Now will all of you A-Holes get off KrizK's & AT editorial staff's back!!

Reply

Yeah... this reivew (to me) proves that Kris is a good, well-intentioned guy, as he put aside his own personal time to re-do these benchmarks. But the results within also prove how utterly inaccurate the first review was, thus justifying (some of) the criticism he recieved.

I can see that you did learn at least one lesson, Kris; there are no claims in the conclusion of the Opteron "trouncing" the Xeon this time (even though such a remark may be justified now). :)

Reply

At the end of page 5, the last paragraph is worded weird. Page 6 graph at the top, "Opteron 250"?

I realize that you probably were sleeping when you did this :).

The only thing else I don't like and I know it's out of your control is those stupid "get the facts" propaganda from Micro losers.

Reply

thanks to all you guys at anandtech, never let it be said that you don't listen to your readership!


Reply

This review is MUCH better.. But still, WHY aren't there reference 32 bit scores for the Noconca, so we can see how much of a difference between 32 and 64 bit performance there is?

Reply

Carfax:

I will address that in a future review. I just didnt have the time to do it all over again :'(

Kristopher

Reply

Sorry for the empty posts, I just signed up to say this....

I think I can speak from a different perspective as I am not a techhead. I do keep a casual eye on hardware and have done extensive programming so I would not classify myself as computer illiterate.

Still I WOULD not have noticeed the rediculous choice of cpu's used in the 1st article. I would have just skimmed the article and assumed that a reasonable choice of benchmark material was used. I would not have known about any of the flaws in the benchmarks. I WOULD have accepted and given weight to the conclusion...which was clearly unwarranted given this second review.

I would like to thank all the posters who criticized that review because without you watchdogs, I would have blindly accepted the article as I used to do with Anandtech which I always though was a reliable source.

Kristopher, it's good you posted a new article, but honestly, your first article was extremely misleading...almost fraudulent...it really changes the nature of Anandtech in my mind...I thought I could rely on you fellows...

If you had initially even written of your reasoning as to why you were using such an uncomparable processor and then properly framed your conclusions it would have been fine....but in the article itself you seemed to be saying that it was a reasonable comparision and the conclusions were not given proper reference.

I'm really disappointed.

Reply

datacipher: The 3.6F will still be marketed against the 3500+/3800+ dual channel AMD CPUs. The benchmarks were messed up in that article, not our processor choice. This was addressed at the beginning of both articles/

Kristopher

Reply

Kris, that's fine man.. Good work on this review, and I look forward to seeing the 32 and 64 bit Nocona benches in a future review!

Reply

thanks Kristopher.
very nice review.

Reply