As I said: no, it doesn't. In certain cases it's neck-to-neck but never faster.
Unlike you I speak from experience thus with confidence, based on my own tests.
Only idiots or schoolboys, amateurs rely on some website tests, sorry.
I'm sorry, I didn't realize you were so much better then everyone else.
I see you fixed your grammar and spelling this round.
Again: ignorant and loud.
That 1-2 sec became 10 minutes in case of a week-long rendering session.
It'd be good if you'd ask first instead of talking out of your bottom part.
Wow did it really shave 10 minutes off of a whole week? Amazing!!
You hopelessly clueless and don't know a flying frog about this. Stop pretending you have ever seen any 3d or compositing application.
You didn't even know what I was referring to.
You obviously doesn't know shit about this, young fella. Start some huge stuff w/ 3-4 gig memory need on Xeons...
Hmm, more insults without any real substance. Fascinating.
SUUUUURE! P-M - fastest is 2.1 as of now - is faster than anything, especially the FX-55!
LOL!
I think this is the point when I should stop answering seriously - this whole argument doesn't make any sense, so why bother to read it?
Congradulations, you once again misconstrued my point by taking what I said out of context.
No, you did not. You conveniently ignored my notes what content creation means, young Jedi, when I listed sw you have oibviously never seen...
Yes, I did. I said the PM was memory bandwidth starved.
You ignored it and tried to change the subject by pointing out how the benchmarks I linked to were not specifically rendering oriented, which I have already explained as well. Is someone slow? As for your 'notes', "Young Jedi: you don't know a lot of things, I'm telling you." Yeah, fantastic 'notes' you got there. I'll study 'them' hard.
You were pretty slow in school, right? Sorry, you ARE , right?
It was a hidden message, pal.
What do I have to be a member of the Star Wars fanclub or something?
Exactly.
I know rabid Intel-fan schoolboys having hard time to imagine but I don't really care about that.
Mo-and-Pa home user never will understand what I'm talking about, so you may just proceed and buy Prescott or Northwood, young Jedi.
And I know AMD zealots when I see them. Considering the A64 is based on the same architecture as the Athlon XP (which pretty much got hammered by the Northwood in everything) just with a memory controller onboard, so called 64 bit extensions and increased cache levels among other slight improvements, it's not hard to see that while definitely being improved, it's not a whole lot better then Intel's offering. The difference between you and me, I'm open to both sides whereas you are privy to only AMD it seems.
Hehehe: now you made clear you don't know shit. Few months from now I'll pull this thread out to embarrass you...
That's exactly what I thought when you first claimed the same.
Look kid: I don't waste my time reading your average newspaper-online test-etc crap which you rely on exclusively. Any people I know, who are in this industry, will only believe for his own tests only.
You don't even know how test a CPU in this field, I fully believe, so I can fully understand that without solid knowledge and experience you have to rely on some website tests.
We don't. At some day you'll see some place like ours and you'll understand what I'm talking about now.
When you got your first job in this industry, come back and I'll tell you how to make it up on the ladder.
That's quite a generalization don't you think? Considering you know absoutely nothing about me. I also assume, then, that you are aware of the fact that results can vary with each test run, especially when the results are close, which they are quite often. Yeah, I understand you work in this area (apparently), that became clear after the tenth time you claimed to have 100+ machines. It still doesn't make you immune to being biased, or even necessarily hardware literate.
? Excuse me?
WTF are you talking about?
Stop smoking that crap - look what it did to you...
Are you hovs? Apparently someone can't read.
arrrse said:
Well I have always bought AMD, I expect I will continue to do so & I fundamentally loathe Intel but I do think that the prevalent 'AMD kills Intel' attitude is overblown.
Its easy to construct a set of benchmarks to show whatever you want.
P4 wins are generally heavy on theoretical CPU, encoding & rendering & generally heavily use HT enabled software, while AMD wins tend to focus on games & even leave out HT apps as unfair.
A bunch of the AMD 'wins' I've seen lately actually show Intel winning more often than not, while the text waxes lyrical about the AMD superiority.
Shades of FX5900 vs R9800 in my opinion.
Thank you. 8)
