The Official PC building thread - 4th Edition

As annoying as this is, one day it'll almost certainly be in every CPU. Better have a CPU that enables you to watch such media than own one that doesn't have the ability to do so right?

 

Better? No!

 

was looking at a sb review, forgot how much more powerful the 2500k at stock is than a 6 core AMD at 4.2 GHz

http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/cpus/2011/01/03/intel-sandy-bridge-review/8

 

Those are actually good tests and measures and would suggest that Sam's point about the 970 being close to as good as the 990x in performance correct, sad to say. LOL

 

Hardware based protection. Pretty dumb if you ask me. It'll be circumvented, as things always are What a waste of money...

Chalk up another 3Tb drive. Sam, you were correct(not that I doubted it). The WD30EZRX was recognized by the card in the bios, as well as windows. I don't foresee any troubles, provided I got yet another good drive R is next in the alphabet. I named it Rosemary ♥

Yes, once again I went with the long format. I have to...

 

Heh, I'm all about the codenames for drives. I originally used codenames for PCs, but it's nowhere near endearing enough. Especially since they seem to pick up personalities of their own of late.... A drive is just a drive though, should I need to replace one (which thankfully, not needed to do for a long time), I have no real qualms about doing so.

 

In deed! Mine seems to have a very established personality today LOL!
15Tb strong
Looks like my eSATA adapter may be faulty, or my dock. My drive is not acknowledging. Have to look at it tonight. No time. Never enough time!

 

Orson Wells would prefer you call it Rosebud! LOL

 

LOL! What :S

 

Shaff,

Nothing like a well skewed test to make the competition look worse than it really is. It's also not a very good review because they weren't very thorough, or consistent. AMD doesn't even compete with the 900 series i7s, so why include them in a review? It was also clever to pick the 1100T, as the 1090T walks all over it in some tests. Two lousy games in a review? Most quality reviews and tests include at least 6 games. Same goes for software. I know that Tom's had 13 different kinds of software, and Look at the choices! Gimp, Handbrake, mplayer and 7-Zip. All favor Intel.

Some people complain about Tom'sHardware and Anandtech's reviews, yet they take the time to choose games that favor both sides and discuss the meaningful reasons they work that way. Same thing with Software. Where does the consumer learn anything from minimal tests that don't showcase both side's strengths and weaknesses?

Just to be fair, I went and checked out bit-tech's review of the 1090T BE and it was just about the same hack job as the review you posted. They said the same thing pretty much word for word in the 1090T review, and used the same software and two games as in your link.

Here's what I would consider a more thorough review, with more software and lot's of games. http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-phenom-ii-x6-1090t-890fx,2613.html
They at least go into detail about why different software and games run better or worse on the different platforms. I would like to see the AMDs tested on a 990XA board and see what the results are. I know with my GigaByte I'm getting the same performance like it was smack in between 3.7 and 3.8GHz at 3.6GHz, compared to the 790X motherboard. I'm happy with that, and I don't find myself pining for a Core i5 or anything beyond that. And I'm ready for BullDozer. Life is good, and overclocks are getting easier all the time! Not only that, I'm still having fun!

Best Regards,
Russ

 

Pretty sure bit-tech's test has been a standard, neutral test formula for years. If the tests they use happen to favour Intel, that probably means that Intel are the better choice for the majority of applications. Just because I don't see the result I want to see from a test doesn't mean I call it skewed, I look at the explanations for the differences first.

 

irony? Mr nvidia bias

 

I worded that post the way I did for a reason, you have to investigate the cause of such biases - and all too often in the case of nvidia it's because of corporate sponsorship. As far as I am aware, the programs in Bit tech's CPU testing suite do not have corporate sponsorship - as evil as I'm aware Intel are as a corporation, I don't think they stoop to that sort of level.

 

haha wake a joke Sam, relax. Yeah all the software they use is open source, so hopefully that means something. Russ do you have proof that the software is Intel biased?

 

Actually there's been proof for years that a large amount software is Intel biased. There was a lawsuit if you remember. SuperPi being a good example where Intel CPUs score disproportionately well, even taking into account their own speed advantages with number crunching.

While I agree with Sam that no matter what, Intel CPUs will be faster, I also have to agree with Russ that the entire AMD CPU lineup could stand to be re-tested on 990X boards. It's well known that every new AMD chipset since 690/SB600 has brought about significant performance jumps. At least enough to change the balance of power a bit.

 

Discovered two things last night. My Sata Dock appears to be fine. It's working through USB anyway.
And my component cable problem for my Wii and monitor are solved. I don't know whether it was interference, or just a crap cable. But a brand new well insulated/shielded Nyko cable solved the problem. The signal is crystal clear.

And yet another 3Tb drive makes it through ~8 hr long format

 

Yeah but what in? The performance increase may manifest itself in some, but not all applications. The superpi lawsuit is news to me. Suffice to say though, calling every test in a review biased, sounds like bullshit to me.

Omega: If you thought I replaced internal SATA cables a lot, eSATAs are even worse. The main rule of thumb is never buy branded akasa/ACRyan etc. cables, they're far less reliable than the basic OEM ones.

 

"Suffice to say though, calling every test in a review biased, sounds like bullshit to me."

Nothing is ever an absolute but it would be ignorant to believe there isn't a bias in most if not all testing sites. Intel & AMD PAY and provide equipment to testers and they will pick groups that have their bias as well. You can see this by compare reports against others, like I said before for one favorable report you can find another that states the opposite. So live in your BS I'm not buying into it.

That is why I like to test things myself under the exact same conditions and hardware as much as possible.

 

but when the majority are saying one thing, then what?

 

Still biased, apparently :/