AMD vs Sysmark, part deux

P

pxc

Extremely [H]
Joined
Oct 22, 2000
Messages
33,063
AMD accuses BAPCo and Intel of cheating with Sysmark benchmarks

If you remember why AMD rage quit BAPCo in 2011, it's basically the same thing again. For some reason AMD believes that standard office work revolves around offloading tasks to the GPU (it didn't in 2011 and still doesn't today).

article said:
Unsurprisingly, five years later, AMD’s complaints are the same. In the company’s video, Hampton says: “There is an excessive amount of high CPU tasking being done (in SYSMark). That is, the benchmark is really only evaluating the CPU side of the system.”
Click to expand...

As a counter, AMD ran a GPU heavy synthetic benchmark against an i5 model (edit2: AMD didn't submit the results, but it's probably an i5-3230M given the 35W "similar" FX laptop AMD compared it to and the AMD FX laptop lost) and runs some unspecified, non-public Office benchmark and still lost. AMD is back in full desperate FUD mode, unfortunately.

This is probably a sign of bad expectations for Zen, since there's nothing really wrong with benchmarking Word, Excel, Photoshop or Premiere. Even sites that don't use Sysmark include some or all those applications in CPU reviews.
 
Last edited:
LoL hahaha, AMD is still laughable, anyone remember the preventive damage control AMD launched before Bulldozer? could be this another preventive damage control before ZEN launch?. lol this prove how cyclic is the history, AMD can't make competitive products so instead they attack the companies that make performance measurements.. great job AMD.
 
pxc said:
AMD accuses BAPCo and Intel of cheating with Sysmark benchmarks

If you remember why AMD rage quit BAPCo in 2011, it's basically the same thing again. For some reason AMD believes that standard office work revolves around offloading tasks to the GPU (it didn't in 2011 and still doesn't today).



As a counter, AMD ran a GPU heavy synthetic benchmark against an i5 model (edit2: AMD didn't submit the results, but it's probably an i5-3230M given the 35W "similar" FX laptop AMD compared it to and the AMD FX laptop lost) and runs some unspecified, non-public Office benchmark and still lost. AMD is back in full desperate FUD mode, unfortunately.

This is probably a sign of bad expectations for Zen, since there's nothing really wrong with benchmarking Word, Excel, Photoshop or Premiere. Even sites that don't use Sysmark include some or all those applications in CPU reviews.
Click to expand...


As long as I still get 60+ fps in gaming I could care less what it does in MS Word. The article backs up my stance also. Nice find though. That benchmark should rot in hell.

Best quote from the article:

But in 2016, who the hell cares? In 1997 we cared about typing in Word or viewing a PowerPoint, but today any PC with an SSD, enough RAM and a reasonably fast CPU does the job for 90 pecent of work tasks. Most of us could not tell the difference between a dual-core Core i3 or 8-core Core i7 chip (with proper RAM and SSD) for standard Office drone tasks.

AMD is right for bashing that trash. Thanks again for posting that!
 
Good thing it didn't test anything besides Microsoft Office apps like Word, Excel, Photoshop and Premiere, with the last two being especially standard in MS Office. lol

When your product sucks, blame the benchmarks (even if it sucks in all the benchmarks). Then write a letter to the next CEO to do the same before resigning due to total failure.
 
pxc said:
This is probably a sign of bad expectations for Zen, since there's nothing really wrong with benchmarking Word, Excel, Photoshop or Premiere. Even sites that don't use Sysmark include some or all those applications in CPU reviews.
Click to expand...

Bad expectations for Zen or bad expectations of BAPCo?


From the article you linked.

AMD’s problems actually go all the way back to 2000, when the company’s Athlon XP CPU was kicking Pentium 4 butt in Sysmark 2001. When Sysmark 2002 was released, however, the Pentium 4 was suddenly the leader. After that AMD decided to join BAPCo in an attempt to have more influence over what it tested.

The company stayed in BAPCo through 2011 when, in a much-publicized blowup, it quit and walked away, accusing the test of being cooked for Intel’s CPUs. Although they didn’t say why, Nvidia and VIA left BAPCo at the same time.
Click to expand...

I will amend the article you linked because VIA did give a statement of why they left:

VIA today confirmed reports that we have tendered our resignation to BAPCo. We strongly believe that the benchmarking applications tests developed for SYSmark 2012 and EEcoMark 2.0 do not accurately reflect real world PC usage scenarios and workloads and therefore feel we can no longer remain as a member of the organization.

We hope that the industry can adopt a much more open and transparent process for developing fair and objective benchmarks that accurately measure real world PC performance and are committed to working with companies that share our vision.
Click to expand...


Also, Photoshop and Premier can both heavily rely on the GPU. If Sysmark heavily weights the CPU over the GPU when it benchmarks these programs, is it really being truthful?
 
Last edited:
Surprising that AMD is still trying to cherry pick SYSmark considering that across the board, Intel CPU's have been smacking anything they've been putting out for awhile now. As many real world benchmarks have shown!
 
Why is this still a topic? In synthetic benchmarks Intel wins. In gaming benchmarks, Intel wins.

So.....?
 
auntjemima said:
Why is this still a topic? In synthetic benchmarks Intel wins. In gaming benchmarks, Intel wins.

So.....?
Click to expand...

AMD wants to keep digging until they find a "fair" benchmark. At this point that means they want all benchmarks to be <$100 CPUs with Leage of Legends FPS with no separate GPU in the system.
 
AMD release a youtube video trainwreck

Hope they never do this again I find the people in it not really convincing and hiring actors to bring this message would be a mistake as well.
 
It is just one very one sided benchmark. Not to sure about any benchmarks you can not compile yourself you don't know what is going on ;) .
 
auntjemima said:
Is that test in SYSmark not designed to test the CPU? Or am I missing something?
Click to expand...

It's not. It's suppose to be a complete system benchmark that simulates the usage of certain applications. It then sets arbitrary weights for some applications over others, and only tests certain features of said applications that are said to favor Intel over AMD. It also weights the CPU over the GPU, even in programs that heavily utilize the GPU like Photoshop and Premier.

Here's a video of the same AMD and Intel processors from the previously linked video in a side by side comparison.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4CwwQq1ddQ4

Somehow Sysmark wants to make us believe that the Intel CPU is 50% better than the AMD APU.
 
Last edited:
variant said:
It's not. It's suppose to be a complete system benchmark that simulates the usage of certain applications. It then sets arbitrary weights for some applications over others, and only tests certain features of said applications that are said to favor Intel over AMD. It also weights the CPU over the GPU, even in programs that heavily utilize the GPU like Photoshop and Premier.

Here's a video of the same AMD and Intel processors from the previously linked video in a side by side comparison.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4CwwQq1ddQ4

Somehow Sysmark wants to make us believe that the Intel CPU is 50% better than the AMD APU.
Click to expand...

It is a double edged sword. Pure CPU performance, say one thread, Intel will indeed show a huge lead. However in real world that generally isn't the case. Or it doesn't indicate what happens real world. Say the Intel completes at 34ms and AMD at 65ms. The Intel is definitely faster by a huge margin but would any individual be able to discern the difference? No at least not in a single instance. It would take far greater instances together to illustrate this in a manner that an individual can clearly see like video encoding if you will.

So what AMD is claiming is in fact based in reality and has merit. And so does what most benchmarks do. I cant speak to the validity of Sysmark and the results it gives but seeing the list of manufacturers that refuse involvement I am inclined to believe AMD has a valid point.
 
Well, they should dedicate their entire budget to make a CPU that isnt beat by i3s in gaming.
Jokes aside, I think people overreact, it is a dying company and will do anything to get back some sales, I do not see anything unusual here.
 
The company stayed in BAPCo through 2011 when, in a much-publicized blowup, it quit and walked away, accusing the test of being cooked for Intel&#8217;s CPUs. Although they didn&#8217;t say why, Nvidia and VIA left BAPCo at the same time.

Nvidia and VIA think the thing is cooked also thus they walked away from it too. I don't see why AMD joining them in protest is such a bad thing?
 
a3venom said:
Well, they should dedicate their entire budget to make a CPU that isnt beat by i3s in gaming.
Jokes aside, I think people overreact, it is a dying company and will do anything to get back some sales, I do not see anything unusual here.
Click to expand...

Was any part of what you posted not a joke? Do you have some insight you gleaned which you would like to share? If so I would like to hear it. But in so far you have not added anything other than what looks like infantile remarks that do nothing more than waste our time reading it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top