Acer Ferrari 3200 review (just a few pics/couple benches) - Page 10

What a lame excuse! Or perhaps its because this benchmark is so new and you haven't found a way to cheat on it yet?

Anyway, this really makes me wonder if there are some funny business going on here and I have no choice but to question everything you do from now on...

Hi,

I'm a big n00b @ notebooks. :P I want to buy a notebook (the Acer Ferrari 3200 seems to be good) to replace my PC. I want to play some games (UT2K4/FarCry) and use some applications (Adobe Photoshop/Illustrator/InDesign CS). Can I burn a DVD±R while I browse with Mozilla FireFox (or another browser) the Internet? With my Intel PIV 2.6GHz, 1024MB DDR333 I can't do that (browse the Internet & burn a DVD at the same time).

Should I buy this notebook, or another one?

this one is excellent and VERY red!

other choices could be the AOpen 1557 or Compal CL56. IMHO either of those are great choices when nicely customized, but try to get the 2.0 Dothan...

sylvesterr,

The ferrari 3200 is an excellent choice for your requirements and the price is a little more tempting than the dothan machines.

However if I had a choice I would go with the CL56 with a 2.0ghz Dothan.

Snorre,

I am glad you wont pay attention to my posts anymore, I have just done a search for all your posts and it would seem no one has ever payed attention to yours either.....that makes us even.

It would seem you are still naive about laptops and i can only put that down to lack of experience with them - you joined here in jun 2004........try going back a few years and catch up with the more experienced users of these forums.......who have a wealth of information based on their experience and facts and most have valued opinions - One day you may have the respect of the rest of the forum until then....good luck with the new benchmark you spam about.

With regard to "Funny Business" about my results from the Dothan I think other users of the same cpu will put that possibility to an end.

Kind Regards

Dekka

i ran the test a few days ago and my 1.7 scored the same as an athlonxp2100

i did some research

"Realstorm is a real-time 3D ray tracing engine executed entirely on the CPU, ignoring any 3D power available with an installed GPU. It scales nicely with CPU frequency and loves AMD processors."



Here's the reverse situation. Realstorm Raytracing benchmark loves the new, improved Athlon CPU.

and then right below it

KribiBench is another 3D renderer done entirely on the CPU, with a different approach to the problem than Realstorm. We should see the same characteristics with Kribi that we've seen already with Realstorm and LAME.



KribiBench absolutely loves the Pentium 4's tight SSE2 implementation. KribiBench is a pure software renderer that can handle an amazing amount of polygons to deliver stunning 3D imagery

just from how these 2 synthetic benchmarks that stresses 3d performance solely on the CPU, and how they both favour certain architectures/chips makes it kinda silly to be the END all of all cpu benchmarks. and prolly the reason why the main hardware review sites DO NOT USE EITHER as a means of cpu comparison.

wow that is funny...

any last shred of credibility snorre had left has just been washed away

Benchmarking voodoo

I'm sorry to chime in. But benchmarks are only as good as the person that reads them...and the amount of data that they provide. To be honest, synthetic benchmarks are great for compairing two processors against eachother or component X vs Y vz Z. That said however, benchmarks may not tell you the whole story about the realworld performance of the PC.

Basically, things such as thermal cooling of the processor (some throttle down if they get to hot) can effect an application after an extended amount of time that a quick benchmark my not catch. ALso, if you drive is slow to begin with, your application may be waiting on the drive to fetch the data...leaving the CPU at idle. The amount of PCI devices intalled may also bottleneck your bus so that your PC doesn't as fast as shoult. For example, if your running a server and playing a game, your SCSI or SATA PCI card could suck up bandwidth even though your CPU isn't directly effected.

So benchmarks are really good to look at scientifically, but ONLY if your looking for the right data they provide.

While thats a nice objective statement... the hardware used from hexus.net had the same drive/gpu/ram/powersupply/etc the only difference was the cpu and mobo.

i agree synthetic benchmarks do serve a purpose (hence why I even bother showing 3dmark01 and 3dmark03 in my sig) and thats the text book defintion... a benchmark is defined as a point of reference to use as a method of comparison

its been brought up before about the real world graphic rendering benchmarks (adobe ps and maya) but snorre said it wasnt enuff and that 23042304320423043 synthetic tests needed to be run, especially raystorm. did i mention raystorm? oh wait what about raystorm? i forgot raystorm. yes raystorm! raystorm. RAYSTORM RAYSTORM!!!!!!!!!!!!!

---------------
Secondly, If you look at my signature you will also see the 3d benchmarking programs results i get.

Thirdly, I have also ran sis for cpu benchmarking and posted the results in these forums. --dekka

Aquamark Score:26373
Aquamark CPU: 9706
3D Mark03 Score 3533
3D Mark CPU: 631
Battery Life: 4 Hours 40 mins

----------------

Get real, man! These benchmarks are perhaps the worst possible indicators for real world performance. They mean nothing, and if you base your whole view on this you're just kidding yourself!

All I'm saying is that we haven't seen enough PROPER benchmarks, especially of the Dothan, to draw any clear conclusion yet. The truth is still out there...--snorre

----------------

If there was a MOD about we should really ask them to lock this thread its turned into a bit of a flame war really...

But just before you do that can we please let Snorre reply to rince's excellent research - should be good entertainment value....

Snorre, before you comment I have added the Sissandra 4 result to my signature - unless of course that world famous program is not a valid benchmark....

my 1.7 banias...er i mean athlonxp2100 rated cpu (accordingto realstorm) beats your dothan dekka... where are your realstorm benchmarks???? huhuhuhuh!?!!?

When is enough..enough

Benchies are nice and all. And your correct, you will always need a refrence PC when benchmarking a single component. But when is enough enough? Obviously my opinion, but I couldn't give a rats-ass if a processor only gives me an extra .05% increase in performance. Even 5% is questionable to me. But hey, I perfer a rock solid platform over what that has been tweaked past the point of stability just for the sake of grins and giggle. The headaches of data errata just isn't worth my time and effort.

Again though, I'm just part of the old school crowd of computing. So while I should have gotten a ThinkPad for my usage, the Ferrari 3200 offers the best bang for the buck. Perhaps I will underclock it some if I can if stability becomes and issue. Though...for the money I shouldn't HAVE to do that.

Snorre ... did AMD plant a burning bush outside your bedroom window? I don't mean to be rude, but I just can't understand why anyone would be so emotionally involved with a microprocessor corporation. I'm sure they appreciate your loyalty, but despite AMD's clear performance advantage in a single benchmark which best caters to it, and its obvious superiority in a 64-bit technology that's at the very least a year or two away from being properly mainstream (i.e. readily available in a wide variety of apps), for the vast majority of people out there, there is very little appreciable difference between the two chips.

I'm buying a new notebook in the next month or so, and in my own decision-making process, I've narrowed it down to either the AMD64 or one of the new Dothan CPU's, and I'm leaning towards the Dothan simply because for my uses the advantages of the AMD64 are completely and utterly irrelevant. I don't do any 3d rendering and I'm in absolutely no hurry to embrace a new version of Windows XP. In terms of game performance, the two are for all intents and purposes about equal in all the benchmarks that the rest of the gaming world seems to accept as being worth something, excluding your esteemed self. But with the Dothan I can get at least 50% more battery life, sometimes double the battery life, out of a lighter, thinner, and cooler (temperature-wise) notebook.

That said, if the right AMD notebook comes along when I'm ready to buy, I'll buy it with a smile on my face. They're both fine products made by faceless corporations who really couldn't care less about me, nor could I care less about them; if they make a good product at a good price, I'll buy from them, if they don't, I won't.

Both of them are not available in Holland...

well said digishaman

what we see here between these 2 cpus is that they perform very comparably... I bring that point up in another thread here:

http://notebookforums.com/showthread...044#post298044

and thats the truth... we will see that in some benchmarks there will be a slight edge over the latter, but BARELY or NOT by MUCH. the difference is negliable. we see no clear victor that makes the other obsolete or inferior in anyway.

we've reached a point where cpu speed is overkill for alot of things and what it boils down to is certain buying aspects like mobile time, or in your case $$$ ,as the athlon64 2800 cpu in the ferrari is more bang for the buck... (dothan 2.0 is priced at 700, the same as an athlon64 fx51) i chose a pentium-m banias because it has the longest mobile life and performs just as good as anything else out there right now... (although that will change to a 2.0 dothan once i return it to ibuypower... they are doing a cpu swap for me i just have to pay the difference)

nothing wrong with oldschool computing either, im oldschool too!

sylvester. it looks like u will have to order out of ur country to get those 2 laptosp or wait until a reseller in your contry has them...

im not sure which companies have international shipping, but u should check with the p-m notebook thread that lists all the different resellers ... do a forum search for it "corresponding odms" use that as ur keyword search

Ya, I agree. This laptop has more than enough CPU usage for me and any of the games I play. In fact, all games are more dependent on the GPU rather then CPU. So finding a laptop under 2K with a fast CPU and Radion 9700 was really really hard. And if it's got a 9700, you will pay for through the nose as it's deamed as a luxury item by other laptop vendors.

BTW, how upgradable is this laptop? Do all mobile athlon 64 CPUs support the NX function that will work when XP SP2 is available?

Interesting, and you refuse to publish your results because your precious CPU didn't come out on top?

I had a point to show you, but your childish behaviour and refusal to cooperate on a fair level made it impossible. You chose only benchmarks where your system excels and simply ignore the other benchmarks where the AMD systems excels. My point was that the Pentium-M bus is prehistoric, the same goes for it's memory controller. Contrary to the benchmarks you usually love, Realstorm Benchmark 2004 is VERY memory intensive like most real world game engines and this is a major advantage for the AMD64 processors with its built-in high-speed memory controller. Based on statement above I'm pretty confident that the CPU in Acer Ferrari 3200 would outperform any Pentium-M system in memory intensive games

These benchmarks are not more synthetic than your AquaMark as they're based on real world rendering engines. My point was that you base your view on a few Intel friendly benchmarks, while you completely ignore the benchmarks that dosen't fit your imagination. As stated before a fair comparison must contain a wide variety of benchmarks covering all possible usage. Am I getting through to you or not?

I dont see how proving a point is childish behavior. Lets back track for a momment here:

- I was asked by a forum member to see which CPU would be better at real world graphical rendering like photoshop, etc. I answered his question.

-I was trying to disprove your statement that the Athlon64 was "BY FAR" the superior cpu at gaming. I ran tests to prove that they are comparable and that there is no clear winner.

Your attempt to turn this on me like I am the child, really shows how arrogant and egotistical you are in the whole matter. Are you not forgetting how you repeatedly asked for realstorm benchmarks in all of your subsequant posts? along with hassling other members with pentium-m systems for their score? What are you the AMD64 police?

I stand by my results. you obviously did not read between the lines when I brought up the issue with the kirbi benchmark. It is the SAME exact 3d intensive synthetic benchmark as Realstorm Raytrace except that it favors intel, where as the latter favors AMD...

whats the point of all that if those benchmarks only show certain aspects of a cpu architecture EXCLUSIVE to 1 chip maker? thats the damn reason why the major hardware review sites DO NOT USE EITHER BENCHMARKS as a form of cpu comparison. if you totally missed that, I dont think you should be asking if I got the point

Theres a reason why I didnt post it, coz its a retarded benchmark along with kirbi because they favor exclusive properties of 1 chipmaker...

Just take a look around on this forum... see what people are posting in their review/tests...

http://notebookforums.com/showthread...6306#post66306

adam of pctorque posts teh SAME BENCHMARKS that are in my sig

Are you trying to disprove all of us saying that our benchmarks irrelevant because they favor intel and is not raystorm raytrace ( ) Get real...

Snorre,

OK I think you need counselling or something - Have you not read the results of the worlds leading benchmarking programs as shown by numerous users posts on these forums and also the reviews!

I cannot believe your arrogance - or should that be ignorance.

Thats it YOU have totally lost all respect on these forums - Rince has as can be seen by his posts offers very BALANCED and factual information and no one has ever had issues with his posts apart from yourself.

If I were you I would close your account on here and open a new one with a sensible attitude!

As long as it is a fair comparison I might add, and none of yours or Dekka's benchmark numbers are very truthful in my opinion. You may continue to cheat for bragging rights, but please stop lying to people about true performance because you have no clue what you're talking about

What's wrong with you?! You were bragging with your tweaked 3DMark & AquaMark scores, and when I confronted you with this you became almost deperate and ran away like a spoiled brat. I understand now that I can't trust anything you say, you're nothing but a little sad troll.

We need proper benchmarking, not flame wars based on a handful of pointless benchmarks. I used RealStorm only to show a point, but sadly you didn't learn from your mistakes...