Slashdot Mirror
PCMark Memory Benchmark Favors GenuineIntel
javy_tahu writes "A review by Ars Technica disclosed that PCMark 2005 Memory benchmark favors GenuineIntel CPUID. A VIA Nano CPU has had its CPUID changed from the original VIA to fake GenuineAMD and GenuineIntel. An improvement of, respectively, 10% and 47% of the score was seen. The reasons of this behavior of FutureMark product are not yet known."
I think you mean 'AuthenticAMD'.
This isn't the first time they've been caught doing something "odd" with their code and it likely won't be the last.
That said, keep in mind it's a 3 year old benchmark. Whatever relevance this benchmarking program has today is far more lessened by its age than by any results shown from this research. Don't get me wrong. I'm not defending Futuremark at all. I don't particularly like their suite of benchmarking tools, and not just because of the "odd" results.
How well a platform scores in Futuremark is less relevant than how well it plays your games or movies or compiles your code or rips your movies/CDs. It's my humble belief that a proper benchmark of a system is how well it will perform in the role you want to use the computer.
If I can play GRID at 1920x1200 at the maximum settings possible with playable frame rates I'm happy.
If I can play Crysis at the same resolution and settings, cool.
If AOC runs well at those settings, then I built a nice system.
If Futuremark runs well...so?
Sig Follows: "Suppose you were an idiot. And suppose you were a member of Congress. But I repeat myself." -- Mark Twain
But older VIA chips had buggy SIMD and broken CPUID where features were reported incorrectly and if the SIMD worked it worked slowly.