News AMD accuses SYSbench of Intel bias

Intel - Capable but dishonest and ill behaved.
AMD - Acceptable, less dishonest and less ill behaved.

Neither company deserves my money. The fact that the weaker of the two is dying deserves not my sympathies.
Unfortunately nobody well resourced thinks it would pay off to attempt to take intels crown.

 

X86 is slowly but surely slowing down. Like for like sales are down 10% last quarter. Intel has a big process lead, it's a minimum of 2 years ahead of everyone else. The competition this year may finally get on the same process node but Yields will likely be low for this year.

With rumours pointing to big issues going from a mobile part that consumes very little power to a desktop size chip that has a lot more requirements. It's similar to the reasons Nvidia and AMD are struggling to get a gpu size above 200mm. And why we will likely see low and mid range parts first this time.

Samsung in theory or Apple could both challenge Intel but it would cost them 20-30billion to buy the manufacturing and recruit the staff and do the R&D buy which point Intel would likely be at 10nm or 8nm.

It's just not worth it in a market that is shrinking. If Apple does manufacture chips it will strictly be for its mobile range smartphone tablets ect. We will not see a desktop part.

There's also big license issues with X86 Intel holds the main license and as long as AMD exists do not need to offer more to another company. So both Apple and Samsung could not even sell what they develop without it.

It's one of the reasons AMD has not been brought out as the license will not transfer with the sale.

 

http://www.geek.com/chips/sysmark-benchmark-bias-questions-543486/

from 2001......

 

To put it another way, Zen doesn't benchmark very well.

 

Samsung can't have a x86 license Intel will never sell them one. Would Samsung even want a x86 license? Personally think they don't, does not fit with there long term goals.

Volume production on mobile parts is one thing, Volume on bigger chips is an entirely different goal.
Will anyone but Apple or Samsung themselves get to see these 10nm chips have my douts before 2018.

Both Nvidia and AMD are having issues with supply of 14/16nm wafers that can meet there targets. With no big gpus expected before Q4 was the latest rumours. Nvidia is meant to be struggling even more if the rumours going around are to be accurate with most claiming we won't see Nvidias next gen chips before end of 2016.

ZEN is still expected late Q3 early Q4. Even if it's the best chip ever made AMD will struggle to survive and be a competitor. They need blockbuster sales and big reviews to say that it's the best.

 

They're video didn't really help things in my mind. They basically said that in a CPU oriented test, we get smoked, but in a 'real world' test that involves the GPU and system, we're still relevant. That's not going to sell me on an AMD processor and neither is whining about an unfair benchmark.

 

i think this was just default old FX processors. likely an fx 6300 or 8350... likely the latter.

 

It could be AMD 'managing expectations'... It sounds like they're getting 'Zen looks rubbish because bias' in before 'Zen looks rubbish because it is' can take hold...

 

or if you read my link from 15 fecking years ago - you`ll see INTEL wrote the benchmark !

 

so they should just accept the Intel bias potentially costing them valuable sales ?

personally this just feels like another Dick move by Intel to keep AMD in their vunerable position
strong enough to not foul monopoly laws
weak enough so as not to provide much meaningful competition

Its all well and good people saying AMD need to rock up with something decent but with their financial situation i simply dont see them having the funds to put into R&d to give Intel something to sweat over

 

It's all kind of moot when you are slower. RedFlames could be right, that it's pre-empting zen.

 

Most people don't even view benchmarks that's the harsh reality it matters to people like us more than general consumer who will have what's installed in there price range which is unlikely to be ZEN unless AMD is going sub £100.

 

What's that AMD, using benchmarks that don't reflect real world usage offers a skewed comparison? Nobody uses Anisotropic Filtering, right?

 

Yes but kick off about at 15-yr old benchmark, even one as noticeably skewed towards intel as this, just prior to Zen's release smells off to me. If AMD know benchmarks aren't going to be kind to Zen, by bringing up the fact that this one's heavily skewed in Intel's favour, they're subtly implying that they all are to some extent. It could just be me being cynical but it feels like they're starting damage control early.

I'm not saying SYSbench isn't skewed in Intel's favour, merely that AMD kicking off about it now seems a little odd.

 

Good point. Didn't they refuse to give Tech Report review samples of a card as well which was accompanied by childishness directed at Wasson on twitter

 

Isn't this also pot calling kettle black. The PCMark 8 tests they use specifically include the gpu as part of the performance. People do not really care either way anymore about sysmark or PC mark. The tests anandtech and bit tech run are a lot more viable.