Quote:
|
Originally Posted by unregistered
all criticism is acceptable when accompanied with a corrective suggestion
|
This is not a political discussion, is it? This arguement is common place in Congress. Don't know if it's relevent there, but I'm sure it is not relevent when discussing data. Bad data is bad data, whether it is the best you have or not. The idea is to figure out if the data is good, you worry about how to get better data if you decide that the data isn't good (enough).
Since there is only one data set now, the whole arguement is pointless until there is other data to compare it with. And in the end there is only one valid measurement as to performance, assuming the block can run the chip at stock speeds. Did the overclock increase, how much, was it worth the time and money.
By the way, since they are using a fake intel heatsource (does it attempt to duplicate a single or dual core), is it even relevent to an amd64 or x2?
Just bought a Storm, so waiting for more results with interest, but not really caring one way or the other.