Quote Originally Posted by qurious63ss View Post
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.