Quote Originally Posted by flippin_waffles View Post
What's real world got to do with anything? AMD has been promoting real world testing and usage scenarios for years now, yet has fallen on deaf ears for the most part.

-journalists/reviewers still use 800x600 gaming resolutions to test CPU performance.
-journalists/reviewers still use SPi to test CPU performance.
-journalists/reviewers still use $1000 CPU's to to test $100 GPU's
-journalists/reviewers still compare $1000 CPU's to $100 CPU's.
-journalists/reviewers still test notebook battery life at the lowest and highest extremes. Nothing in between.

And the list goes on and on...

Boinc is a lot more real world than anything listed above.
-valid (do you want to test gpu performance on a cpu review?, also tehy test more realworld resolution)
-hardly anymore, show me a recent review who does.
-valid, since with flexible multis you get the exact same performance a lower cpu would offer
-valid, since you want to see what performance you get for what money
-valid, since they cover both extremas so you know you can expect a runtime inbetween those two points. Also your implying they don't test normal usage scenarios.

Boinc cpu test falls in the same categorie as sandra or spi, pure synth test. If they would have provided actual WU/day figures it would be far more usefull.