Awful cheat Tom... you disappointed me - Page 2

volt · 09-10-02, 08:25 PM

But look at what I marked. All 3's have different colors on the right.

EDIT: of course colors could have been altered but it would require a lot of precision to do it. I dunno ?

**ALobpreis** · 09-10-02, 08:42 PM

The copy area may not be a rectangle. Furthermore, doing some random-colored random-pixels isn't anything hard.
The issue are the similar pixels, not the different ones. How can you explain the similarities?

volt · 09-10-02, 09:09 PM

yes i see the similarities, i just wanted to point out what i've seen

09-10-02, 09:38 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by ALobpreis
The copy area may not be a rectangle. Furthermore, doing some random-colored random-pixels isn't anything hard.
The issue are the similar pixels, not the different ones. How can you explain the similarities?

you'd think if they were smart enough to do that then maybe they would have changed the the similar pixels too.

lots of weird random things occur in the world though, just something to think about

pelly · 09-10-02, 09:41 PM

I'm not sure that posting this on our front-page would be the best idea...Mutants come out of the wood-work when they smell blood from accusations like this...

However, I certainly think an email or two to the man is in order...hopefully, we can get this whole mess cleared up.

I'll fire-off an email tomorrow morning and let you know what he says...

intercede007 · 09-12-02, 10:02 AM

I found this on Hard[OCP] this morning

"Just a side note, we have been bombed this morning with everyone reporting the fake 3.3GHz P4 pictures that popped up today, and all the sites out there that have editorials, rants or articles disproving the obvious fakes. PLEASE don’t send any more of this stuff, we know, we have seen it….and frankly, if posting that stuff is what gives those guys kicks, more power to them. "

Tom caught with his hand in the cookie jar?

Solomon · 09-12-02, 12:05 PM

I'm not here to disprove or agree that it's a fake, but this is what pops in my head.

1) Maybe Intel provided the picture to Tom to use for the article? So if we remove the picture, would you still believe the article?

2) Intel demonstrated a 4.6GHz at their conference. So is it possible that a 3.3GHz or 3.6GHz is really so far fetched to believe?

3) Would Tom be that stupid to do a fake article after the relentless slamming to [H] and Vans Hardware?

Personally for me? I can really care less if the picture is fake or not. I looked at the article and came out with the conclusion that Intel has the GHz race down pat. Meaning that they already have all the necessary strings to release faster and faster CPU's if needed. That's what I got out of the article. Considering Intel demonatrated the 4.6GHz and Tom's controversial article on the 3.3GHz and 3.6GHz.

Regards,
D. Solomon Jr.
*********.com

pelly · 09-12-02, 12:14 PM

Personally, I did not even begin to doubt the validity of the CPU used in the article. Only after I realized that there was no real focus on HyperThreading ( a huge feature in my mind ). Doing some research and viewing the opinions of others in our forums and around the net, I began to be a bit more suspicious.

Tom has since edited their article to reflect the fact that the CPU in question is essentially an overclocker's dream Northwood. I have no problem with this, aside from one aspect. The fact that he seems to claim that this overclocked CPU is an accurate depiction of the "legit" 3GHz+ CPU really seems a bit far-stretched. As far as I know, no CPU's with HyperThreading have been sampled thus far. Wouldn't this feature ( amidst others ) effect performance?

This certainly seems to be a sticky situation...I'm beginning to think this field is like a bad soap opera...

Solomon · 09-12-02, 12:21 PM

I tend to agree with you pelly that the fact the hyperthreading wasn't even brought up. But if you look at the bigger scope of things. The Northwood is far more sacalable them maybe people have been let to believe?

Did Tom mention if his CPU is at least a C1 stepping? If it was, then we can come to some sort of conclusion that the C1 stepping is very very flexible in terms of GHz speed.

I try not to get caught up with validating if an article is legit or not. I only do that with The Inquirer, because it's so easy to make fun of them as they do it to themselves. Hehe.

Regards,
D. Solomon Jr.
*********.com

pelly · 09-12-02, 12:29 PM

Given the insane overclocking ability of the CPU, I have to imagine the processor is based upon the next stepping...

As far as validating an article...I refrained from posting anything until I gave Tom the opportunity to respond. When he failed to reply in any manner whatsoever ( even to say he was too busy to answer right away ), my suspicions grew too high...

It definitely came across ( in my opinion ) that Tom was trying to pass this CPU off as one of these "next-generation" processors with all the new bells and whistles...

Solomon · 09-12-02, 12:32 PM

I would have to add that Intel must of gave them the "Go Ahead" with the article. I have no ties with Intel, but I would certainly email them and just say:

"Is Tom's article supposed to be taken truthfully or is this a hoax"

At least you are not asking about the speed, availability, etc... So if Intel doesn't at least answer that question then I would then start to evaluate if the article is legit or not.

Regards,
D. Solomon Jr.
*********.com

DaveW · 09-12-02, 02:04 PM

haha... I love it when people try to fake a pic... I remember some faked shots of the GF3 core... Come on people, just because you know a little photoshop doesn't make you a master at forgery.

These guys don't realize that there are plenty of people out there who do a lot of graphical work... we are used to staring at pixels all day... we can spot fakes like this a mile away...

By the way... I do think it would be interest for use guys to make our own fake pictures... maybe fake NV30 cores? It would be an interesting contest, and we could show them how its really done

09-10-02, 08:25 PM	#13
volt Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: /dev/null Posts: 1,556	But look at what I marked. All 3's have different colors on the right. EDIT: of course colors could have been altered but it would require a lot of precision to do it. I dunno ? Attached Thumbnails __________________ [b]Optimization guidelines by Koji Ashida of NVIDIA:[/b][list][]Use fx12 instructions whenever possible[]Use lowest pixel shader version[/list][url=http://developer.nvidia.com/docs/IO/10878/ChinaJoy2004_OptimizationAndTools.pdf]source[/url] [size=1]The politics are invading the technology. We don't really like to mess with politics because that kind of adversarial relationship has nothing to do with pure technical operations and the technical specifications of what we like to play with, the hardware![/size] Last edited by volt; 09-10-02 at 08:30 PM.

09-10-02, 09:09 PM	#15
volt Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: /dev/null Posts: 1,556	yes i see the similarities, i just wanted to point out what i've seen __________________ [b]Optimization guidelines by Koji Ashida of NVIDIA:[/b][list][]Use fx12 instructions whenever possible[]Use lowest pixel shader version[/list][url=http://developer.nvidia.com/docs/IO/10878/ChinaJoy2004_OptimizationAndTools.pdf]source[/url] [size=1]The politics are invading the technology. We don't really like to mess with politics because that kind of adversarial relationship has nothing to do with pure technical operations and the technical specifications of what we like to play with, the hardware![/size]

09-10-02, 09:41 PM	#17
pelly Registered User Join Date: Jul 2002 Posts: 681	I'm not sure that posting this on our front-page would be the best idea...Mutants come out of the wood-work when they smell blood from accusations like this... However, I certainly think an email or two to the man is in order...hopefully, we can get this whole mess cleared up. I'll fire-off an email tomorrow morning and let you know what he says... Last edited by pelly; 09-11-02 at 01:00 PM.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
openGL driver considered to be cheat by VALVE	birkoff	NVIDIA Linux	3	08-08-02 07:52 AM

09-10-02, 08:42 PM	#14
ALobpreis Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: Ramos Posts: 358	The copy area may not be a rectangle. Furthermore, doing some random-colored random-pixels isn't anything hard. The issue are the similar pixels, not the different ones. How can you explain the similarities?

09-12-02, 10:02 AM	#18
intercede007 American Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: Destin, Florida Posts: 331	I found this on Hard[OCP] this morning "Just a side note, we have been bombed this morning with everyone reporting the fake 3.3GHz P4 pictures that popped up today, and all the sites out there that have editorials, rants or articles disproving the obvious fakes. PLEASE don’t send any more of this stuff, we know, we have seen it….and frankly, if posting that stuff is what gives those guys kicks, more power to them. " Tom caught with his hand in the cookie jar?

09-12-02, 12:05 PM	#19
Solomon Join Date: Sep 2002 Location: In a House Posts: 502	I'm not here to disprove or agree that it's a fake, but this is what pops in my head. 1) Maybe Intel provided the picture to Tom to use for the article? So if we remove the picture, would you still believe the article? 2) Intel demonstrated a 4.6GHz at their conference. So is it possible that a 3.3GHz or 3.6GHz is really so far fetched to believe? 3) Would Tom be that stupid to do a fake article after the relentless slamming to [H] and Vans Hardware? Personally for me? I can really care less if the picture is fake or not. I looked at the article and came out with the conclusion that Intel has the GHz race down pat. Meaning that they already have all the necessary strings to release faster and faster CPU's if needed. That's what I got out of the article. Considering Intel demonatrated the 4.6GHz and Tom's controversial article on the 3.3GHz and 3.6GHz. Regards, D. Solomon Jr. *********.com

09-12-02, 12:14 PM	#20
pelly Registered User Join Date: Jul 2002 Posts: 681	Personally, I did not even begin to doubt the validity of the CPU used in the article. Only after I realized that there was no real focus on HyperThreading ( a huge feature in my mind ). Doing some research and viewing the opinions of others in our forums and around the net, I began to be a bit more suspicious. Tom has since edited their article to reflect the fact that the CPU in question is essentially an overclocker's dream Northwood. I have no problem with this, aside from one aspect. The fact that he seems to claim that this overclocked CPU is an accurate depiction of the "legit" 3GHz+ CPU really seems a bit far-stretched. As far as I know, no CPU's with HyperThreading have been sampled thus far. Wouldn't this feature ( amidst others ) effect performance? This certainly seems to be a sticky situation...I'm beginning to think this field is like a bad soap opera...

09-12-02, 12:21 PM	#21
Solomon Join Date: Sep 2002 Location: In a House Posts: 502	I tend to agree with you pelly that the fact the hyperthreading wasn't even brought up. But if you look at the bigger scope of things. The Northwood is far more sacalable them maybe people have been let to believe? Did Tom mention if his CPU is at least a C1 stepping? If it was, then we can come to some sort of conclusion that the C1 stepping is very very flexible in terms of GHz speed. I try not to get caught up with validating if an article is legit or not. I only do that with The Inquirer, because it's so easy to make fun of them as they do it to themselves. Hehe. Regards, D. Solomon Jr. *********.com

09-12-02, 12:29 PM	#22
pelly Registered User Join Date: Jul 2002 Posts: 681	Given the insane overclocking ability of the CPU, I have to imagine the processor is based upon the next stepping... As far as validating an article...I refrained from posting anything until I gave Tom the opportunity to respond. When he failed to reply in any manner whatsoever ( even to say he was too busy to answer right away ), my suspicions grew too high... It definitely came across ( in my opinion ) that Tom was trying to pass this CPU off as one of these "next-generation" processors with all the new bells and whistles...

09-12-02, 12:32 PM	#23
Solomon Join Date: Sep 2002 Location: In a House Posts: 502	I would have to add that Intel must of gave them the "Go Ahead" with the article. I have no ties with Intel, but I would certainly email them and just say: "Is Tom's article supposed to be taken truthfully or is this a hoax" At least you are not asking about the speed, availability, etc... So if Intel doesn't at least answer that question then I would then start to evaluate if the article is legit or not. Regards, D. Solomon Jr. *********.com

09-12-02, 02:04 PM	#24
DaveW Its me! Hurray! Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: Brit in USA Posts: 1,203	haha... I love it when people try to fake a pic... I remember some faked shots of the GF3 core... Come on people, just because you know a little photoshop doesn't make you a master at forgery. These guys don't realize that there are plenty of people out there who do a lot of graphical work... we are used to staring at pixels all day... we can spot fakes like this a mile away... By the way... I do think it would be interest for use guys to make our own fake pictures... maybe fake NV30 cores? It would be an interesting contest, and we could show them how its really done