At which planet do you live ?
It's called Earth.
Read the first post in this thread and you will know why I'm comparing it to Phenom 9500
Still doesn't excuse the fact that the 9500 wasn't meant to compete with the Q6600
The author of thread was thinking about getting Phenom 9500, and not 9600. No one here was talking about Phenom 9600
Which doesn't somehow mean that it should be compared with the q6600
Try the 13.5% that you conveniently ignore.
That's with a slower clocked, and less expensive 9600.
I think 18% is a big margin
First of all, I don't. And second of all, you're still comparing the 9500, which again was not meant to be a direct competitor to the Q6600.
At least it not very small as you claim
At least I don't compare products that weren't meant to be direct competitors.
I was saying that to Wildside, not you
that's nice.
Tech-forums won't automatically include secondary quotes when you quote somebody else.
Don't reply on behalf of him
I wasn't replying on behalf of him. I was replying with my own answer.
You said that "The difference is very small" in one of your previous posts
Which it is, if you compare the 9600
Yes.
I don't think 18% is very small, anyway
1. See above.
2. You're still comparing two products that weren't meant to be direct competitors.
3. That's why the 9500 is cheaper than the Q6600 is.
And it outperformed Phenom 9500 by 19.1% in 3d-studio recording
1. Q6600 costs about 25% more
2. you're
still comparing products that aren't meant to be direct competitors.
Maybe in your eyes it is not big margin, thats because your are AMD biased.
1. Oh, as if
you aren't a fanboy, or anything. when you keep insisting on slamming Core 2 at people.
2. No, it's because I'm not comparing the products that aren't meant to be direct competitors. 9500 IS NOT a direct competitor to the q6600. That's why it's cheaper.
And who told you that I was asking this question to you ?
who told you that I was asking you what colour stripes you like to have on a golfing umbrella?
Did I quote you when I said "So, what is the problem if I recommend for him an Intel ?"
Does tech-forums include secondary quotes when you click the button to quote people's posts?
The answer is no, please check my previous post
Gee, you wouldn't want to make a big deal out of it, or anything, would you?
Again, in many other threads many people recommend AMD even when the author of the thread don't ask about AMD. But you never said to them the same thing.
"I vaguely remember seeing some other guy do the same thing once, therefore that completely justifies me doing it"
umbrella is not even a computer processor and it is not a computer part.
Wow, I did not know that!
So, your comparison between Q6600 and this golfing umbrella is invalid
I wasn't comparing processors to umbrellas. I was pointing out an
argument from ignorance, using my own
argument from ignorance as an example.
EDIT: I was saying that to Wildside anyway (see my previous post). I hope that you stop replying on behalf of others
See above.
I don't like to talk with you.
Then don't.
I'm trying my best to avoid you, but it seems that you are doing the opposite.
This is despite the fact that in just about any other thread that I wanted to talk about the Phenom processors without even mentioning Core 2, you were there to slam Core 2 at me.
You come here and reply to every comment that I make even when I don't quote you
The only reason I replied to you in the first place, is because you're slamming Core 2 at people, when they didn't ask for it.
Sure, you can recommend Core 2. but you're always so flamboyant about it.
Did I prevent you from doing that ?
You're trying to do it with the very post I'm replying to.
I think getting a processor that have no bugs like Q6600 is better idea than getting a processor that might cause an error
Despite the fact that the chances of getting that error, are so small, that I haven't even heard of it actually happening?
The TLB bug has such a minutely small chance of actually occurring, that
AMD didn't even
know about it during their testing of the processors.