MaximumPC 2006 01

110 MAXIMUMPC JANUARY 2006

We tackle tough reader letters on...

PDigicam Testing PAMD64 Extensions

PLaCie’s Silverscreen PCreative’s X-Fi

INTEL GIVING UP?

I arrived home this evening to find the November

2005 issue waiting patiently for me in my mailbox. I

made myself a cup of coffee, and settled in to read. I

check out the article on page 10, entitled “Goodbye

Pentium 4.” Then I looked at the chart on the lower

left-hand corner of the page, “Intel CPUs Compared.”

I nearly did a spit-take when I saw the specs for the

“Next-Gen CPU.”

The specs, under Advanced Features, are

listed as “SSE, SSE2, SSE3, Dual Core, Vanderpool

Technology, Intel Advanced Management Technology,

and AMD64”!

Is this a typo, or has Intel thrown in the towel?

Inquiring minds want to know!

—Bobby Sledge

SENIOR EDITOR GORDON MAH UNG RESPONDS:

We’re assuming you’re shocked that Intel would

adopt an AMD technology in its CPUs, but that’s

exactly what the company has done. Intel, how-

ever, calls the AMD64 extensions “Intel Extended

Memory 64 Technology,” or EM64T. The only rea-

son we can see not to call the AMD64 extensions

by their real name is to save face. This would be

roughly akin to AMD adding SSE3, which was

created by Intel, and calling it something nutty,

like Super Sonic Extreme 4 Instructions. We actu-

ally preferred it when the 64-bit extensions were

just called x86-64.

LACIE AIN’T LAKICKASS

While your review of the LaCie 40GB Silverscreen

external drive in the Holiday 2005 issue seems accu-

rate, I disagree with your decision to give it a Kick Ass

rating. The Silverscreen omits several features that

I personally would have found very appealing. I saw

no mention of a digital output such as HDMI or DVI.

The device does not support FireWire or SATA for data

transfer. Furthermore, the 80GB model is only $50

more expensive yet offers double the capacity and an

8MB buffer (although it’s still just a 5400rpm drive).

I just feel that a verdict of 9/Kick Ass seems a bit

high for a device that could be much better than it is.

—Bryan Kazdan

FEATURES EDITOR LOGAN DECKER RESPONDS:

When I review a product, I begin with an assess-

ment of what it’s trying to do. Generally speak-

ing, the verdict will primarily depend on how

well a product meets that objective and the

overall value of that objective—everything else

is gravy. LaCie is pushing the Silverscreen as a

portable media center, and in that capacity, the

Silverscreen is about as ass-kicking as ass-kick-

ing gets. It’s the only media playback device

we’ve ever tested that played every single one

of our test videos (with the exception of Divx 6

media, which is a fairly new format). No disap-

pointments, no unexpected hassles, no hysterical

error messages, just Pretty Woman, Dead Alive,

and Piranhas 2. Or whatever you’re into.

I agree that the 80GB model is a better value,

but we review the products sent to us as is. We

encourage manufacturers to send us their big-

gest, best, and baddest, but what lands on our

desk is what gets put to the test.

DAMN YOU, DRIVER UPDATES!

In your Holiday 2005 issue comparison of SLI and

CrossFire, you gave CrossFire kudos on flexibility,

citing that CrossFire can use cards from different

manufacturers and with different clock speeds, while

SLI cards have to be identical and from the same

manufacturer with the same BIOS. While CrossFire

does have it over SLI on the clock-speed and differ-

ent-card-use elements, it’s not true that SLI cards

must be identical. You can run cards from different

manufacturers as long as they both use the same

reference design. They also have to be of the same

type (e.g., both 7800 GTX boards), and you have to be

using the nVidia drivers, not vendor-specific drivers

for both cards.

I have an XFX GeForce 7800 GTX and an EVGA

GeForce 7800 GTX running in SLI and it works flaw-

lessly, delivering outstanding performance with no

Testing

Cameras the

Maximum PC

Way

I’m sorry to say this but the camera

reviews in the Holiday 2005 issue, espe-

cially of the Sony DSC-T7 were very poorly

done. No objective criteria were used whatsoever, and if you look at any objective review

comparing color quality, resolution, etc. the DSC-T7 will outperform the Casio Exilim, which

you rated higher. Just eyeballing a few test shots isn’t a good camera review.

If you’re going to review cameras, use objective criteria for resolution and color accuracy.

—Nick Dolezal

SPECIALS EDITOR STEVE KLETT RESPONDS: Rest assured much more went into these

reviews than you suggest. Each camera’s image quality was tested at its maximum

resolutions across a range of lighting situations. Battery life and usability, which is

admittedly much more subjective, were also major considerations. In the end, we didn’t

feel the T7’s higher price was justified given the competition’s similar performance.

reviews in the Holiday 2005 issue, espe-

cially of the Sony DSC-T7 were very poorly

inoutYOU WRITE, WE RESPOND