Ars: AMD may be irrelevant

[Keysplayr]

There is no big deal. The article is just a spomsored opinionated hit piece. This has been done for decades, and practically every GPU release has been accompanied by reviewer guides that inform which games to benchmark. The hypocricy runs deep in that article.

Has Scott not seen the dozens of 'leaks' on various products over the years? Surely he doesn't believe those aren't sanctioned leaks?

Also, maybe Scott could publish private emails from other hardware vendors so we can see their correspondence as well. People will lose a lot of respect for TR after this, its a ridiculous premise.

I think you mean "gain" respect.

 

[AtenRa]

I think you mean "gain" respect.

Then i suppose you think people will loose respect for every other side that published a Trinity Preview, AT included.

 

[Blitzvogel]

There is no big deal. The article is just a spomsored opinionated hit piece.

Spomsored..........:hmm:

verb form: spomsor

definition: to sponsor or promote by baseless fact or in absence of supporting evidence.

I like it :awe:


I don't think AMD is irrelevant. AMD just needs to focus on providing a good product at a price that creates high value, which AMD is failing at. Trinity is a good product, but it's just too "middle grounded" for the desktop market. It hopefully will create more waves in the laptop market, but what it really needs is to be on a lower process node and the module architecture needs to be improved to be better performing versus Intel.

 

[frozentundra123456]

Then i suppose you think people will loose respect for every other side that published a Trinity Preview, AT included.

As a matter of fact, I was disappionted that AT published this when they could have published a complete review in a few days, and not been told by AMD what they were allowed to present. I wont comment on other sites, because AT is the one I put the most faith in for unbiased reviews.

 

[Mallibu]

Then i suppose you think people will loose respect for every other side that published a Trinity Preview, AT included.

Nah, there's no black and white. If I also had a tech site I made a living by, and knew that my competitors would agree with the AMD guidelines and show only the positives, I'd do the same because that's business and I wouldn't want to lose the traffic or stay out of this whole "launch party". That's understandable. However you have to respect the guy/site that refused to do it (and we're talking about a very respectable one). Don't try to downplay a tactic that if it was done by Intel you would cry out on these forums like there was no tommorow. Be objective, admit that manipulating reviews is wrong, whatever side is coming from and get on with it.

 

[alexruiz]

To be honest, I am still trying to digest why AMD wanted a staged set of reviews. THG posted FULL review of the desktop A10-5800K months ago, as OEM machines have available for quite some time.

Spoiler

Oh, and it does quite well against its price opponent, the i3s.

Is the release now more about the FM2 platform, as well as CPUs, to the end users? Hard to understand the position.

But as surprised as I am about AMD position, I am even more surprised that Scott, who had been for quite some time the most impartial reviewer on the web is clearly takings sides now, and as sides, I mean as opposite... If you don't think he is taking sides, just analyze some of his latest articles. His "CPU impact on gaming" featured poorly coded DX9 games, while he could have picked also some DX11 well threaded ones. Older unoptimized stuff..

OK, you might argue that is sour grapes on my part as the CPUs I use had a poor showing. Point taken. But, for all the rambling about not compromising editorial integrity or allowing a company to dictate review guidelines; his reviews of the GTX660ti and GTX660 followed the suggested script by the manufacturer very closely, and were among the friendliest ones to the product reviewed. Dirt showdown result was excluded from the final statistics, but not batman AC; any kind of AA applied was FXAA, settings were always kind to the narrower buses, and the games picked run better on new hardware.

His verdict was a well targeted editor choice in both reviews, which was expected given the settings he used. He crowned the GTX660ti as faster than the HD7950, but other reviews performed at the more appropriate settings the card will see show the GTX660ti trading blows with the HD7870, right in line where it should be. He also crowned the GTX660 as faster than a HD7870, when in reality it sits barely above a HD7850. He followed the script to the line perfectly in those reviews, and now he is complaining about "editorial integrity"? Something is up at TR, and unfortunately it is no good.

 

[ViRGE]

GPGPU is already used in IE & FF, I'm not sure what Chrome does. There is also a WebGL.

As for games, there is the DirectX 11 API for games to use Direct Compute and several games coming out this year will use it.

IE and FF use the GPU, but not GPGPU. They're just doing simple graphics operations; that's a far cry from using it in a computational manner.

 

[AtenRa]

Nah, there's no black and white. If I also had a tech site I made a living by, and knew that my competitors would agree with the AMD guidelines and show only the positives, I'd do the same because that's business and I wouldn't want to lose the traffic or stay out of this whole "launch party". That's understandable. However you have to respect the guy/site that refused to do it (and we're talking about a very respectable one). Don't try to downplay a tactic that if it was done by Intel you would cry out on these forums like there was no tommorow. Be objective, admit that manipulating reviews is wrong, whatever side is coming from and get on with it.

The Sandy Bridge Preview : By http://www.anandtech.com/show/3871/the-sandy-bridge-preview-three-wins-in-a-row

I will just leave here the first benchmarks from that Preview. Just for historical purposes, this Preview was done in August 2010, 3-4 months before the SB release on January 2011.

First benchmarks are.....no not for the CPU

Sandy Bridge Integrated Graphics Performance

Now, i dont remember anyone having any problems with that Preview back then

 

[Mallibu]

The Sandy Bridge Preview : By http://www.anandtech.com/show/3871/the-sandy-bridge-preview-three-wins-in-a-row

I will just leave here the first benchmarks from that Preview. Just for historical purposes, this Preview was done in August 2010, 3-4 months before the SB release on January 2011.

First benchmarks are.....no not for the CPU


Now, i dont remember anyone having any problems with that Preview back then

AMD is trying to hide low cpu performance.
Intel was trying to hide...? The best performant CPU in the market? Enlighten me please.

 

[Nemesis 1]

Nah, there's no black and white. If I also had a tech site I made a living by, and knew that my competitors would agree with the AMD guidelines and show only the positives, I'd do the same because that's business and I wouldn't want to lose the traffic or stay out of this whole "launch party". That's understandable. However you have to respect the guy/site that refused to do it (and we're talking about a very respectable one). Don't try to downplay a tactic that if it was done by Intel you would cry out on these forums like there was no tommorow. Be objective, admit that manipulating reviews is wrong, whatever side is coming from and get on with it.

I agree this type of thinking has destroyed America. I wouldn't have printed it as was done . Only as a complete CPU would it be benched . I was disappointed with AT going along with this BS.

 

[Nemesis 1]

The Sandy Bridge Preview : By http://www.anandtech.com/show/3871/the-sandy-bridge-preview-three-wins-in-a-row

I will just leave here the first benchmarks from that Preview. Just for historical purposes, this Preview was done in August 2010, 3-4 months before the SB release on January 2011.

First benchmarks are.....no not for the CPU

Sandy Bridge Integrated Graphics Performance

Now, i dont remember anyone having any problems with that Preview back then

I take it you weren't around here than. I got banned at XTreme for saying Conroe would be 30% faster than AMD X2. It was. I was also banned here for defending what Intel showed. Hardly anyone believed Intel was on the up and Up . Time reveals all. This preview doesn't mean alot the Graphics just isn't there yet . But soon very soon.

 

[KingFatty]

Be objective, admit that manipulating reviews is wrong, whatever side is coming from and get on with it.

The way you are wording it, seems to diverge from what actually happened.

Can you elaborate by what you mean by manipulating reviews? My understanding is AMD is allowing info to be released early, but not all the info. I don't understand how that is manipulation? Isn't it more of a sneak peek, a glance behind the curtain before the big reveal?

 

[AtenRa]

I take it you weren't around here than.

AtenRa
Join Date: Feb 2009

I was reading AT since Anand left TomsHardware back in the 90s

 

[AtenRa]

AMD is trying to hide low cpu performance.
Intel was trying to hide...? The best performant CPU in the market? Enlighten me please.

Intel was trying to promote its iGPU
AMD is trying to promote its iGPU

 

[Keysplayr]

The Sandy Bridge Preview : By http://www.anandtech.com/show/3871/the-sandy-bridge-preview-three-wins-in-a-row

I will just leave here the first benchmarks from that Preview. Just for historical purposes, this Preview was done in August 2010, 3-4 months before the SB release on January 2011.

First benchmarks are.....no not for the CPU

Sandy Bridge Integrated Graphics Performance


Now, i dont remember anyone having any problems with that Preview back then

Did you not realize that in the same "preview" you posted ONLY iGPU results from ALSO had shown:

Adobe CS4 Video Encoding
http://www.anandtech.com/show/3871/the-sandy-bridge-preview-three-wins-in-a-row/8

SPECapc 3dsmax CPU Rendering Test?
http://www.anandtech.com/show/3871/the-sandy-bridge-preview-three-wins-in-a-row/9

PAR2 Multithreaded Archive Recovery Performance?
http://www.anandtech.com/show/3871/the-sandy-bridge-preview-three-wins-in-a-row/10

What difference does it make if the first benchmarks IN THE SAME REVIEW are for iGPU? The rest of the article show CPU performance. Doesn't it.

 

[AtenRa]

What difference does it make if the first benchmarks IN THE SAME REVIEW are for iGPU? The rest of the article show CPU performance. Doesn't it.

So whats the problem having TWO articles, the first showing the iGPU and the second the CPU results ???

 

[ShintaiDK]

So whats the problem having TWO articles, the first showing the iGPU and the second the CPU results ???

Kinda hillarious. Shady behaviour and manipulation by strongarming review sites is OK when its your precious AMD. Had it been another company...uha uha..doom and destruction would rain over it from you.

Morale is good, double morale is double as good? :thumbsdown:

 

[inf64]

From now on,when I see or hear anything related to TR,I would picture this in my head:
http://www.evolutionaryparenting.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/08/crying-baby.jpg

"What ,I cannot eat my toy now?I can only drive it on carpet? Boohoo"

We're not 4Chan
-ViRGE

 

[AtenRa]

Kinda hillarious. Shady behaviour and manipulation by strongarming review sites is OK when its your precious AMD. Had it been another company...uha uha..doom and destruction would rain over it from you.

Morale is good, double morale is double as good? :thumbsdown:

That's your expertise not mine, I havent DOOMs day any Preview/s or Review/s so far.

 

[Mallibu]

From now on,when I see or hear anything related to TR,I would picture this in my head:
http://www.evolutionaryparenting.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/08/crying-baby.jpg

"What ,I cannot eat my toy now?I can only drive it on carpet? Boohoo"

I'm pretty sure if you replaced "AMD" with "Intel" in a same talk, you would be the baby in the picture
It must get tiring to attack all the people/sites that don't agree with you. Yesterday it was the guy's college degree, today it's that this site are whiners, bla bla
All the world is wrong except you, clever thoughtflow you got there champion.

 

[inf64]

Thank you Mallibu!

 

[Mallibu]

Thank you Mallibu!

My pleasure.

 

[inf64]

Sarcasm is great ain't it .

As for Mr. Wasson's integrity,top comment on his 2nd article reveals double standards of TR:

Hey look what I found guys!

http://techreport.com/review/9538/intel-conroe-performance-previewed/1

The same author quite happy to preview conroe's performance under Intel's conditions, which included :-

"We used test systems pre-configured by Intel before the show, and we had very limited time to conduct testing or inspect the systems. We were not allowed to look inside of the case of either PC, and the scope of the benchmarks we were allowed to run was defined by Intel. We weren't given the leeway to record our own custom timedemos for the games, and we didn't have enough time to run each test three times or even reboot between the tests."

And without a full page knickers-in-a-twist article to boot! Sorry Scott, but you've lost a lot of respect here.

Link of interest.

 

[CHADBOGA]

Sarcasm is great ain't it .

As for Mr. Wasson's integrity,top comment on his 2nd article reveals double standards of TR:

Link of interest.

Jimbo75 is quite a confused fellow at the best of times, afterall how bad do you have to be to get banned from Chuckles' site, when you are pro-AMD.

What he and you have failed to grasp is the difference between a preview and a full blown review.

This isn't meant to be a preview here that AMD gets to warp, yet they are trying to get away with doing just that.

 

[frozentundra123456]

So whats the problem having TWO articles, the first showing the iGPU and the second the CPU results ???

The problem is not that there are separate two articles. If Anand had chosen on his own to split the benchmarks into 2 articles for some good reason like making the data easier to digest, I would have accepted that. The problem is having the producer of a product you are reviewing telling you what you can print and what you cant.

And like others, I dont really know what AMD is trying to do. Benchmarks of both CPU and GPU performance are already out at Toms Hardware. AMD just makes itself look shady and manupulative by trying to control the review sites.