Windows 7 Forums
Welcome to Windows 7 Forums. Our forum is dedicated to helping you find support and solutions for any problems regarding your Windows 7 PC be it Dell, HP, Acer, Asus or a custom build. We also provide an extensive Windows 7 tutorial section that covers a wide range of tips and tricks.


Windows 7: Anyone else tired of these stupid logo's?

10 Jan 2010   #1
Frostmourne

Windows 7 Ultimate x86-64
 
 
Anyone else tired of these stupid logo's?

These logo's are starting to become ridiculous. I've got Resident Evil 5 and an ad proudly proclaims, "Runs great on i7". Really? I'm shocked. As for the quad-core recommendation, my Phenom X2 550 Black Edition has no issues at 1080p combined with a stock Sapphire 4890.

Then the even more idiotic, "Nvidia, the way it's meant to be played". That is just sloppy - if the developer builds a good, solid engine any gaming card (not integrated or mid range) should run fine. I can understand the need for quad-core and an upgrade will take a few minutes, but these logo's are stupid - anyone else?

At least Call of Juarez had an ad for ATI and AMD - .
My System SpecsSystem Spec
10 Jan 2010   #2
stormy13
Microsoft MVP

Win 7 Ultimate x64
 
 

I tend not to see those "ads" in games. If I do it is only during the first time the game is run, after that I go looking for the files or folder(s) to rename so they never show up again. Only one's I haven't figured out how to remove are the games that have it in-game, BF2 on the Highway tamps map and the Intel billboards (shot them with a tank every time I go past one ).
My System SpecsSystem Spec
10 Jan 2010   #3
Frostmourne

Windows 7 Ultimate x86-64
 
 

Inaccurate though - AMD will give you all the performance you need without the cost.
My System SpecsSystem Spec
.

10 Jan 2010   #4
pparks1

Windows 7 Ultimate x64
 
 

Quote   Quote: Originally Posted by Frostmourne View Post
Inaccurate though - AMD will give you all the performance you need without the cost.
It used to be that Intel cost quite a bit more than AMD....however it seems that recently the AMD chips are not that much cheaper than the Intel offerings and while decent CPU's....the Intel line is a fair amount better. I apologize in advance to AMD fanboys that simply cannot stomach running Intel chips, but the last great superior chip from AMD was the Athlon X2 64 back in the day. Since the Core 2 Duo introduction, Intel has solidly been in the lead.
My System SpecsSystem Spec
10 Jan 2010   #5
Frostmourne

Windows 7 Ultimate x86-64
 
 

Agreed, but the difference is virtually nothing - in games a few FPS and that may be due to the CPU architecture - AMD has dropped following Intel's support for SSE 4.1 and SSE 4.2 - and the price is good - my Phenom 550 @ 3.1GHz Black Edition was around US $120. Thats for a great dual-core.
My System SpecsSystem Spec
10 Jan 2010   #6
grimreaper

Windows 7 Ultimate X64
 
 

Quote   Quote: Originally Posted by pparks1 View Post
It used to be that Intel cost quite a bit more than AMD....however it seems that recently the AMD chips are not that much cheaper than the Intel offerings and while decent CPU's....the Intel line is a fair amount better. I apologize in advance to AMD fanboys that simply cannot stomach running Intel chips, but the last great superior chip from AMD was the Athlon X2 64 back in the day. Since the Core 2 Duo introduction, Intel has solidly been in the lead.
I used to have an X2 6000 it ran great, then I switched over to Intel's Duo Core chips....and still with Intel, AMD has a great line- up of chips, but they need to come out with something to give Intel a run for it's money.
My System SpecsSystem Spec
10 Jan 2010   #7
smarteyeball

 
 

Quote   Quote: Originally Posted by Frostmourne View Post
These logo's are starting to become ridiculous. I've got Resident Evil 5 and an ad proudly proclaims, "Runs great on i7". Really? I'm shocked. As for the quad-core recommendation, my Phenom X2 550 Black Edition has no issues at 1080p combined with a stock Sapphire 4890.

Then the even more idiotic, "Nvidia, the way it's meant to be played". That is just sloppy - if the developer builds a good, solid engine any gaming card (not integrated or mid range) should run fine. I can understand the need for quad-core and an upgrade will take a few minutes, but these logo's are stupid - anyone else?

At least Call of Juarez had an ad for ATI and AMD - .
Are you talking about the splash screen intro logos?

It's all about money. Developers get paid to use them. It's just marketing.

In game ads that get updated can be blocked by dis-allowing access through the firewall. It doesn't work for all games though.
My System SpecsSystem Spec
11 Jan 2010   #8
ThePizzaMan

Windows 7 Ulitimate Beta 32 Bit, Windows Vista 32 Bit, Ubuntu 9.10 32 Bit
 
 

Quote   Quote: Originally Posted by pparks1 View Post
Quote   Quote: Originally Posted by Frostmourne View Post
Inaccurate though - AMD will give you all the performance you need without the cost.
It used to be that Intel cost quite a bit more than AMD....however it seems that recently the AMD chips are not that much cheaper than the Intel offerings and while decent CPU's....the Intel line is a fair amount better. I apologize in advance to AMD fanboys that simply cannot stomach running Intel chips, but the last great superior chip from AMD was the Athlon X2 64 back in the day. Since the Core 2 Duo introduction, Intel has solidly been in the lead.
now the charts (and I) have to disagree with this...... a stock phenom II 965 and a stock I7 920 run almost neck in neck in games with only about a 10 or less fps difference, while the I7 is about $290 the Phenom II is about $195, making it much cheaper yet same performance also you have to remember a I7 is using its 8 hyper-threaded core, the Phenom II still only uses four so when you take that into account who really has the better processor? what would a four core Intel do against a phenom II now? well.... lose....
My System SpecsSystem Spec
11 Jan 2010   #9
pparks1

Windows 7 Ultimate x64
 
 

Thanks for the information on the Phenom II's. The original Phenoms were certainly nothing to write home about. When the Phenom II's came out, it seemed they were about $520 for the 940, while the Core i7 was about $580...however the Core i7 did surpass it in the benchmarks.

Hyperthreading is not a big deal, never was with Intel. Others might argue that the lower clock speed of the Intel versus the higher clock of the AMD....would mean that if you cranked up the clocks of the Intel to match AMD..it would really outperform it. But that's just nitpicking details to me.

My biggest concern with the AMD CPU's would be heat...as they are much hotter than Intel from what I have read, and much more heat usually indicates that they are consuming far more power.
My System SpecsSystem Spec
11 Jan 2010   #10
ThePizzaMan

Windows 7 Ulitimate Beta 32 Bit, Windows Vista 32 Bit, Ubuntu 9.10 32 Bit
 
 

Quote   Quote: Originally Posted by pparks1 View Post
Thanks for the information on the Phenom II's. The original Phenoms were certainly nothing to write home about. When the Phenom II's came out, it seemed they were about $520 for the 940, while the Core i7 was about $580...however the Core i7 did surpass it in the benchmarks.

Hyperthreading is not a big deal, never was with Intel. Others might argue that the lower clock speed of the Intel versus the higher clock of the AMD....would mean that if you cranked up the clocks of the Intel to match AMD..it would really outperform it. But that's just nitpicking details to me.

My biggest concern with the AMD CPU's would be heat...as they are much hotter than Intel from what I have read, and much more heat usually indicates that they are consuming far more power.
actually for most of the gaming benches i've seen they are neck and neck with the Phenom ahead sometimes and others the i7, and as far as heat the Phenom II's are very cool running processors which is why they take to overclocking so well right now (if i had the cash that is....) i could get a Phenom II 940 for about $150
My System SpecsSystem Spec
Reply

Thread Tools


Similar help and support threads
Thread Forum
Im tired of BSOD
Hello! I come here to please you to help me. Here is my system : computer name: OWNER-PC windows version: Windows 7 Ultimate Service Pack 1, 6.1, build: 7601 and 32bit! windows dir: C:\Windows CPU: GenuineIntel Intel(R) Core(TM)2 CPU 4400 @ 2.00GHz Intel586, level: 6 NVIDIA CARD 8500
BSOD Help and Support
I'm tired
I'm feeling tired all I wanna do is sleep... forever
Chillout Room
Tired of the same games!
Hey everyone! I just want to know if anyone knows of a game that is free that is pretty cool? Just throw names at me. Nothing is free in this world, yeah I know.. Wont hurt to ask right? Im tired of playing the same games, and games now a days run a hefty amount of $$.
Gaming
Stupid Stupid Laptop Battery
Hi, My laptop has had 1 year of what I would call "heavy" use. Although it has been plugged into the wall all its life (1 year) the battery is now dying in under 10 minutes. This really sucks as it means I lose the portability of my laptop. I don't have any way of getting money for a new laptop at...
Chillout Room
Tired of waiting
I am not a fan of waiting while Windows 7 does their fading and drop down menus. I want my drop down menus to expand at once. I don't want screens to fade in and out - just do it. However, I cannot find where to make those changes in Windows 7. Can anyone help.
Customization
Anybody tired of Aero?
Am I the only one that's kind of annoyed by the Aero GUI as of now? The transparency/blurring is really unnecessary. I think Windows should've gone with a Matte Shiny Plastic visual style, akin to Mac OS X.
General Discussion


Our Sites

Site Links

About Us

Find Us

Windows 7 Forums is an independent web site and has not been authorized, sponsored, or otherwise approved by Microsoft Corporation. "Windows 7" and related materials are trademarks of Microsoft Corp.

Designer Media Ltd

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 19:08.
Twitter Facebook Google+ Seven Forums iOS App Seven Forums Android App