wbmw,
In reality, AMD took their "findings" to the journalist Tom Pabst back in April, in hopes that he would write a sensationalized story, and help AMD sling mud at their competitor.
Sling mud? Uncovering the truth behind benchmark cheating is mud? Why is Bapco hiding their methodology, and you have to hack it to find out what it is they are testing? It's mud when it is false. I haven't seen many poeple coming in defense of BapCo. Even Tom. Here is what he said: What I will always criticize BAPCo for is that they have a very low degree of transparency about their structure, their members as well as their benchmarks. I don't trust organizations that like to cover behind clouds. Believe me, most of BAPCo's members have very little or nothing to do with the development of the benchmarks. That is a bit strange, ain't it?
It was this *objective* journalist that turned down AMD's attempt to discredit Bapco and Intel, since his "findings" didn't agree with AMD's.
One problem with this objective journalist is that he no longer does any hands on work, just hands it to his 3 underlings. His passion to search for truth is gone, and his 3 underlings are hopeless. AMD should have read his site and realized that Tom is gone from Tom's Hardware site.
AMD has once again decided to sling mud
You are playing with words again. It's Bapco and Intel who are dirty, underhanded with their non-transparent one sided benchmark. They are the mud. AMD has uncovered it.
but this time, they have taken their case to the AMD fanatic Van Smith, who has proven many times in the past that he is not afraid to lie and cheat in order to bash Intel.
Are you so upset with Van Smith because he is so eager to uncover Intel's dirty laundry? Let me give you advice. Channel your anger at people inside Intel who think of fraudulent schemes like BapCo, and Van Smith will be out of work. No more dirty stuff to uncover.
Therefore, I find it exceedingly humorous that you are still idolizing AMD as the "investigator" and condemning Intel as the "perpetrator", when this is nothing more than a catfight between two businesses, one of which has nothing to lose and everything to gain by being dirty and sneaky about the way that they compete.
I think you are wrong about nothing to lose. Intel lost $400 Bilion in market cap, and secretive benchmark manipulation was intended to slow down the loses. If everything was alright with Intel, if Intel was on top of the world as, say 3 or 4 yars ago, there would have been no need to cheat, to manipulate benchmarks. Intel had the best processors back the, regardless of benchmark, task or program.
And that wouldn't be Intel, who has little to gain, and everything to lose from taking on the same sneaky and dirty tactics
You would think so, wouldn't you? Apparently Intel management does not agree with you, since they created BapCo, the crooked benchmark company.
that AMD is now becoming well known for.
Oh really? I know it is so in your mind and in your posts. But that does not constitute "becoming well known".
Joe |
