PM 1.6 Dell more powerful than Core-Duo 1.83 - A Cnet review

I know Cnet reviews are joke, esp how they compare the notebooks for giving relative indexes, but here is the height of it on Lenovo 3000 N100 review.

http://reviews.cnet.com/Lenovo_3000_N100/4505-3121_7-31756411-2.html?tag=nav

Dell D510 with PM 1.6 outscores Lenovo N100 with Core-Duo as well as Turion ML-37 by wide margin in BAPCo MobileMark 2002 performance rating!!?

I did not understand why they hell Intel even bothered with Core-Duo?

 

Because all reviews except maybe this one show that Core Duo stops Pentium M into the dust core per clock? How bout not jumping to conclusions because of one glitchy result of MobileMark?

 

I know I am not jumping to conclusions about Core-Duo, but rather this re-inforces how pathetic Cnet reviews are!!

 

O_O, i though Cnet reviews were decent, but rather short.

 

OK, sorry. Failed to detect your sarcasm.

 

Well depending how you test them there are ways to screw up. The obvious tell tale sign is that dual core systems are guranteed to outscore the 533fsb pm's by about 40% in a statistical mark and about 10% in a memory benchmark if using ddr666. Hdd transfer speeds remain the same. The obvious problem here is the reviewer @ cnet either dont know what he is doing or dell has him in their pocket.

 

Agreed with Eddie.

Tests can be screwed up any number of ways including bad installation of drivers, etc, etc, background threads that shouldn't have been there, etc, etc.

Cnet reviews are seriously a joke and they are not useful whatsoever, except maybe the pictures.

If they did car reviews they would be out of business by now.

"This is the new VW GTI. It is black. It has seats. Seats are too firm. It drives like a car. Wow, cool dash lights. This is the VW GTI, my name is (insert name), thank you."

Seriously like that and I'm trying not to exaggerate. The reviews I've read were VERY close to what I wrote there.

Edit:: I wrote them a suggestion asking them not to embarrass themselves and to check out notebookreview.com for good reviews in short.

HOLY **** CNET HOW ARE YOU AROUND?

 

CNET is pathetic just like PCMag. If they can't bench a system right, somethings messed up, and I think it is the testers.

Once, I saw them say that an X700 is faster than a Go6800 Ultra in game tests, because the "X700 got higher FPS". Yeah you dorks, that's because the Go6800 Ultra was running at a 1920x1200 res and the X700 at an XGA!

Wow,
Chaz

 

Surely you jest?

 

I wonder howcome they are still in business!!? Howcome people are so ignorant about their blunders!?? god knows

 

Basically because CNet is geared more towards tech noobs (like myself) who really don't have a good background knowledge about anything related to technology (kind of like some of the writers there....).

 

I do not mind if they do not provide lot of technical details, that is fine with me. But blunders like this? You just need common sense to know it is wrong, you do not need to be a Techie to know that.

 

It's not that they don't provide technical details, you can find many reviews on this site without technical details yet the reviews are very informative.

Those fools are good for nothing, but pictures and even then some of their pictures are tiny and show nothing.

hahaha