Marketing and Prejudice Get the Better of Consumers with PC Processors: Test

[W1zzard]

Pure marketing stunt. Apart from the subtle setup differences, there's no way you can eliminate observer and control bias in this scenario. For the results to mean anything, you'd need both everything verified identical (including software in the backround), ABX testing ( 1 x Intel, 1 x AMD and 1 x random Intel or AMD rig) and supervision from someone who did not know the setups (double blind testing).

that. but at least it gets them some good pr unlike the bulldozer team. fire all engineers and hire more pr people?

 

[Damn_Smooth]

3 monitors? At that resolution both setups were GPU limited so there really wasn't a difference.

 

[Rowsol]

AMD has a much better integrated graphics. It's common knowledge. It's no surprise that without a graphics card the intel is going to suck. And as for the triple monitor test that's lol worthy. The cpu isn't even a factor. With that said the A8 does have some great budget build applications if you are okay with medium settings in games.

 

[cavemanthreeonesix]

My i5-2500k is cheaper and outperforms an FX-8150 in about 90% of gaming benchmarks. I don't feel cheated in the slightest.

odd that seeing when i benched my 2600k against my phenomII 965 it didnt beat it is any test until i started ramping the clocks up, apart from cpu tests like in 3d mark, 26k had a healthy lead in these from the start.

For gaming I found the 26k to begin with quite dissappointing

 

[de.das.dude]

i always say and will say it again, AMD systems just feel a lot faster or snappier than those of intel, and thus i will always get AMD ones.

and this tests just prove my point.

 

[Frick]

i always say and will say it again, AMD systems just feel a lot faster or snappier than those of intel, and thus i will always get AMD ones.

and this tests just prove my point.

And we keep telling you you are so wrong it's silly.

 

[entropy13]

i always say and will say it again, AMD systems just feel a lot faster or snappier than those of intel, and thus i will always get AMD ones.

and this tests just prove my point.

Exactly, that's why you have 100+ fps in GTA:SA while I only have 60 fps...because I have V-Sync on.

 

[Kaynar]

Seriously, HOW can they expect and i3 to perform in gaming? They wanted to play pacman with it?

 

[Jarman]

how hard would it really be to skew the high end test by using a beta driver or something for the 7970 on the 2500k? Or clock down the 2500k, or use low frequency ram etc, etc....or even overclock the bulldozer and use some nice 1800 ram.

The tests seem very open to manipulation if you ask me

 

[kajson]

The 8150 system also functions as roomheater, thus the gaming experience probs felt a lot cozier slap:

 

[General Lee]

Yeah, nice of AMD to show how you don't need an FX-8150 since the game is totally GPU bound.

 

[xenocide]

odd that seeing when i benched my 2600k against my phenomII 965 it didnt beat it is any test until i started ramping the clocks up, apart from cpu tests like in 3d mark, 26k had a healthy lead in these from the start.

For gaming I found the 26k to begin with quite dissappointing

Alright, prove it. You did the benches right? So show me what every non-bias tech review site failed to.

http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/102?vs=288
http://www.guru3d.com/article/core-i5-2500k-and-core-i7-2600k-review/1
http://www.tomshardware.com/charts/desktop-cpu-charts-2010/Gaming-Left-4-Dead-2,2433.html

But I'm sure all these people are lying. I don't want to derail the discussion, so pm me the results, and if they are valid I will no longer hold the idea that the i5-2500k is a better value.

 

[Kaynar]

Alright, prove it. You did the benches right? So show me what every non-bias tech review site failed to.

http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/102?vs=288
http://www.guru3d.com/article/core-i5-2500k-and-core-i7-2600k-review/1
http://www.tomshardware.com/charts/desktop-cpu-charts-2010/Gaming-Left-4-Dead-2,2433.html

But I'm sure all these people are lying. I don't want to derail the discussion, so pm me the results, and if they are valid I will no longer hold the idea that the i5-2500k is a better value.

I will always believe that AMD is better value for money, but Intel and nVidia have the top performance high-end stuff, no matter what u do to try to proove me wrong

 

[digibucc]

this thread is depressing

 

[Mistral]

I'd be really interested to know WHY they thought the high-end AMD system was better

It's quite simple, really.

Systems are named A and B, with B being the AMD. People, left to their own devices, will tend to try system A first, B second.

In the case of the "low end" PC, you have a clear gaming advantage on AMD's side.

In the case of the "high end" gaming PC, you have a very comparable gaming experience, but the joy had on system B is fresher in the participants mind, hence why you see more selecting it as the "better" one.

 

[Andrei23]

i always say and will say it again, AMD systems just feel a lot faster or snappier than those of intel, and thus i will always get AMD ones.

and this tests just prove my point.

See, to me it feels the exact opposite, therefore I must be right about my judgement, following your logic (or lack thereof) here.

 

[Andrei23]

I will always believe that AMD is better value for money no matter what u do to try to proove me wrong

GTFO computer tech enthusiast forums then


Bulldozer reminds me of this image



For fanboys these are God's hands (Crapdozer analogy), for people who can think for themselves (people who base their judgements on results i.e. REALITY not marketing fluff and gut feelings) it's something completely different.

 

[yogurt_21]

3 monitors? At that resolution both setups were GPU limited so there really wasn't a difference.

this and the first test the A8 is obviously a better choice for on-chip graphics.

so biased testing sure, but still proves that experience is influenced by marketing and brand loyalty.

 

[suraswami]

There are 143 total votes for the basic system and only 141 for the high-end system. So there were 2 who had no idea what was happenning and left the tent? Or they got so dizzy with the awesome i3 frame rates and fainted?

 

[de.das.dude]

i see a lot of intel fanbois here.

 

[coldtortilla]

comparing the i3 with the A8 using integrated graphics is kinda unfair. They should both be using some lowend GPU. Then we'll see who has better preformance. (core i3 owner)

 

[Spectrobozo]

I remember some people complaining about HT causing some trouble, stuttering in some games, maybe they tested it with HT on in one of these games?
because it doesn't make any sense, so you will probably need find another factor to explain,

 

[badmau5]

I remember some people complaining about HT causing some trouble, stuttering in some games, maybe they tested it with HT on in one of these games?
because it doesn't make any sense, so you will probably need find another factor to explain,

we will never know all details about this test cause its not even test, just another portion of marketing type of crap, the point is AMD vs Intel comparison organized by AMD is kind of hard to trust - unless you are hardcore AMD fanboy which is just silly, like any other fanboyism. It has been proved by numerous reviews already that bulldozer is significantly slower than sandy bridge chips, consumes more power and even somewhat slower than phenom II in many cases and every time someone tries to prove the opposite its just silly noise. AMD isnt bad company - they have amazing GPU's and lots of potential in general but bulldozer is a fail, and every "but our bulldozer feels a lot smoother!" type of statement is a fail as well.

 

[de.das.dude]

comparing the i3 with the A8 using integrated graphics is kinda unfair. They should both be using some lowend GPU. Then we'll see who has better preformance. (core i3 owner)

the price of each build was the same ainnit?
you dont get the point. AMD offers more for less. thas what they tried to say.

 

[OneCool]

:shadedshu