Author: Aaron Gordon
Date: 02:21:18 04/11/03
Go up one level in this thread
On April 11, 2003 at 02:56:27, Tom Kerrigan wrote: >On April 11, 2003 at 00:12:10, Aaron Gordon wrote: > >>On April 10, 2003 at 20:37:39, Tom Kerrigan wrote: >> >>>On April 10, 2003 at 12:57:10, Aaron Gordon wrote: >>> >>>>It's possible because Intel engineered their chips to have high MHz, low >>>>instructions per cycle. Why? Great for marketing. Most people don't know MHz >>> >>>I don't think so. >>> >>>It can't be a coincidence that this design principle that's "great for >>>marketing" also yielded a processor that's faster than the competition on most >>>benchmarks. >>> >>>-Tom >> >>I've been over this before, a LOT of pages are corrupt. Tomshardware for one >>fakes reviews, there's already proof of that. Anandtech still runs the biased > >It seems plausible to me that many hardware sites are biased/corrupt. > >That said, recent processor reviews have been roughly in line with SPEC CPU >scores, which are certainly not corrupt. > >It just irks me when people suggest that Intel wasted _millions_ of man hours >and their engineers' integrity "jacking up" their flagchip processor's clock >speed for marketing reasons instead of performance reasons. > >-Tom If it makes them X many billion more dollars, who cares? Intel sure doesn't.. as long as the cash is rolling in. :)
This page took 0 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.