Slashdot Mirror
AMD Rips 'Biased and Unreliable' Intel-Optimized SYSmark Benchmark (hothardware.com)
MojoKid writes: AMD is making a stink about SYSMark, a popular benchmarking program that's been around for many years, and one the chip designer says is not reliable. Rather than provide meaningful results and information, AMD claims SYSMark unfairly favors Intel products and puts too much emphasis on strict CPU performance above all else. John Hampton, director of AMD's client computing products, explained in a video why SYSMark itself is an unreliable metric of performance. He even brought up the "recent debacle" involving Volkswagen as proof that "information provided by even the most established organizations can be misleading." Salinas says SYSMark's focus on the CPU is so "excessive" that it's really only evaluating the processor, not the system as a whole. In comparison, PCMark 8 probes not only the CPU, but graphics and subsystems as well. In an attempt to drive the point home, AMD ran a set of custom scripts it developed based on Microsoft Office and timed how long it took each system to complete them. The Intel system took 61 seconds to finish the benchmark versus 64 seconds for the AMD platform, a difference of about 6-7 percent and in line with what PCMark 8 indicated, though Sysmark shows a stark delta of 50 percent in favor of Intel with comparable CPUs.
Hrmm... why is AMD's PR department* suddenly making a giant stink about Sysmark? They aren't due to launch any new chips until the end of the year at a bare minimum... right?
Well, maybe it's because a certain company (AMD) has run some internal benchmarks with a certain chip (Zen) and they aren't necessarily coming out with miraculous results.
So what do you do? Attack the benchmark of course!
Gee, I wonder why AMD waited so long to attack that evil evil Sysmark? Maybe it's because back when the Opterons were actually much stronger than Pentium-4 Xeons, AMD actually won Sysmark benchmarks and openly bragged about it.
Here's a 13-year old example of AMD bragging about SPEC, which AMD has also attacked as being an evil conspiracy (when they don't win that is): http://www.geek.com/chips/amd-...
* Wait to call him until after Tuesday since he has to mop the hallways on Tuesdays.
AntiFA: An abbreviation for Anti First Amendment.
You're a moron who doesn't know what he's talking about. Skylake isn't an upgrade either, it's a backdoor rebranded.
Actually no. I buy AMD processors for *intregity*
I haven't bought an Intel processor since they said : If you can show us you *need* it you can have a fixed Pentium (without the FDIV bug).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
Publicly, Intel acknowledged the floating-point flaw, but claimed that it was not serious and would not affect most users. Intel offered to replace processors to users who could prove that they were affected. However, although most independent estimates found the bug to be of little importance and would have negligible effect on most users, it caused a great public outcry.
So.. long memory. Many $'s lost. Don't piss off customers (or lie about it and when you have to fess up say : Whatever..)
Amd did fall behind but let's not forget i7s that went up in flames on stock coolers..... I have clients with old AMDs that run the latest games no problem. The reality buying a high end Intel for just gaming is a waste of money. IMO they have gone greedy with the prices and I hope the new amd chips kick their butt. They need to be knocked down a peg they are going to start to charge 500 for a 250 retail price processor I'm sure soon... Don't get me started on the price of Intel based boards for what you get.
When AMD was KING lntel locked them out of big parts of the market and that give intel time to get back on top. And now that they are on top they are ripping people off and lacking on pci-e lanes on sky lake and cutting the number of lanes on the on higher end chips unless pay more then the last gen when the lowest one had it all.