LinkBack URL
About LinkBacksRead more.Mainly because the Intel laptop features a 90W GeForce RTX 2060, AMD laptop a 65W version.
Read more.Mainly because the Intel laptop features a 90W GeForce RTX 2060, AMD laptop a 65W version.
Yeah, valid as a system to system comparison, but then the AMD system is thinner (as a result of the reduced thermals) and uses premium components (lower TDP high performance parts cost more).
So it's not a valid comparison how Intel has used it.
The other slides are really dodgy as well. AMD absolutely needs to respond.
Terrible comparison, different chassis/thermal restrictions, 2060non-maxq has a large advantage in TDP. The full fat 2060 with Ryzen would win here, Intel getting desperate. We haven't even started talking about heat generation/battery consumption, the Ryzen efficiency is fantastic, up to 10hours non gaming. no chance on an intel machine
Jim from AdoredTV got the whole slide stack leaked to him,so he analysed it all:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gj5_uc4ScNE
Worth a watch,especially as it appears the latest SYSmark now weights single core performance more than the previous version(but not surprising if you remember the history of the benchmark).
The problems I have with Jim are:Originally Posted by CAT-THE-FIFTH
1) After sitting listening to his long videos, a vaguely amused Scottish accent replaces my usual internal monologue.
2) They make me really, REALLY hate Intel and Nvidia.
3) He then releases another video showing how AMD aren't much better when it suits them.
The end result is I have a vaguely Scottish internal monologue telling me "it's all just a mess, they are all liars. Keep your money and spend it on something worthwhile".
F**K Intel CEO BOB "no more benchmarks" SWAN
https://www.pcgamer.com/intel-tiger-lake-move-away-from-benchmarks/
Intel use skewed marketing because they know 85% of world population is tech impaired and only look at the charts thinking Intel is the best choice.
So another 'benchmark' going down the same route of biased weighting, just like userbenchmark which got banned from a lot of places for it's underhanded rigging of the results to favour Intel....
I know people will have perferences and I know that in some cases intel will be faster than AMD but I do wish that at the very least benchmarks were 'neutral' so people can make their own informed decisions based around what they need the pc to do...
Fundamentally, I think people just want to know which is "BEST!" and don't want to even ask a nuanced question. The level most people are working on is "is an Acer, HP or a Lenovo computer better?" Telling them there are two main brands of CPU, each with a distinct product hierarchy, and that is just one element of the pixie box what makes it go.... that's liable to make most people's heads go pop. That's not necessarily a bad thing - their areas of specialist knowledge are usually just different.
The other problem is that when an enthusiast has spent £500 on a CPU and the associated bits and bats, they don't really want to hear about the other choice being superior in any way shape or form. That might make them feel silly for spending a shed load on the 'wrong' product.
its marketing, who cares just look at decent reviews like gamers nexus and buy amd
What's not to like?
Phage (23-06-2020)
"It would be interesting to hear what HEXUS readers think about this kind of presentation slide"
rubbishrubbishrubbishrubbish intel will always be rubbishrubbishrubbishrubbish, they have been always known for false advertising and their shady marketing practices, so this comes to no surprise for me.
the irony is last month their CEO said benches are not important, while now they became important, add false advertising with some vulnerabilities as sauce, there is intel for ya.
I agree though as he is correct! I feel that PC enthusiasts and PC gamers are increasingly being treated as gullible whales.
It was funny how SYSmark 2018 is more biased towards lightly threaded scores than SYSmark 2014!
Doesn't surprise me one little it. If I had any shares or vested interest, I'd try to exit as soon as possible.
It's very, very evident they have no plan whatsoever. Their entire business model consists of deceit and incompetence. This model has no long term future, they'll bluff a few more sales, but they are due an exceptionally steep crash.
Well as the video shows, they've been doing it for many, many, years, seemingly with success. What sort of time scale do you mean by 'long term'?
I was pretty amused to see how they only wanted those Intel slides to be released to the tech literate. As if their enthusiast customer base, which spends ages arguing online about the intricacies of nm scale chip fabrication and the challenges posed by EUV, can't understand the difference between performance scaling with cores and frequency.
OR that line was put in to stroke the egos of the technically illiterate people who were the targets of those slides. People who wouldn't notice the frequency range being used on their graphs was 2.5-3.5GHz rather than a useful range in the modern day. I think they wanted to keep them out of the hands of people who were willing and able to scrutinise the slides properly as well as make the people who were the recipients feel like they were special because of their depth of knowledge. "They wouldn't try and con us, we know too much which is the only reason they're being up front with us and sharing this depth of real-world information".
the intel one is probably goign to burst into flames... be sure to be well insured as well ^^
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote