AMD Athlon64 X2 4600+ Dual Core Fresh Test

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ben805

that's what some of those so called 'tester' and '(p)reviewers' have been doing for awhile, noticed I said some...not all. I'm still surprise to see a bunch of people still got suckered every single time when there's new core coming out, and most of those users don't seems to learn either, all the testers needed to do is clock as high as they possible could with their cherry-picked cpu prior to the launch date, and show a few superpi 1m and sandra screenie all over the internet forums....everyone would got all hyped up and be like....oooooo.....wooowww.... LOL it kinda remind me of those scratching lotto tickets you get from 7-11, every once awhile you'll see on the news that some joe schmuck hit the jackpot, but how many percentage of the buyer out there actually got lucky? do the math...
I wonder if those Intel guys are pulling the same kind of tricks to sucker people into buying their stuff :D :D

---

So would you say that these "people" you're referring to ;) shouldn't even bother to post results of their cpu's? Let me just say this - without these so called "reviewers" or "testers", our community would have no idea the capability of any new cpus unless they bought one for themselves. Eventually there will be a "first preview" of any cpu. Now if that review happens to be favorable, would you say that the reviewer is trying to "sucker people into buying their stuff" :) - even if that cpu is already available? Trust me, companies such as AMD don't need to resort to such tactics in order to make a few quick dollars. The "previewer" is simply trying (or at least his intentions should be) to demonstrate the capabilities of any particular cpu. It is up to the reader to take whatever info they feel is pertinant and apply it to their own situation.
Note: This is meant as a friendly comment/question and, in no way shape or form is it my intention to start a flame war :toast:

I think his point was that the companies that supply the CPU to reviewers should supply them products that are indicative of the average chip, not the stellar one..

These X2's are GODLIKE. I want one so badly...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by s7e9h3n

So would you say that these "people" you're referring to ;) shouldn't even bother to post results of their cpu's? Let me just say this - without these so called "reviewers" or "testers", our community would have no idea the capability of any new cpus unless they bought one for themselves. Eventually there will be a "first preview" of any cpu. Now if that review happens to be favorable, would you say that the reviewer is trying to "sucker people into buying their stuff" :) - even if that cpu is already available? Trust me, companies such as AMD don't need to resort to such tactics in order to make a few quick dollars. The "previewer" is simply trying (or at least his intentions should be) to demonstrate the capabilities of any particular cpu. It is up to the reader to take whatever info they feel is pertinant and apply it to their own situation.
Note: This is meant as a friendly comment/question and, in no way shape or form is it my intention to start a flame war :toast:

---

Stephen, please dont' get me wrong. The tester, previewer or reviewer are doing their job to test whatever they gets their hands on, it's not their fault that AMD, Intel, or whomever shipped them the cherry-picked product, atleast I don't think they'd requested to test ONLY cherry-picked. I'd blame the sales, marketting or strategy team from whichever company whom pull that kind of trick to mislead consumers, well... As a professional (p)reviewers such as yourself and others out there, have you noticed almost 99% of the cpu being preview ALWAYS perform much better than the mass production? coincidence? I know overclocking is hit-or-miss and heavily depends on luck, but in average how many percentage of the final products actually perform anywhere close to those that were being preview? :D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kronik

I think his point was that the companies that supply the CPU to reviewers should supply them products that are indicative of the average chip, not the stellar one..

---

yup...that's exactly what I was trying to say :D :D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ben805

Stephen, please dont' get me wrong. The tester, previewer or reviewer are doing their job to test whatever they gets their hands on, it's not their fault that AMD, Intel, or whomever shipped them the cherry-picked product, atleast I don't think they'd requested to test ONLY cherry-picked. I'd blame the sales, marketting or strategy team from whichever company whom pull that kind of trick to mislead consumers, well... As a professional (p)reviewers such as yourself and others out there, have you noticed almost 99% of the cpu being preview ALWAYS perform much better than the mass production? coincidence? I know overclocking is hit-or-miss and heavily depends on luck, but in average how many percentage of the final products actually perform anywhere close to those that were being preview? :D

---

Hey Ben,
OK here's the deal with early release cpu's (at least with many I've encountered with AMD): Many of the sample/leaked cpu's are from a pool of cpu's which were meant as test/evaluation for AMD themselves (past ES stage). They created these cpu's from the best silicon they could find atm in order to produce a cpu which can guarantee the settings they code into it. From these test cpu's they are able to tell how much they can effectively mass produce such a cpu @ minimal cost. Sometimes it means that their test cpu's are of "too-high" a quality, and mass production costs can be lowered by using an inferior wafer. Basically, it's these type of cpu's you're referring to. In most instances, cpu's created for OEM's (which are usually available about a month or two before retail) clock quite similar to the cpu's which a normal end-user will see.
BTW, I'm not a pro-reviewer in any sense of the word :p: (But I'll take that as a compliment :toast: ) I'm just llike most members of XS, only difference is that I'm well-connected ;)

[QUOTE=s7e9h3n]Hey Ben,.........
In most instances, cpu's created for OEM's (which are usually available about a month or two before retail) clock quite similar to the cpu's which a normal end-user will see.......................

[\QUOTE]

So us normal end users get an HP or Compaq quality CPU.

[QUOTE=RAMMIE]

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by s7e9h3n

Hey Ben,.........
In most instances, cpu's created for OEM's (which are usually available about a month or two before retail) clock quite similar to the cpu's which a normal end-user will see.......................

[\QUOTE]

So us normal end users get an HP or Compaq quality CPU.

---

Hey,
I know it sounds like crap, but you'd be surprised to see some of the beasts which HP and Compaq hide under their stock HSF ;)