Hi, all...

Well it was a mistake after all, the Tomshardware Apologized for adding the 3.4, 3.6 EE in the AMD64/P4EE performance test.

This is the right way Toms. sorry for calling u cheaters.

also for others who flamed me this proves that my way of thinking is right and it was a bad way of "showing things"..

now I respect their conclusion more but still have my own openion about AMD64 VS P4EE

from TOMSHARDWARE :

Update Sept 24,2003: Unfortunately we have made a mistake in the original article: In addition to the official P4 EE 3.2GHz we had included benchmark scores of the P4 Extreme 3.4GHz and 3.6GHz. These values were planned for a future THG article and were not intended to be included here. We would like to apologize especially to those readers who misinterpreted our charts. The two bars of the P4 Extreme 3.4GHz and 3.6GHz have now been removed. However, this issue does not affect our conclusion as we have only compared the official P4 3.2GHz EE to all other test candidates in our original article. For your information: The press sample of the P4 Extreme provided by Intel does not have a multiplier lock and is already designed for higher clock speeds.


link : http://www6.tomshardware.com/cpu/200...lon_64-22.html

thanx Toms and I apologize too