Favourite Processor! Not again!

[airiox]

yeah thats what i meant. the 3.4 gig, one million dollar price tag one.

 

[GeforcebOY1]

i know its only at 640x what ever but it still wins , lol , it does come second in the next test down.

 

[Lord Kalthorn]

http://www.tomshardware.com/cpu/20040601/socket_939-16.html#opengl

the most trusted source on the internet for benchmarks proves the FX-53 is better for gamers.

The FX only looses once to the HT and that is only a 640x480 quake III game. no one is going to play quake at such resolutions.

The HT does win alot of the benchmarks for applications, encoding and such.

All this hook up on games! I will never understand it! Give me a processor which can take 5, 10 minutes off a big encoding job and I'll go for it: but a processor that gives me 2, maybe 3 more frames per second on a game that is going to be obsolete in a year if its lucky?

Why buy a computer for games? Where the processor is not as tough, as hardwhereing as endurant as a gaming processor? Use a computer for Games; it should be so; but why buy it for games based on game benchmarks when game benchmarks show what it can do graphically - where the 64-Bit processors have the advantage of the 64-bitting and the HT Processors have a disadvantage of the Hyperthreading. Not really a fair test is it?

Are we not after Power anymore?

 

[airiox]

Well if you are looking for fairness you would have to run the FX-53 on a 64 bit OS on a completly rebuilt applictation specificallly built for 64 bit computing.

You cant say things arent fair becuase they are. You take the processors and make them do the same thing, whoever does it better is the best processor. AMD didnt force intel to make hyperthreading technology if it sucks so bad they wouldn't have used it. The fact is that hyperthreading is the only reason it keeps up on encoding and application benchmarks.

 

[Lord Kalthorn]

Well if you are looking for fairness you would have to run the FX-53 on a 64 bit OS on a completly rebuilt applictation specificallly built for 64 bit computing.

You cant say things arent fair becuase they are. You take the processors and make them do the same thing, whoever does it better is the best processor. AMD didnt force intel to make hyperthreading technology if it sucks so bad they wouldn't have used it. The fact is that hyperthreading is the only reason it keeps up on encoding and application benchmarks.

Ah ha, but it doesn't suck 'so bad' does it? It is the best thing for a processor to do - it simply isn't good for playing games.

Maybe Intel will bring out another line of Processors specifically for games if it does become the thing it appears to be becoming.