A Computer hardware and components forum. ComputerBanter.com

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » ComputerBanter.com forum » Processors » AMD x86-64 Processors
Site Map Home Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

AnandTech Benchmark



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old June 7th 06, 07:56 PM posted to alt.comp.hardware.amd.x86-64
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default AnandTech Benchmark

On June 5, I published the SysMark 2004 comparison between Con E6300
and Athlon 64 X2 3800+. Many visitors from intel.com read that page. On
June 6, Anand showed SysMark 2004 comparison between Conroe XE and
FX62.

Some people keep quoting Anand's stuff as gospel truth. I have proven
that Anand is a paid Intel pumper. So please stop quoting Anand as
reliable source here, except for critical examination.

* Dempsey vs Opteron benchmark: Why did AnandTech handicap the
Opteron? The responses I quoted in the comments were from Anand
himself. We know now, Dempsey is no match to Opteron in 64 bit
performance.
* Anand's benchmark on Yonah: X2 3800+ won by 16:6, yet Anand
initially gave X2 a negative conclusion. After seeing those big
Centrino ads on the same review page, it became all too clear. Anand's
primary source of income is ad money.
* IDF: Was Anand duped by INTEL? Anand pushed the Intel arranged
buttons, instantly wrote that "Intel Regains the Performance Crown".
After the BIOS issue, Intel called Anand back and had the machine BIOS
flashed and tests redone. No one else got such VIP treatment from
Intel. I suggested to AMD that it should subpoena Anand for information
regarding the IDF test as part of the discovery process in the
anti-trust lawsuit.
* One month later, Intel quoted Anand's words and showed them to
Wall Street analysts and investors. Intel market cap increased about
$100 million that day. You notice that Hexus.net was also quoted by
Intel (see page 51 of this Intel presentation to Wall Street).
* Today, Anand published what he claimed to be an independent
Conroe benchmark, while others could only push Intel arranged buttons.
How could Intel trust Anand so much more than others? Anand claimed
that he gathered the Intel parts. How? The Taiwanese were suddenly not
afraid of Intel any more and just gave Anand the Conroe CPU?

Let's make some quick comparisons. In this test by PCStats, an Athlon
FX62 got a SysMark 2004 Office Productivity Overall score of 261 . In
Anand Lal Shimpi's test, FX62 (2.8GHZ, 2x1MB) only got 210, Conroe XE
(2.93GHZ) got 266. This result for a slower Athlon 64 X2 5000+ agreed
with PCStats' results quite well. There, the X2 5000+ with a 7200RPM HD
got 230 points in SysMark 2004 Office Productivity Overall. Look at the
FX62 sub scores from PCStats, they were 263 for communications, 297 for
document creation, and 214 for data analysis. However, in AnandTech's
results for FX62, the sub scores were respectively 178, 280, 185.

Let's look at PCStats.com result on Business Winstone 2004, the FX62
got a score of 36.4 there. However, at AnandTech, FX62 only got 27.9,
while the Conroe XE got 32.8.

Why were AnandTech's scores on FX62 substantially lower than the scores
obtained by others?

Anand is not dumb. He knew that AMD64's main advantage is low memory
latency due to the integrated memory controller (IMC). AMD64 doesn't
need huge cache in general because it can access memory quickly. AMD
estimated that IMC's low latency gave its CPUs 20% performance edge.
Intel Conroe's solution is to use large cache to compensate the lack of
IMC. With this knowledge, Anand decided to use high latency 5-5-5-12
DDR2 memory for his test. As a result, FX62's low latency IMC advantage
was almost eliminated.

As you can see from this newegg.com memory shopping page, most DDR2-800
memory in the market today has 4-4-4-12 or lower latency. In fact, on
newegg.com, out of 59 DDR2-800 memory products, only 15 models have CAS
latency of 5, the other 44 products have CAS latency of 4 or lower.
4-4-4-12 memory is 25% quicker than the 5-5-5-12 used by Anand.

AnandTech's results on FX62 should therefore be considered invalid if
not fraudulent. Based on AnandTech's SysMark 2004 results on Conroe XE
(2.93 GHZ) and PCStats' results on Athlon 64 FX 62:

SysMark 2004 Office Overall: Conroe XE scored 266, Athlon 64 FX 62
scored 261
Business Winstone 2004: Conroe XE scored 32.8, Athlon 64 FX62 scored
36.4

This agrees with our previous findings.

Charlie at INQ commented that "[i]t would most likely be cheaper to buy
all the hardware sites out there off". I guess some company has already
done that. What did Charlie know? A hardware site, a script kiddie
finished reading "How to Upgrade Your PC" pushing benchmark buttons. I
doubt his annual income is big. He should be cheap, as our Charlie
observed.




span style="font-size:85%;"span style="font-style: italic;"On June
5, I /spana style="font-style: italic;"
href="http://sharikou.blogspot.com/2006/06/conroe-close-to-be-really-busted.html"published
the SysMark 2004 comparison/aspan style="font-style: italic;"
between Con E6300 and Athlon 64 X2 3800+. Many visitors from intel.com
read that page. On June 6, Anand showed SysMark 2004 comparison between
Conroe XE and FX62./span/span

Some people keep quoting Anand's stuff as gospel truth. I have proven
that Anand is a paid Intel pumper. So please stop quoting Anand as
reliable source here, except for critical examination.
ulliDempsey vs Opteron benchmark: a
href="http://sharikou.blogspot.com/2005/12/why-did-anandtech-handicap-opteron.html"Why
did AnandTech handicap the Opteron?/a The responses I quoted in the
comments were from Anand himself. We know now, a
href="http://sharikou.blogspot.com/2006/06/373-ghz-dempsey-xeon-5080-fragged-by.html"Dempsey
is no match to Opteron/a in 64 bit performance.
/liliAnand's benchmark on Yonah: X2 3800+ won by 16:6, yet a
href="http://sharikou.blogspot.com/2005/11/intel-has-efficiency-problem-in-yonah.html"Anand
initially gave X2 a negative conclusion/a. After seeing those big
Centrino ads on the same review page, it became all too clear. Anand's
primary source of income is ad money.
/liliIDF: a
href="http://sharikou.blogspot.com/2006/03/was-anand-duped-by-intel.html"Was
Anand duped by INTEL?/a Anand pushed the Intel arranged buttons,
instantly wrote that "Intel Regains the Performance Crown". After the
BIOS issue, Intel called Anand back and had the machine BIOS flashed
and tests redone. No one else got such VIP treatment from Intel. I
suggested to AMD that it should subpoena Anand for information
regarding the IDF test as part of the discovery process in the
anti-trust lawsuit.
/liliOne month later, a
href="http://sharikou.blogspot.com/2006/04/conroe-performance-claim-being-busted.html"Intel
quoted Anand's words/a and showed them to Wall Street analysts and
investors. Intel market cap increased about $100 million that day. You
notice that Hexus.net was also quoted by Intel (see page 51 of a
href="http://media.corporate-ir.net/media_files/webcast/2006/april/intel/PDF/SAM-42606-morning.pdf"this
Intel presentation /ato Wall Street).
/liliToday, a
href="http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=2771&p=3"Anand
published /awhat he claimed to be an independent Conroe benchmark,
while a
href="http://www.tomshardware.com/2006/06/05/first_benchmarks_conroe_vs_fx-62/page4.html"others
could only push Intel arranged buttons/a. How could Intel trust Anand
so much more than others? Anand claimed that he gathered the Intel
parts. How? The Taiwanese were suddenly not afraid of Intel any more
and just gave Anand the Conroe CPU?/li/ulpLet's make some quick
comparisons. In a
href="http://www.pcstats.com/articleview.cfm?articleid=1959&page=13"this
test by PCStats/a, an a
href="http://www.pcstats.com/articleview.cfm?articleid=1959&page=14"Athlon
FX62 got a SysMark 2004 span class="text"span class="text"Office
Productivity Overall score of 261/span/span/a . In a
href="http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=2771&p=3"Anand
Lal Shimpi's test/a, FX62 (2.8GHZ, 2x1MB) only got 210, Conroe XE
(2.93GHZ) got 266. This a
href="http://www.beareyes.com.cn/2/lib/200605/24/20060524141_7.htm"result
for a slower Athlon 64 X2 5000+/a agreed with PCStats' results quite
well. There, the X2 5000+ with a 7200RPM HD got 230 points in SysMark
2004 Office Productivity Overall. Look at the FX62 a
href="http://www.pcstats.com/articleview.cfm?articleid=1959&page=14"sub
scores from PCStats/a, they were 263 for communications, 297 for
document creation, and 214 for data analysis. However, in AnandTech's
results for FX62, the sub scores were respectively 178, 280, 185.
/ppLet's look at a
href="http://www.pcstats.com/articleview.cfm?articleid=1959&page=15"PCStat s.com
result on /aspan name="KonaBody"a
href="http://www.pcstats.com/articleview.cfm?articleid=1959&page=15"Business
Winstone 2004/a, the FX62 got a score of 36.4 there. However, at
AnandTech, a
href="http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=2771&p=3"FX62
only got 27.9, while the Conroe XE got 32.8./a
/span
Why were AnandTech's scores on FX62 substantially lower than the scores
obtained by others?
/ppAnand is not dumb. a
href="http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=2738&p=3"He
knew /athat AMD64's main advantage is low memory latency due to the
integrated memory controller (IMC). AMD64 doesn't need huge cache in
general because it can access memory quickly. AMD estimated that IMC's
low latency gave its CPUs 20% performance edge. Intel Conroe's solution
is to use large cache to compensate the lack of IMC. With this
knowledge, Anand decided to use high latency 5-5-5-12 DDR2 memory for
his test. As a result, FX62's a
href="http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=2771&p=2"low
latency IMC advantage was almost eliminated/a.
/ppAs you can see from this a
href="http://www.newegg.com/Product/ProductList.asp?N=2010170147+1052416064&Submit=ENE &SubCategory=147"newegg.com
memory shopping page/a, most DDR2-800 memory in the market today has
4-4-4-12 or lower latency. In fact, on na
href="http://www.newegg.com/Product/ProductList.asp?N=2010170147+1052416064&Submit=ENE &SubCategory=147"ewegg.com/a,
out of 59 DDR2-800 memory products, only 15 models have CAS latency of
5, the other 44 products have CAS latency of 4 or lower. 4-4-4-12
memory is 25% quicker than the 5-5-5-12 used by Anand.

AnandTech's results on FX62 should therefore be considered invalid if
not fraudulent. Based on AnandTech's a
href="http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=2771&p=3"SysMark
2004 results on Conroe XE (2.93 GHZ)/a and a
href="http://www.pcstats.com/articleview.cfm?articleid=1959&page=14"PCStat s'
results on Athlon 64 FX 62/a:/ppspan style="font-weight:
bold;"SysMark 2004 Office Overall: Conroe XE scored 266, Athlon 64 FX
62 scored 261
Business Winstone 2004: Conroe XE scored 32.8, Athlon 64 FX62 scored
36.4/span
/ppThis agrees with our a
href="http://sharikou.blogspot.com/2006/06/conroe-close-to-be-really-busted.html"previous
findings/a.span style="text-decoration: underline;"
/span/ppa
href="http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=31994"Charlie at INQ
commented/a that "[i]t would most likely be cheaper to buy all the
hardware sites out there off". I guess some company has already done
that. What did Charlie know? A hardware site, a script kiddie finished
reading "How to Upgrade Your PC" pushing benchmark buttons. I doubt his
annual income is big. He should be cheap, as our Charlie observed.
/pp
span style="text-decoration: underline;"/span/p

 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
REQ: benchmark help H.W. Stockman Overclocking AMD Processors 0 April 12th 04 07:07 PM
Benchmark request H.W. Stockman General 0 April 8th 04 09:11 PM
Fluid flow benchmark -- help me choose CPU/mboard H.W. Stockman Intel 0 April 8th 04 04:54 AM
Athlon 64 Vs. Pentium 4 article: On the Justification for Quake3 as a CPU Benchmark rms General 6 October 2nd 03 05:16 PM
Athlon 64 Vs. Pentium 4 article: On the Justification for Quake3 as a CPU Benchmark rms Overclocking 6 October 2nd 03 05:16 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 12:09 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2004-2018 ComputerBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.