Author: Aaron Gordon
Date: 13:59:37 04/24/03
Go up one level in this thread
On April 24, 2003 at 13:45:23, Robert Hyatt wrote: >On April 24, 2003 at 13:01:04, Keith Evans wrote: > >>On April 24, 2003 at 01:20:00, Matt Taylor wrote: >> >>>On April 23, 2003 at 23:27:49, Keith Evans wrote: >>> >>>>On April 23, 2003 at 22:08:41, Matt Taylor wrote: >>>> >>>>>On April 23, 2003 at 01:01:37, Keith Evans wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>On April 23, 2003 at 00:43:27, Tom Kerrigan wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>>On April 22, 2003 at 22:09:16, Aaron Gordon wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>>On April 22, 2003 at 21:20:15, Eugene Nalimov wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>Here are *official* results for Spec2k. Please notice that Athlon benchmarks >>>>>>>>>were submitted by AMD itself. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>http://www.spec.org/osg/cpu2000/results/res2003q1/cpu2000-20030224-01964.html >>>>>>>>>http://www.spec.org/osg/cpu2000/results/res2002q4/cpu2000-20021202-01875.html >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>So: base Spec2k for P4/3.06 is 1099. For Athlon XP 3000+ score is 995. Higher is >>>>>>>>>better. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>Thanks, >>>>>>>>>Eugene >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>I've done official testing for AMD using AMD's methods. This was when I was >>>>>>>>working on the optimized Quake 3 dlls. They had me disable everything in the >>>>>>>>bios. This means the test took a pretty large hit performance wise. Why? I asked >>>>>>>>AMD the same thing. They responded with, "Intel doesn't think it's fair, so if >>>>>>>>we set the bios timings to the fastest settings possible we'd have a large >>>>>>>>lawsuit on our hands and AMD doesn't need that". If you need confirmation of >>>>>>>>what I'm saying email me at speedycpu@attbi.com and I'll give you the contact >>>>>>>>information to the guy at AMD and he'll verify everything I've said. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>So, for a properly configured Athlon, my results are there and plain as day. >>>>>>>>Like I said, run them yourself on the same systems I ran them on. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>I don't see how that works. Intel has the "performance at all costs" reputation >>>>>>>for SPEC scores, even going so far as to use its committee clout to make >>>>>>>profile-directed optimizations allowed for base scores, and now you're saying >>>>>>>they use artificially slow memory timings? You can be sure that the competition >>>>>>>(Sun, IBM, HP, etc.) runs their memory as fast as possible--is Intel going to >>>>>>>sue them, too? Also, Intel submits slightly higher scores than Dell for the same >>>>>>>processors. Does Dell also run its memory slow? And what would the charge be for >>>>>>>this lawsuit, anyway? And besides, why do slow memory timings hurt AMD and not >>>>>>>Intel? >>>>>>> >>>>>>>It's one thing to suggest that some sites might be somewhat biased in Intel's >>>>>>>favor to get free stuff from them, but in this free-press society, not all sites >>>>>>>can be biased, or it would be a major coup for the one that does the exposee. >>>>>>>Besides, what benefit would aggressively anti-Intel sites (e.g., AMDZone) get >>>>>>>from biasing their reviews towards Intel, and their reviews are remarkably >>>>>>>similar to other sites' reviews. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>Suggesting that all hardware review sites are biased and that Intel, Dell, and >>>>>>>AMD are all part of a conspiracy to artificially lower their own SPEC scores... >>>>>>>did you forget your tin foil hat today? >>>>>>> >>>>>>>-Tom >>>>>> >>>>>>Well if they thought that said settings would produce unreliable behavior, then >>>>>>they might feel uncomfortable quoting performance under said conditions. Makes >>>>>>sense... >>>>> >>>>>The default settings are good enough for consumers but unreliable for SPEC? >>>>> >>>>>-Matt >>>> >>>>No the default settings are good enough for consumers, and apparently good >>>>enough that they use them for SPEC. >>> >>>Default settings on all my boards are more optimized than the ones Aaron has >>>described. >>> >>>>The "optimized" settings may be operating components out of specification, so >>>>they could feel uncomfortable quoting results obtained with those in benchmarks. >>>>For example do those people who tweak BIOS settings related to DRAM know how to >>>>read a datasheet and verify that all of the parameters are being met? >>> >>>Modern DRAM has an SPD chip on it that lets the DIMM determine the specs. There >>>is a difference between using SPD and manually configuring the DIMM so that it >>>runs slower. I believe Aaron was implying the latter. >>> >>>I have had ram where I've been forced to manually configure it due to the >>>manufacturer settings being too aggressive. In my experiences, however, this is >>>not the general trend when you buy quality ram (which they were hopefully >>>using). >>> >>>>Tom was basically wondering why they might "hold back", and I offered a >>>>potential reason. I doubt that they would intentionally cripple their >>>>benchmarks. Believe me I've worked in the electronics industry for a while, and >>>>marketing people will do anything possible to quote good numbers. >>> >>>Considering they've had a couple hard years of losses and their gross income >>>doesn't even compare to Intel's profit, AMD has no means to fight a lawsuit. >>>Such lawsuits are not aimed for major financial gains but rather to inflict >>>financial woes on the opponent. Baseless or not, if AMD was indeed threatened >>>with a lawsuit over their numbers, they would be forced to comply. >>> >>>>I remember back when Diamond was shipping overclocked graphics cards. By default >>>>they would be overclocked, and then we people had trouble they would call up and >>>>the tech support guys would tell them to edit a ".ini" file to fix the problem. >>>>I'm sure the cards that went to reviewers were carefully screened so they could >>>>be overclocked and produce good benchmarks. >>> >>>So if AMD is doing the opposite as Aaron is claiming, it should make you raise >>>your eyebrows. >>> >>>-Matt >> >> >>It just wouldn't make any sense. If they are so afraid of getting caught up in a >>lawsuit with Intel, then how do you explain the release of the Opteron? > > > >I'm sorry, but I don't buy the "Urban Legend" stuff about Intel suing >anyone that is faster. They could get murdered in court for filing a >frivilous lawsuit and end up paying attorney fees for _both_ sides. > >It makes no sense, other than to provide another urban legend topic for >various conversation groups.. Would you like to explain why the AMD employee (Manager, Performance Technical Marketing) told me this?
This page took 0.01 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.