Quote Originally Posted by gosh View Post
Yesterday I did a report for a customer having a large database. The report took about 40 minutes to complete in debug mode. When you do this kind of work you don't sit and wait for the report to be ready, you plan it and do other work while the report is being created. On the AMD you will not notice that the computer is working but I on the Intel, the computer slows down considerably.
I think you miss the point, If you remember when the first gossip of phenom started and then with AMD pimping it themselves expectations were high, When phenom launched it was not a bad cpu, It was just worse that the competition. It was slower clock for clock, Max stock clocks and oc potentiol AND used more power. This made it a failure in many of the enthusiasts eyes just like the pentium dual cores were compared to the x2 (i.e x2 3800 beating a extreme edition with hyper threading pentium lol)

So don't get upset when someone calls the first phenom a failure, Sure it is a better option in some cases and with later revisions and new chipsets etc it made its self a valid option in more and more scenarios but at the end of the day extreme systems is 99% guys with a hardware hobby and to them the phenom was a flop. So when Zytek_Fan says that phenom was a failure he is not talking about severs vmware etc, He is just giving a opinion on what phenom was to him.

Deneb will be what phenom1 was meant to be anyway and we can all just forget about phenom1 like we did the p4d.