AMD Phenom II 920 & 940 Full Review

[roofsniper]

To the Mods. It appears that some people are not liking the Deneb results that are being presented on this thread, so they are doing everything possible in getting this thread closed again. It would be a shame that they get their way, please don't let them succeed

it appears that some people are trying to make rational decisions yet the same people keep popping up every single time saying that they are trolls. many people have said that the q6600 is better than the phenom II but you have never had a problem with that but when people say that phenom II doesn't suck and its alright thats when all hell breaks lose.

[qurious63ss]

it appears that some people are trying to make rational decisions yet the same people keep popping up every single time saying that they are trolls. many people have said that the q6600 is better than the phenom II but you have never had a problem with that but when people say that phenom II doesn't suck and its alright thats when all hell breaks lose.

See that's the problem. You have to show proof to backup those rational decisions or whatever else your trying to prove. I asked Overclocker a few pages back why his results for Cinebench were so low on Deneb as compared to what Anand got when he tested Agena. I had proof and showed him the numbers and he politely answered that it was because different OSs were used.

[roofsniper]

See that's the problem. You have to show proof to backup those rational decisions or whatever else your trying to prove. I asked Overclocker a few pages back why his results for Cinebench were so low on Deneb as compared to what Anand got when he tested Agena. I had proof and showed him the numbers and he politely answered that it was because different OSs were used.

ok and results from other people who have reviewed it are not good? plus i believe no where in this thread there was proof of a q6600 being better than a phenom II yet that went on for pages. mostly the problem is that so many people are coming to conclusions so quickly without seeing many important things like more real world results, power consumption and pricing. without knowing everything you can't just say something is going to be horrible. if someone has proof that deneb sucks and that it is worse than the core 2 quads then ok. but from the results i have seen that mattered, that people will actually use, deneb isn't looking to shabby with more results to come. so before the other results come out and before there are more reviews it just doesn't make sense to come to conclusions so fast. we haven't even seen oced results yet although many people have said that the competing intel quads are better based on the fact that they can oc to phenom II speeds. they still have more results coming and they are some things that they won't do that other reviewers will and we need those before making such quick judgments on things.

[qurious63ss]

ok and results from other people who have reviewed it are not good? plus i believe no where in this thread there was proof of a q6600 being better than a phenom II yet that went on for pages. mostly the problem is that so many people are coming to conclusions so quickly without seeing many important things like more real world results, power consumption and pricing. without knowing everything you can't just say something is going to be horrible. if someone has proof that deneb sucks and that it is worse than the core 2 quads then ok. but from the results i have seen that mattered, that people will actually use, deneb isn't looking to shabby with more results to come. so before the other results come out and before there are more reviews it just doesn't make sense to come to conclusions so fast. we haven't even seen oced results yet although many people have said that the competing intel quads are better based on the fact that they can oc to phenom II speeds. they still have more results coming and they are some things that they won't do that other reviewers will and we need those before making such quick judgments on things.

Agreed, so when more results come out and more importantly people get there hands on this chip then we will see if Overclockers numbers were correct or not, but until then let's give him the benefit of the doubt and if you dispute his numbers then call him on it but only if you have data to back it up.

[roofsniper]

Agreed, so when more results come out and more importantly people get there hands on this chip then we will see if Overclockers numbers were correct or not, but until then let's give him the benefit of the doubt and if you dispute his numbers then call him on it but only if you have data to back it up.

oh no im not disputing his numbers. i know for a fact that most of his numbers are correct. i have seen some better results at stock from others but im sure that was because of a different configuration. the results here are good but theres just not many that matter to real world performance and theres more that i want to see which he is working on now. i just think its good to have more reviews because different reviews have different configurations and different chips. if i can see power consumption, x64 results, and how well it can oc plus a few more real world benchmarks then in my books its a perfect review.

[qurious63ss]

oh no im not disputing his numbers. i know for a fact that most of his numbers are correct. i have seen some better results at stock from others but im sure that was because of a different configuration. the results here are good but theres just not many that matter to real world performance and theres more that i want to see which he is working on now. i just think its good to have more reviews because different reviews have different configurations and different chips. if i can see power consumption, x64 results, and how well it can oc plus a few more real world benchmarks then in my books its a perfect review.

So then if your problem is with the posters then ignore them, or let the Mods handle them.