You seem a bit behind the times my boy.
Not only did Anand test it live, so too now has BSN
http://www.brightsideofnews.com/news/2012/1/10/exclusive-intel-lets-us-test-dx11-on-ivy-bridge.aspx
Overall, though, we did enjoy playing F1 2011 on this Ivy Bridge Ultrabook and it ran extremely smoothly without any dropped frames or lag at all.
Intel invited us this morning to come to their booth and take a look at the DX11 demo ourselves and to test it out first hand using the exact same system that Mooley Eden had been using. We unfortunately did not have the luxury to play it with a steering wheel like Mooley did, but it was definitely an interesting experience to be playing it in real time on an Ivy Bridge Ultrabook. We simply played F1 2011 on Medium settings with the display running at medium settings in DX11 mode. We played this game like we normally do, with a mouse and keyboard and had quite a bit of fun, to be honest.
We also got a chance to run the game in benchmark mode which runs the game with higher graphics and allows you to see the overall performance of the game on your system. The Intel representative would not let us run the game through til the end where the score showed itself simply because they aren't quite finished optimizing Ivy Bridge yet and it would be unfair to show an unfinished benchmark. Overall, though, we did enjoy playing F1 2011 on this Ivy Bridge Ultrabook and it ran extremely smoothly without any dropped frames or lag at all.
No surprise it can run on medium (aka low) settings. For an ultrabook that's fine, but for mainstream laptops people will want more.
I can sense a strong bias here.
There is Ultra Low, low, then Med... So aka not low, medium.
Let's keep in mind we're talking about Intel here, they didn't overspend to buy a gpu company. Compared to where they were just 2-3 years ago they're doing a great job, even if this isn't as fast as what AMD has at least you can sleep well knowing the next gen mobile gpus won't be bottlenecked to heck in back by low clocked bulldozer cores.
I can sense a strong bias here.
I like how your reading comprehension is such that you confuse yourself.I like how you take one sentence out of context and draw various conclusions from it.
Well with that admission, if your thinking wasn't so confused, you would recognise that I didn't take anything out of context.It's perfectly reasonable to not have final performance data right now and not make final judgments
You are mistaken, Haswell doesn't come out till 2013.Yeah it's typical intel style though. They don't have to sell hardware on technical merits or capabities, they can sell it by playing charades! So it looks like intel tried to polish this turd and put a happy face on it, while in reality it's the same old steaming pile it always was.
Anyway, IB is old news. There's much more exciting tech on the market now...
I can sense a strong bias here.
There is Ultra Low, low, then Med... So aka not low, medium.
Let's keep in mind we're talking about Intel here, they didn't overspend to buy a gpu company. Compared to where they were just 2-3 years ago they're doing a great job, even if this isn't as fast as what AMD has at least you can sleep well knowing the next gen mobile gpus won't be bottlenecked to heck in back by low clocked bulldozer cores.
Yeah it's typical intel style though. They don't have to sell hardware on technical merits or capabities, they can sell it by playing charades! So it looks like intel tried to polish this turd and put a happy face on it, while in reality it's the same old steaming pile it always was.
Anyway, IB is old news. There's much more exciting tech on the market now...
LOL!!!! Awesome, he expected to play a game by clicking on VLC. You actually expect anyone to even remotely believe that? Comedy, you are good at it.
Case closed? What? Intel faked a demo, then lied about faking the demo, then hastily prepared a follow up that gets posted on Anandtech.com using different hardware.
Not case closed. This is incredibly poor form by Intel, there is simply no excuse for doing this, and any sort of follow up demo has to be called into question as well.
So let me get this straight. You think Mooly Eden pressed the play button on VLC thinking that is how you start a game? Do you happen to know the position Mooly Eden holds at Intel? A 10 year old knows that a video player doesn't start a game.
<lots of logical discourse>
Understood.When I say "case closed" I mean in regards to the position I held earlier that the reasoning for this staged hokey "demo" was that it probably meant IB was not at all as mature as it needs to be at this stage in the timeline.
.....
I did not mean "case closed" to say all was forgiven or that intent and effort to lie and deceive was now explained, rationalized, or justified.
Of course. Intel had to play the game (on unknown hardware at this point) and capture it to a video file.This is the bottom line. Regardless the reason for said deception, said deception was the plan from time-zero of that particular segment of the press demo of IB.
There is simply no way this can be possible, Mooly would have to be absolutely clueless to think that, and given his position with Intel, that is blatantly obvious to not be the case.There is no way you can convince me that Mooly honestly thought the game was being played backstage after he was the one who pressed the play button on the video in the first place.
Keep in mind that any business is the people, without people the business does not exist. The ethics and culture put forth by individuals is very often a reflection of the overall culture of the corporation they work for. You see this time and time again. I will remind everyone the past practices of Intel, they bribed their suppliers to the tune of billions of dollars.But not admitting to your mistake, and further lying about it in the first place...just not good. Not good at all. I'm not as dissapointed in Intel as I am in Mooly. Intel is a business, businesses don't have ethics because they aren't alive. But Mooly did something unethical and only he can right that wrong. But he hasn't, and doesn't appear to be inclined to.
There is no way you can convince me that Mooly honestly thought the game was being played backstage after he was the one who pressed the play button on the video in the first place.
I like how your reading comprehension is such that you confuse yourself.
Well with that admission, if your thinking wasn't so confused, you would recognise that I didn't take anything out of context.
If there's no reason to lie about the live demo, why lie?
I'm connecting the dots to the Trinity demo AMD was doing. In the video
http://hothardware.com/News/AMD-Fus...00M-Mobile-GPUs-and-Lightning-Bolt-In-Action/
You can see AMD is running a game bench of what appears to be the same F1 game that Mooly is playing a video of.
Question Intel is avoiding is why? Why do it? I'm speculating they don't like where they see ULV chip prices going when AMD starts shipping 17W Trinity chips. The hyped up ultrabook sales pitch would be in line with trying to minimize the number of OEM deals Trinity gets.
The fact is that, if you don't have the balls to play with your technology on a stage, then your tech is not really ready for deployment. It's too fragile.
We—the journalists and the consumers—should call them out. Not apologize for them. Demos should be live. Otherwise, just play a video and say it's a video, not a demo. The fact is that you will never have any backstage people to switch to a second computer when your computer crashes. And pretending you are playing while a video plays is boring.
Don't accept the beta culture. We all should demand reality and never defend companies faking it because "that's what they all do". —JD.