than some blurbs in articles on other processors/chipsets etc. I would think that the flagship processor from AMD or Intel, especially one that uses a higher FSB than before would be covered - for better or worse. If the thing gets spanked by other processors, then so be it!

Thank you for that post. Finally, someone who has similar feelings :beer:

I agree with you also. The 3200 should have received some coverage. I know a lot of folks are curious how this cpu stands up. I find it quite amusing how everyone rushes to defend "Anand Almighty" (hey that could be a movie) rather than put some thought into the issue at hand. Don't get me wrong, I love this site and spend a lot of time here. But what is done and written here should not always be taken as gospel without question.

 

[DAPUNISHER]

Originally posted by: thorin

Originally posted by: AndyHui
Why would we hate it? I seriously do not understand the reasoning here.

We haven't done a review of the Intel Celeron since the 1.7, and now what speed are they up to? You cannot draw the conclusion from this that we hate it.

OMG Anand hates the Celeron too ... it must be CPU discrimination <grin> just kiddin

Thorin

LOL! that's just wrong brudda, no way should the celery be grouped with the Barton! :brokenheart:

 

[DAPUNISHER]

EDIT: gosh darn the subscriber server is fast! double posted as quick as I could click the mouse button :Q

 

[Double Trouble]

I have no doubt that Anand (and his crew, lets not forget that there's a lot of folks involved to get us all the info we want here at AT) is an extremely busy guy, and no reasonable person would have a problem with that. I just think the 3200+ should have received a little more coverage, perhaps a small overview with the basics, how it stacks up, whether it's significantly better or worse than similarly priced cpu's etc.

We don't know the goings on behind the scenes, and I don't think it's a matter of anyone "hatin'" on anything, but I'm surprised at the (lack of) coverage of the 3200... I would guess it's a matter of a bunch of things going on at the same time (canterwood, springdale, 3.0c processors, lots of new mobo's to review) etc.

 

[andreasl]

I am also left wondering why the XP3200+ review was never posted. Especially since I remember reading this from the boss himself(dated 05/13/2003):

Quote

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
perhaps a 400MHz FSB plus a 400MHz FSB-optimized nForce2 boards adds noticable performance?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Nope.

I put the review on hold to make sure people could access the NV35 review, you'll see my take on the CPU later today...

Take care,
Anand

Link

The strangest thing is that there does not seem to have been any explanations for why it was never posted. I am not into the Intel vs AMD thing but I kept waiting for that review to get the complete picture. I was never fully happy with the THG review and others.

Would be nice if someone from Anandtech could explain why it wasn't posted. I'll live with that.

 

[txxxx]

FFS ITS A PROCESSOR GET OVER IT!

 

[TROGDORdBURNINATOR]

Nope.

I put the review on hold to make sure people could access the NV35 review, you'll see my take on the CPU later today...

Take care,
Anand
05/13/2003 7:10 AM

Sound to me like the review was done from anand's comments. I bet he just has a soft spot in his heart and didn't want to hurt AMD by telling the world the truth about their deceptive PR rating. Pfft...it's only off by 400...that's not too bad!

 

[TROGDORdBURNINATOR]

It makes me question his objectivity...
Withholding bad news about a processor/company is really not too far off from lying about the performance of a chip. I don't know if it's true or not but I'm left wondering if the processor had done extremely well, would we be hearing about it? I've never seen anandtech not cover the launch of any AMD flagship CPU in recent memory.

 

[Ketchup]

Originally posted by: TROGDORdBURNINATOR
It makes me question his objectivity...
Withholding bad news about a processor/company is really not too far off from lying about the performance of a chip. I don't know if it's true or not but I'm left wondering if the processor had done extremely well, would we be hearing about it? I've never seen anandtech not cover the launch of any AMD flagship CPU in recent memory.

Lemme get this straight. Anandtech does not post a review on AMD's latest chip, for any number of reasons we know not, and you are calling the editors at Anandtech lyers? You have some nerve buddy, and you have nothing to back it up.

 

[TROGDORdBURNINATOR]

Lemme get this straight. Anandtech does not post a review on AMD's latest chip, for any number of reasons we know not, and you are calling the editors at Anandtech lyers? You have some nerve buddy, and you have nothing to back it up

No...not accusing them of anything. I'm just saying that having the review done and ready to post but then waiting until the afternoon because he wants people to soak up an existing one...then never posting it at all raises some questions about objectivity in my mind. It's the first truly horrible chip AMD has released in a long time (if only for its PR rating) and I find it an odd co-incidence that this is the review to not get published despite being finished.

If having my own opinion on why it wasn't posted makes me a heritic to all the anandtech fanboys then so be it.

Maybe there's an explanation that I don't know which is great. I hope someday to hear it. But, from where I sit, with the facts I have, it looks like bias to me.
That's my perception.

 

[ed21x]

It wasn't really ignorance, per say as the lack of maturity his original post was responded to that sorta surprised me. Alot of us consider Anandtech to be among the more unbiased sources of news with a staff of dignified workers. So the fact that this staff member claimed to be speaking on behalf of all the others in such an arrogant matter was annoying to say the least.

Originally posted by: Syborg1211

I'm sorry that you responded to this thread in that manner. Espcially since in your post you chose the term we. I hope your sarcasm and taunting are not representative of the Anandtech staff. This site has been several hundred feet above that kind of attitude and I hope that your use of we was not endorsed by Anand.

I can't help asking but... are you that ignorant? Anandtech may not have the time nor the resources to be reviewing EVERY processor that comes out. A speed bump for a processor happens so frequently that it's tough to cover every stinkin one. Maybe they're busy covering a motherboard or something else right now? Maybe they're trying not to waste a whole LOT of time, because it takes a LOT of time to do all the benches, on a processor that will not show a significant enough boost in performance to warrant the use of their time to review. Doing a review will only show one thing, that the processor does not deserve the PR rating that it has. Everyone seems to know that, so why bother? You're acting like it's easy to do reviews, but you go and try swapping out your processor a few times and see how easy that is on top of taking benches and trying to maintain absolute uniformity between them all.

Originally posted by: AMDHardcoreFan
Id go steal Hitlers car than kill myself before using an intel

entire life has been filled with nothing but problems from Intel, AMD ive never had one

maybe my luck, but Intel is overpriced peices of monkey poop

That was completely unnecesary and highly biased. Highly off topic as well. Where in the crap did Intel vs. AMD ever come into this thread???

 

[Wingznut]

Some of you guys need to lighten up. Andy was just being sarcastic, and even added emoticons so that the sarcastic challenged would understand.

 

[Macro2]

A lot of the benchmarks are a hee-haw anyway.

 

[jeffrey]

Thank you tagej, Strych9, andreasl, and TROGDORdBURNINATOR for your willingness to come forward and take a stand when something just dosen't seem right.


Anyone else left wondering the following.....

Was a review ever done?

If a review was done, why wasn't it posted?

Did Anandtech decide to not do a review for the part at all and if so why?

 

[jeffrey]

Anand previewing the performance increase of a 400mhz FSB Barton in November of 2002

"We just received confirmation (although AMD won't announce it until much later) that Barton will be shipping with a 400MHz FSB and the performance boost from the new FSB is pretty healthy. On current processors the use of a 400MHz FSB will improve performance anywhere from 0 - 15% on the nForce2 platform, obviously depending on the benchmark."

 

[AndyHui]

jeffrey, my post was in jest, as clearly indicated by the emoticons.

I wonder about your objectivity if you interpret my post as dismissing the AXP3200+, which I have not done.

I used we because you addressed AnandTech as "hatin'" the processor, which we do not.

I suggest you re-read my post and think about it for a moment. My point is that it is not the end of the world that we have not posted a 3200+ review, nor does it really hurt anyone either.

You have ignored my initial post where I made the point where we have not reviewed the Celeron. Surely there are people interested in this processor (no matter how misguided), and we have given no indicated on it performance for the last 6 speed grades.

I ask you to calm down, step back for a bit and have a sense of humour. I'm sorry that you have read my post as coming across arrogant or offensive. This was not my intention. Again, it was a joke and you would be incorrect if you believed it to be anything else.

The review will be up when Anand decides to put it up. Have some patience, for we are all very busy.

I await your response.

 

[First]

Anand is waiting for the 3.2GHz Pentium 4 launch so that he can do a direct comparison with the 3200+, that's all.

In June we'll have several individual nForce2 400 Ultra motherboard reviews (or a roundup) with 400MHz FSB benchmarks, in addition to a Socket A motherboard roundup later in the summer. So don't worry, you'll get plenty more Athlon XP coverage in the coming months before the Athlon 64 launches in September.

 

[Duvie]

I was just about to comment after reading through the middle section of this pathetic thread, that EVAN had stated something to that fact about a week ago when I asked where the review was.....It makes complete sense and it has been covered thoroughly around the net and does not need the anandtech stamp on it....

The only bad thing (for AMD that is) is that they are waiting for the 3.2ghz p4c and that negates AMD's constant rush to get their part out first to raise the false perception through their BS marketing they have the "highest performing desktop cpu available"...You've seen this BS??? Like every chip they have released in the last year in which they still have yet to take the crown back in majority of test and reviews I have followed throughout this year......

I like it!!! Lets see how much that 3200+ deserves that rating considering it didn't even best the 3.0ghz p4c.....

 

[andreasl]

Originally posted by: Evan Lieb
Anand is waiting for the 3.2GHz Pentium 4 launch so that he can do a direct comparison with the 3200+, that's all.

In June we'll have several individual nForce2 400 Ultra motherboard reviews (or a roundup) with 400MHz FSB benchmarks, in addition to a Socket A motherboard roundup later in the summer. So don't worry, you'll get plenty more Athlon XP coverage in the coming months before the Athlon 64 launches in September.

Thanks Evan. That is what I thought before. But I also thought that the 3.2GHz P4 would be out just days or a week after the XP3200+ which didn't happen. Now I hear it will be out in late June. Is that about right?

 

[Remedy]

Originally posted by: Duvie
I was just about to comment after reading through the middle section of this pathetic thread, that EVAN had stated something to that fact about a week ago when I asked where the review was.....It makes complete sense and it has been covered thoroughly around the net and does not need the anandtech stamp on it....

The only bad thing (for AMD that is) is that they are waiting for the 3.2ghz p4c and that negates AMD's constant rush to get their part out first to raise the false perception through their BS marketing they have the "highest performing desktop cpu available"...You've seen this BS??? Like every chip they have released in the last year in which they still have yet to take the crown back in majority of test and reviews I have followed throughout this year......

I like it!!! Lets see how much that 3200+ deserves that rating considering it didn't even best the 3.0ghz p4c.....

I must have went through 12 AMD threads in the last 15 days and you were involved in every single one of them spouting off the same remarks or similar about PR model politics. Question: How long do you plan on doing this for so I can add you to my ignore list?

 

[dguy6789]

The Athlon XP's PR Rating was never supposed to be compared to a P4, if i can find the old article ill give a link, but it states that the PR rating is how fast it is compared to an amd athlon of that speed. Anyways, even if it is supposed to be compared to the P4, and even if it does not achieve the speed it claims, by NO means is it a slow chip. get a good nforce 2, dual channel pc3200. and a good video card, and other things that make a system fast, and you will have one heck of a fast system that can do anything very fast. Maybe not THE fastest, but it is very fast, and by no means slow.

 

[jeffrey]

Originally posted by: AndyHui
jeffrey, my post was in jest, as clearly indicated by the emoticons.

I wonder about your objectivity if you interpret my post as dismissing the AXP3200+, which I have not done.

I used we because you addressed AnandTech as "hatin'" the processor, which we do not.

I suggest you re-read my post and think about it for a moment. My point is that it is not the end of the world that we have not posted a 3200+ review, nor does it really hurt anyone either.

You have ignored my initial post where I made the point where we have not reviewed the Celeron. Surely there are people interested in this processor (no matter how misguided), and we have given no indicated on it performance for the last 6 speed grades.

I ask you to calm down, step back for a bit and have a sense of humour. I'm sorry that you have read my post as coming across arrogant or offensive. This was not my intention. Again, it was a joke and you would be incorrect if you believed it to be anything else.

The review will be up when Anand decides to put it up. Have some patience, for we are all very busy.

I await your response.

Andy, Andy, Andy.... Sorry if I got things stirred-up a bit. I just didn't see this thread arriving at a conclustion and serving its purpose unless it rattled some chains. You had a completely valid and true point regarding the Celeron, that is why I was unable to respond to it until now

Thank you Evan Lieb for answering a question more people were wondering about than just myself. I still regard Anandtech as the BEST place for objective online coverage and I hope that the whole staff recognizes this strength and is conscious of upholding it. :beer:

 

[Ketchup]

Originally posted by: dguy6789
The Athlon XP's PR Rating was never supposed to be compared to a P4, if i can find the old article ill give a link, but it states that the PR rating is how fast it is compared to an amd athlon of that speed. Anyways, even if it is supposed to be compared to the P4, and even if it does not achieve the speed it claims, by NO means is it a slow chip. get a good nforce 2, dual channel pc3200. and a good video card, and other things that make a system fast, and you will have one heck of a fast system that can do anything very fast. Maybe not THE fastest, but it is very fast, and by no means slow.

Well, since Intel is AMD's only real competition, and since AMD has raised the price of it's flagship chip to match that of Intel's flagship chip, I think it would be really stupid of AMD NOT to have a speed rating comparable to the P4. AMD can say that they are not marketing their "processor model number" to the speed of the P4 until they are blue in the face, I think most of us know it is a big fat lie!