It had been a large number of hours since I had read the start of the thread, so I just went back to it to make sure that we are both reading the same thing.  You are right that Nsanity went after ethomaz directly, but the order of things is a little different than you portray.  ethomaz didn't prove his points or offer explanation until after being called into question.  And Nsanity hasn't posted(proabably due to the banning) since before ethomaz explained himself.

I agree that ethomaz doesn't make it personal when he does these things and I would guess that he sincerely believes that he is right(and could be).  But, as the OP of a thread, if someone commented on most of your threads that you/your thread is "wrong", wouldn't you think that there is an agenda there as well?

Not sure of your point regarding off site sourcing, as I think that is generally a great way to support your ideas.  The problem is that I have also followed a number of ethomaz's links and they are similar to using someone's blog to make your point.  This whole argument is about the fact that we have no facts for sure and people are saying things as if they were facts.  No winners in that argument.

Just to add reability to my posts...

AMD said again what I said here... PS4 uses UMA and Xbone eSRAM (there are no UMA with non-coherence eSRAM).

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/thread.php?id=167349

I didn't say he was, I asked him if he was.  There is a significant difference.

I personally know of no way to calculate the CPU speed based on the components that support the CPU.  I neither accept nor defend the validity of the authors statement.  That said, the guy who wrote this has been in the field, he's written countless articles, and he advises clients on the subject of semi-components.  His creditials are solid.

I don't have a problem with someone saying they don't believe it.  I take issue with someone saying he's wrong and not being able to contradict what he is saying.  I haven't read post for post, but so far I haven't read where EThomaz has actually contradicted his argument, he's only introduced his own argument to rationalize why the author is wrong.  I want more than that.  To me, that isn't a justified argument against someone who has creditials I can take stock in.

Understand, this isn't an attack on EThomaz, per se.  This is an attack on the shrill and insufficient conversations that permeate the Internet.  Opinions are like assholes.  We all know this.  Everyone has one.  There needs to be a higher level of conversation where people can actually move out of their encampments to come to rational, logical conclusions. 

That's what this is about.  The moderation on this site won't do anything to improve the level of discussion or discourse.  As long as no one is trolling or flaming, they don't see problems.  Unfortunately there are problems and they are significant to the level of discourse on this site.  Seriously, why are your most vocal Xbox supporters the most frequently banned?  On the face of it you will say because they've violated the rules, but the problem is we can't have a conversation here about the Xbox platform without the thread being filled with useless opinion.  Unfortunately, the few people on this site who can straddle both sides of the isle with some unbiasedness often resort to the same childish conversation.

I believe EThomaz is capable of providing decent, unbiased, quality conversation.  I want him to offer insightful, thoughtful, intelligent arguments.  That was my challenge in saying "prove it."  I don't always agree with what Walsulfur says, but the guy when he makes an argument comes packing heavy fire.  He supports pretty much every argument he makes. 

I'm not saying every conversation on this site has to be intellectual.  I'm saying, if someone is going to refute someone who is a known professional in their industry and has experience and credentials in that industry, and you say they're wrong.  You better have a good argument to support it.

There is a huge difference between.  "He's wrong." and "I think he's wrong."  The first one is fact, the second one is opinion.  One implies first-hand knowledge that contradicts.  The other an opinion, whether educated or not.

I don't want to shut-out differing opinions from my own, but the shrill, immature conversations are getting tiresome.  They're getting tiresome for a lot of people, not just me.  That's why you see people in your Xbox community getting banned more frequently.  That's why you see your Nintendo community leaving.  You have a problem.  It's not those two communities, and it isn't the level of conversation we bring to the site.  How we act is a direct reflection of how we are treated.

If you want this site to be one big Sony circlejerk, do nothing.  It'll happen.  Your community will continute to fester and boil until the Xbox and Nintendo community leave for good.  You want to a strong gaming community, you want lively and intelligent conversation, then start considering doing something to foster it.  Because right now you're banning the people that help bring something diverse to this site.

You assumed.  Your assumptions are patently false.     

Thank you for your opinion and completely dismissing the actual point I was trying to make which was only two sentence below.  Your addition to this conversation is much appreciated.

This is a great post.

Unfortunately, MHz means almost nothing nowadays

@Adinnieken Firstly Charlie was never credible and he never tried to be... Semi-accurate was created because some disagree between Charlie and TheInquirer... both tabloid are based in rumors... the rumors on backstage... on the underground of the industry... you need always to read with a grain of salt Semi-accurate, TheInquirer, Fudzilla,etc... they are site that do they jobs in that way... they aren't technical sites and never was supposed to be.

Most of times they are wrong but sometimes they are right.

I said the Charlie's explanations is wrong... and it is because the CPU clock and NB clock has no relations with each other besides the base clock (~200Mhz) in AMD APUs... I give even more examples over the thread why his assumptions can't be true... the way he guessed the clock is wront.

Posted articles about AMD APUs and PDF from the HotChips to support what I said. Charlie is just guessworking in a unreasonable way without any technical support.

To be fair the clock can be 1.9Ghz but not because the Charlie's arguments but MS choose to use a multiplier with give a clock close to 1.9Ghz.. I can't see the Jaguar cores going over 2.2Ghz because architecture limitation...

My guesses? 1.7Ghz for the CPU because in that way the CPU and GPU will be syncronized... the APU doesn't need to have syncronized clocks but in most cases that what happen in the industry (even so I can show to you some AMD's APU with unsyncronizaed clocks).

Indeed.

It is a perfect addition to this argument, that portion of your post is only added to say that Ethomaz has less place to question someone or their article unless they have degrees in frames to substantiate his claims.

As for one community or the other getting banned from here, people just need to remember if they go in a thread and want to argue against the OPs points they argue against their points, if you have issues with the OP unrelated to the thread at hand it's best to just avoid it or if you feel he is trolling or flamebaiting with a thread just click the report button and let the mods handle it.

As for what I think of the whole CPU clock speed... No interest really, you'll see when the games start rolling out if they've put together a machine which can rival the expected graphic lvls in the ps4, can only hope they're very similar in power from a gaming point of view since otherwise you'll see odd ports between the systems games based on where they're begun to be designed for.

And logically you can have hUMA without eSRAM being involved.

However, regardless there are two points to be made here.

First, Microsoft designed and fabricated their own silicon.  They purchased the rights to AMDs technology.  AMD doesn't know what Microsoft did or didn't do.

Second, your argument doesn't stand, anymore than any other assertion.  The Xbox One SoC includes coherency between the GPU and CPU.  It utilizes unified memory on the DDR3 memory, and it employes an hetrogenuous system architecture.  Not only that, but the Xbox One's SoC also includes coherency with the eSRAM.  So whether or not it uses "hUMA" it is, AS I stated, a hetrogenuous memory architecture.  As have many others in the professional community.

The argument against there being so, was largely based on the fact that some marketing guy from AMD said so.  Yet the fact remains that the core Jaguar technology included it, so in the very least, the CPU and GPU would have had hUMA on the DDR3 memory, and no on the eSRAM.  However, that isn't the case because Microsoft made the eSRAM coherent between the CPU and GPU. 

Finally, let's drop this conversation, it isn't germain to this thread.  I brought it up not because I wanted to discuss it here, but because while you stated your opinion in that thread, you along with a couple of other people (one joined in this thread) failed to actually look at what was being said and discreditted it out of hand, saying any opposition to it was wrong, despite the facts that proved otherwise. 

In the end, those, including myself, who were indeed right have the satisfaction of knowing we were indeed right, and knowing that whether you truly knew you were right or wrong didn't matter, but the fact that you were closed minded enough to join in the infantile conversation and not support the logical conclusions based on factual information.  Suggests that your arguments are slanted (e.g. biased). 

I personally don't care whether you support the PS4, the Xbox One, or the Wii U.  That isn't important to me.  What is important to me is, when you have the technological knowledge whether you offer an impartial opinion or argument.  Especially when it isn't something you want to do.