Skip to content
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Extreme Tech)   Tech reviewer barely controls laughter as Intel CEO asks people to stop paying attention to benchmarks   (extremetech.com) divider line
    More: Amusing, Laptop, Intel CEO Bob Swan, Advanced Micro Devices, Benchmarking, Benchmark, benchmark results, last week, That that is is that that is not is not is that it it is  
•       •       •

877 clicks; posted to Geek » on 04 Jun 2020 at 12:31 PM (9 weeks ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook



17 Comments     (+0 »)
 
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest
 
2020-06-04 12:00:35 PM  
The only benchmarks that matter really are speed of launching applications, from POST to log-in, zipping and unzipping, and FPS tests for AAA games. These are real-world tasks that matter. Most other benchmarks are useless.
 
2020-06-04 12:32:48 PM  
As a hardware reviewer, I agree with Swan and always have. Benchmarks don't capture the entire experience of using a product.

This highlights the difference between Apple's approach and most others. Apple stuff is almost never in the top of the benchmarks because that's not their focus, their focus is on usability, style, simplicity, and reliability.
 
2020-06-04 1:09:24 PM  
Why? Because Ryzen is better? Both one-on-one and $ per flop?
 
2020-06-04 1:14:32 PM  

Barfmaker: usability, style, simplicity, and reliability.


Dongle says what?
 
2020-06-04 1:33:47 PM  

ColonelCathcart: Why? Because Ryzen is better? Both one-on-one and $ per flop?


Yes, but others are right the "user experience" counts for a lot. However it is more than a little rich that Intel is saying ignore benchmarks when they used to worship benchmarks. The circular firing squad is always present in tech. Odds are, in a year or whatever, Intel will begin dominating the benchmarks again, and demand everyone worship them benchmarks.
 
2020-06-04 1:37:29 PM  

ColonelCathcart: Why? Because Ryzen is better? Both one-on-one and $ per flop?


Yup. Even on laptops. I believe it is Asus who have a gaming laptop for $1500 running on a ryzen9 that outperforms i9 laptops that cost at least $500 more.

I actually could afford that laptop if I tried, and I am finding it hard to find excuses not to.
 
2020-06-04 1:48:12 PM  
Over the last 30 years, I used to only get Intel cpus, because some AMD processors had been flaky.

I have been running a Ryzen 5 for months and it is by far the best CPU in any computer I have ever had, in every respect, from power consumption to heat to speed and stability.

There's a reason why AMD is doing so well, and it's not fake benchmarks.
 
2020-06-04 1:50:42 PM  

Barfmaker: As a hardware reviewer, I agree with Swan and always have. Benchmarks don't capture the entire experience of using a product.

This highlights the difference between Apple's approach and most others. Apple stuff is almost never in the top of the benchmarks because that's not their focus, their focus is on usability, style, simplicity, and reliability.


Not to mention gouging customers for hardware that retails at less than half their price in other machines.  You forgot that.
 
2020-06-04 1:54:28 PM  

Animatronik: Over the last 30 years, I used to only get Intel cpus, because some AMD processors had been flaky.

I have been running a Ryzen 5 for months and it is by far the best CPU in any computer I have ever had, in every respect, from power consumption to heat to speed and stability.

There's a reason why AMD is doing so well, and it's not fake benchmarks.


AMD Fusion looked like it was going to be a disaster a few years ago. However it put them on a higher playingfield for today. Now that they have zoomed in on CPU power, they got the best integrated graphics solution along with a CPU that cannot be beat.
 
2020-06-04 2:07:31 PM  
that article writer is a real butt nugget.

trying to pretend that intel makes laptops. NO ikntel makes the CPU in the laptop, so the only data i need from intel about their part of the lapopt is basically the CPU's horse power to power consumption ratio.

That's all intel provides to this, so that is all intel has to offer in this.

FTA:
" , but I can't benchmark how well you'll like the keyboard response, whether the edges of the machine will cut into your wrists or arms when you type on it, or if you'll like the trackpad. "

And WTF did intel have to do with any of that? Did intel make the laptop chassis? Did intel make the keyboard? Did intel decide what trakpad in put in the laptop?

The fook you ,manipulate a-hole, all that garbage you toss out pretending matters to intel's argument, is all unrelated bs to intel's involvement in your laptop/PC end user experience.


The ONLY thing we need to know from Intle, is, what is the top end power potential and power consummation rate ratio  to that their Cpus run at.
So we can decide what intel CPU we do or do not need/want to be running in the laptop/PC we get.
All that other stuff is unrelated to intel, so is solely related to the maker of that particular laptop, where they just let you decide if you want the i3/5/7 and maybe what top speed clock of a i3/5/7 you needed.you know so as to not wasted funds on CPU power that just forever remains unused idle for the lifetime of the system.Fooking tools advocating for what other fooking tools want you to imagine is reality.
 
2020-06-04 2:30:22 PM  

Barfmaker: As a hardware reviewer, I agree with Swan and always have. Benchmarks don't capture the entire experience of using a product.

This highlights the difference between Apple's approach and most others. Apple stuff is almost never in the top of the benchmarks because that's not their focus, their focus is on usability, style, simplicity, and reliability.


I don't understand the "style and usability" point people make when talking about OSX. I'm using it for the first time to develop iOS apps. Various UI animations seem to be chosen at random and feel like a leftover to show off how flashy and interrsting it was back in ancient (late 90's) times. And other than "grey and white, sometimes shiny... oh yeah make that thing blue" I don't understand the style at all and it feels really disjointed, not uniform throughout the windows and settings. And don't get me started on App Store Connect or what it takes to release a goddamn app.
 
2020-06-04 5:16:34 PM  

cman: The only benchmarks that matter really are speed of launching applications, from POST to log-in, zipping and unzipping, and FPS tests for AAA games. These are real-world tasks that matter. Most other benchmarks are useless.


Thing is though that the CPU isn't going to have much of an effect on gaming, even today. When I play modern warfare the amd 3700x I have sits at around 33% usage, and the GPU maxes out.

Load times and Sim games would see the biggest benefit, but that depends on ram and storage as well.
 
2020-06-04 6:17:02 PM  

cman: The only benchmarks that matter really are speed of launching applications, from POST to log-in, zipping and unzipping, and FPS tests for AAA games. These are real-world tasks that matter. Most other benchmarks are useless.


Temperature and power consumption benchmarks matter. Especially if you're the average person running a stock cooler.

I finally upgraded my cooler (Raijintek Themis, $30USD) because I was sick of having extremely noisy blips for a few seconds every time I opened my browser (and all my tabs load) or an application.

The thermal mass of the stock cooler sucks, and the fan is small and whiny. The new cooler is a tower with a 120mm fan, the idle volume seems to be about the same but much deeper and less annoying. And 100% load is easily half the volume or less. I don't notice the fan change speed.

Especially if you're buying a modern Intel chip which is a superclocked Skylake chip that blows right past its TDP when you open MSPaint but still comes with a stock cooler made for its TDP.

Right now, Intel should be bundling tower coolers with mid-low range processors, that would probably actually win them a few sales and promote the UX ideal they're pushing. The finished product for mine cost me $30USD, so presumably maybe $5-10 in materials which shouldn't materially affect profitability on a $200 processor if they get more sales out of it.
 
2020-06-04 6:54:55 PM  

Animatronik: Barfmaker: As a hardware reviewer, I agree with Swan and always have. Benchmarks don't capture the entire experience of using a product.

This highlights the difference between Apple's approach and most others. Apple stuff is almost never in the top of the benchmarks because that's not their focus, their focus is on usability, style, simplicity, and reliability.

Not to mention gouging customers for hardware that retails at less than half their price in other machines.  You forgot that.


The I Hate Apple bros always need to announce themselves, they're the vegans of the tech world.
 
2020-06-04 7:14:51 PM  

Barfmaker: Animatronik: Barfmaker: As a hardware reviewer, I agree with Swan and always have. Benchmarks don't capture the entire experience of using a product.

This highlights the difference between Apple's approach and most others. Apple stuff is almost never in the top of the benchmarks because that's not their focus, their focus is on usability, style, simplicity, and reliability.

Not to mention gouging customers for hardware that retails at less than half their price in other machines.  You forgot that.

The I Hate Apple bros always need to announce themselves, they're the vegans of the tech world.


Barfmaker is correct. Animatronik is kinda correct.

I hackintosh my laptop because a) its fun and b) MacBook's thermals are absolutely terrible. I mean, really farking terrible. Browsing the web is OK, but as soon as you do any hard lifting you get throttled. Your i9 MacBook Pro is not worth it considering you will never get the full usage of the CPU.

There is an Apple tax but it isnt where most think it is. The base models are pretty much on par with other computers using the same hardware. But when ya add in the upgrades, thats when the tax hits hard. $200 for an 8GB upgrade? farking A. $300 to go from 128GB to 512GB? Hell naw.
 
2020-06-04 10:32:20 PM  

cman: Barfmaker: Animatronik: Barfmaker: As a hardware reviewer, I agree with Swan and always have. Benchmarks don't capture the entire experience of using a product.

This highlights the difference between Apple's approach and most others. Apple stuff is almost never in the top of the benchmarks because that's not their focus, their focus is on usability, style, simplicity, and reliability.

Not to mention gouging customers for hardware that retails at less than half their price in other machines.  You forgot that.

The I Hate Apple bros always need to announce themselves, they're the vegans of the tech world.

Barfmaker is correct. Animatronik is kinda correct.

I hackintosh my laptop because a) its fun and b) MacBook's thermals are absolutely terrible. I mean, really farking terrible. Browsing the web is OK, but as soon as you do any hard lifting you get throttled. Your i9 MacBook Pro is not worth it considering you will never get the full usage of the CPU.

There is an Apple tax but it isnt where most think it is. The base models are pretty much on par with other computers using the same hardware. But when ya add in the upgrades, thats when the tax hits hard. $200 for an 8GB upgrade? farking A. $300 to go from 128GB to 512GB? Hell naw.


I love gaming, and am dumb enough to buy an RTX 2080 TI.  So you can stop reading there.  But if you continue, I also run physics simulations on massive $10k+ machines, and the software most people running have to turn hyperthreading OFF, and depend heavily on single core Frequency for a large portion of the setup and calculation.  They can be sped up by solving multiple simulations at once with multiple cores, or even split frequency analysis among the cores, but that single core performance is critically important.

After that, RAM and SSD speed are important.  So high performance Raid 0 and overclocking and water cooling are fairly normal for all three.

In a few years the graphics cards may be able to process simulations (much like the crypto stuff is doing), and that will really make life easier.  You can bail on the CPU and focus on a bank of GPU.  That will be a nice change.  It should have happened about 5 years ago, but things change slowly in those high-cost software packs.  A single license is about $120k for the one I've been working with, the last time I checked.
 
2020-06-05 4:14:07 AM  
Reviewers tend to compare previous top-end hardware against current top-end hardware, effectively missing the user experience of someone who leaps from, say, a GTX 680 or Radeon 7970 to an RTX 2080 or Radeon 5700 XT.

If I go from the top of 5 years ago, to the tenth best of now, yes, I'm going to be happy. But I'm going to be happy for longer if I go to the best of now. Because it will age slightly slower.

People who only want to play games at medium settings, watch netflix, and/or send email shouldn't bother with benchmarks anyway.
 
Displayed 17 of 17 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking




On Twitter



  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.