☰

» »

BAPCo razkrinkan

BAPCo razkrinkan

Van's hardwere - Menda se je že dolga leta sumilo v nepristranskost BAPCo-ja in njegovih benchmark produktov (Sysmark, WebMark, ...). V zadnjem Sysmark2002 so šli pa čez rob. Na VansHardware so objavili povzetek AMDjeve predstavitve primerjave med Sysmark2000 in Sysmark2002. Večina drugih sajtov še čaka in gleda kako se bo stvar razvijala. Vse skupaj zna postaviti tožbo proti Intelu v povsem drugo luč.

5 komentarjev

Boeing ::

Mah... to vse kaže na to, da Intelu ne gre ravno najbolje oz. obratno - da je AthlonXP res hud stroj.

Ali pač ?[:\]
Ko segaš po zvezdah ne skrbi, če kakšno zgrešiš... Morebiti ujameš Luno...
R50e AS355n, T-Rex600FBL, T-Rex500FBL, T-Rex450FBL, Futura + JetCat 200SX

tha_man ::

Itak da Pentium 4 sucks. Eni tega pač nočejo razumet, pa kaj bi se sekiral, their loss :D

Jaz sem že nehal folk prepričevat o tem, ker itak ponavadi dobim standaren odgovor, Intel je priznana firma in je zakon. Pol prijavijo še tisto da se P4 ne greje medtem ko ti Athlon lahko ogreva sobo... Eh, fu*k it, glavno da mam jaz kul računalo ;) Ko sem že mislu da P4 2.53 le ni tako napačen proc, pa pride tole o fake benchmarkih. Oh ja...
(c) 1982 Sinclair Research Ltd

kuglvinkl ::

Anandova izjava v njegovem forumu:



just thought I'd chime in here now that data seems to be leaking out about this.



Here's where things stand currently:



1) AMD went around to reviewers and distributed the PDF that you've seen posted in this thread. The data AMD produced is verifiable as I have done my own verification of the tests in house.



2) Here's the main problem: SYSMark 2001 ran a certain set of tasks but in the move to SYSMark 2002, a good deal of the tasks that AMD's Athlon was faster at were removed and replaced with tasks that the Pentium 4 was faster at. Both sets of tasks are perfectly valid tests of CPU performance (it's not like BAPCo just stuck in random tasks that don't do anything) but the point that must be made is that the changes were made seemingly without any user-level research to back them up. If there was some research that said "this is how most people use their systems" that caused BAPCo to change their methodology then this wouldn't have been a problem, but without that backing for their decision then it just seems as if BAPCo optimized the benchmark for the Pentium 4.



3) AMD's secondary complaint is that the benchmarks now use much larger datasets (e.g. Excel). This is more of a minor complaint since it penalizes the Athlon XP for having a smaller cache than Intel's Northwood. AMD would not have made the same complaint had their Hammer already been out since the larger datasets would mean that Hammer's on-die memory controller would give it the advantage.



4) I've been working with AMD on analyzing this information, it's very simple to obtain but requires a bit of effort to analyze. Even AMD today sent me an email saying that they had to order some special software in order to fully understand what's going on in the benchmark. It's too early to make any complete conclusions but what can be said is that SYSMark 2002 can no longer be used as a sole measurement of application performance.



It's pretty sad that it has come to this, but what I can envision happening (at least on AnandTech) is a larger set of office application benchmarks just as Modus and Rand have suggested in this thread. I would like to put together our own tests but it is definitely not an easy task; in light of these discoveries I will have to put much more thought into doing just that however.



The good news is that now that AMD is a part of BAPCo, SYSMark 2003 should become a much better and more balanced benchmark. Before, the only real input from a major CPU vendor was coming from Intel (I was always afraid that SYSMark 2003 would be released and it would show an incredibly unrealistic gain with HyperThreading enabled) but now with AMD involved things will hopefully become more balanced. According to AMD, BAPCo is infinitely more responsive to their needs now that they're a part of the organization and they should be having a formal meeting to discuss this issue very soon (if they haven't already).



I'll keep you posted on what's going on as soon as I get the info I need from AMD/BAPCo.



Take care,

Anand
Your focus determines your reallity

AtaStrumf ::

Na overclockers.com je Ed spisal precej zanimiv članek o vsem skupaj, še posebaj ker je okrog vsega tolk zafilozofiral, da že skor več ne veš kaj hoče povedat. Vseeno zanimivo branje in mnenje, ki se kot vedno razlikuje od večine. Če vas zanima kaj ima vse to skupnega z igro baseball-a..... klik.

aky ::

Pa tudi današnji Userfriendly je zadel žebelj na glavico.

Vredno ogleda ...

TemaSporočilaOglediZadnje sporočilo
TemaSporočilaOglediZadnje sporočilo
»

Athlon XP 3000+: končno procesor, ki prehiti P4 3,06 GHz?

Oddelek: Novice / Procesorji		372450 (2450) morphling1
»

Zgodba o BAPCO-u se nadaljuje

Oddelek: Novice / Procesorji		112005 (2005) WarpedGone
»

BAPCo razkrinkan

Oddelek: Novice / --Nerazporejeno--		51755 (1755) kuglvinkl
»

AMD 1.4GHZ Tb na KK266A MB V P4 2.0Ghz

Oddelek: Strojna oprema		151526 (1281) Malecky

Več podobnih tem