Intel Corp (INTC)

[spokeshave]

wbmw: Re: I am saying that you personally are unqualified to make the conclusions that you have because they conflict with data present from dozens of reviews on the Internet."

You don't know enough about me to conclude that I am unqualified to do anything. As I will show below, there *are* data that support my position.

"I can only assume that you are misreading what has been presented."

Then, as I said, tell me what I am misreading. I assume that *you* are qualified.

As for benchmarks, See:

http://www.extremetech.com/article2/0,3973,701275,00.asp

Note that on Business Winstone, the 2.8 outperforms the 3.06 with HT off with a score of 31.6 vs. 31. Look at Multitasking with Norton Anti-Virus Scan + Photoshop elements. Here, the 3.06 with HT off performs almost exactly the same as the 2.8. Surely, that would not be expected.

As I pointed out before, Anand has some benchmarks where the 2.8 clearly outperformed the 3.06:

http://www.anandtech.com/cpu/showdoc.html?i=1746&p=11

See Content Creation, where the 2.8 scored 45.4 and the 3.06 scored 43.9. Incidentally, Anand does not separate out HT versus non-HT 3.06s. I already pointed out the SPEC tests where the 2.8 outperforms the 3.06.

It is interesting that while the Anand tests show that the 2.8 outperforms the HT3.06 on those specific SPEC tests, all other sites show it the other way around. Same thing goes for Content Creation. There goes your theory that HT causes poorer performance in those tests.

Now, I admit that these are somewhat skimpy data, but it is enough to show that there are at least some discrepencies at the upper limit of performance.

"As for Viewperf, I have looked at Tom's Hardware, Anandtech, and Xbitlabs, and none of these reviews showed a 3.06GHz Pentium 4 processor as scoring the exact same as a 2.8GHz Pentium 4 on this benchmark. I don't know how you substantiate your claim, but it seems to be yet another example of a "stretch" on your part."

It is so easy for you to assume that I am trying to pull the wool over your eyes. I object to the "another stratch" hyperbole. I have not yet stretched anything. First off, I did not say "exactly". I said "almost exactly". Look again at Anand:

http://www.anandtech.com/cpu/showdoc.html?i=1746&p=19

and look at drv-08. The 2.8 scores 31.41 and the 3.06 scores 31.36. That is "almost exactly" in my book.

Or, look at Tom's:

http://www.tomshardware.com/cpu/02q4/021114/p4_306ht-18.html

and look at Light-05. The 2.8 scores 12420 and the 3.06 scores 12430. That again is "almost exactly" in my book.

"but I have yet to see any proof on your part."

Yes you have. You just choose to ignore it.