Principled Technologies Comments on their Intel Processor Study

[Xzibit]

 

[Fiveohfour]

Yea even better, so much for being independent, you’d think an independent unbiased source would disclose this themselves in the benchmark, or mention it in their follow up, not wait until someone else digs it up from Intel’s website. Intel themselves says not to make a purchase based on Principled Tech’s work. Lmao.

“ Principled Technologies Benchmark Disclosure: Intel is a sponsor and member of the BenchmarkXPRT* Development Community, and was the major developer of the XPRT* family of benchmarks. Principled Technologies is the publisher of the XPRT* family of benchmarks. You should consult other information and performance tests to assist you in fully evaluating your contemplated purchases”

Principled Technologies is sponsored by Intel and Intel is also a major developer of BenchmarkXPRT family of benchmarks, which is published by none other then Principled Technologies.

But did you know that AMD has commissioned not one but thirteen reports from them as well?

You posted this at 5:04. I missed it and just posted the same info, only to go back and see it was posted at the exact time that matches my username. Something something triangles, something something the Illuminati is real

 

[Steevo]

Ram prices and diminishing returns over 32GB is why 64 is absurd, 300 for 32GB of ram.

 

[cadaveca]

They either had no idea what did what to what, or they did and that makes it even worse. as I said their methodology pales in comparison to part time amateur youtuber’s and there’s zero excuse for that. They contradict themselves claiming they understand the importance of parity and then saying but we used the stock cooler because “amd said it was good”. Come on.

As for RAM, they’re again trying to have it both ways and plead ignorance “but this is what the average guy would do” while also claiming to be professionals interested in parity across systems, but without actually taking the most basic steps of controlling for every possible variable and ensuring each system is presented in the best light possible, because nobody is interested in how a Ferrari 488 performs against a Ferrari 458 in limp mode because it’s throwing codes.

As an enthusiast reviewer, I agree.

As a technical writer, I can see why they did what they did, and actually I kind of agree with how they did things.

Now, would I have run tests like that? NOPE.

Will I run tests like that? NOPE.

Could I have done it differently, and would Intel still have won the majority of benchmarks?

You bet your ass I could.

And that... that's what makes it bad for me.


But do I care? NOPE...

...and because it was used for marketing. It just all the more reason for people like me to do what we do.

BTW, amateur youtubers are some of the worst sources of info there is, and the fact you mention them... man... they often have it so misconstrued, and are doing their thing to make money with views, just like Principled Technologies does. I see the youtubers as far worse than PT is. But they serve a purpose too. Even negative attention is attention, for marketing.


Like...Look... everyone's talking about Intel's latest, and there's no real reviews, and you can't buy them yet.

PT did an awesome job.

 

[Fiveohfour]

As an enthusiast reviewer, I agree.

As a technical writer, I can see why they did what they did, and actually I kind of agree with how they did things.

Now, would I have run tests like that? NOPE.

Will I run tests like that? NOPE.

Could I have done it differently, and would Intel still have won the majority of benchmarks?


You bet your ass I could.

And that... that's what makes it bad for me.


But do I care? NOPE, and because it was used for marketing. It just all the more reason for people like me to do what we do.

BTW, amateur youtubers are some of the worst sources of info there is, and the fact you mention them... man... they often have it so misconstrued, and are doing their thing to make money with views, just like Principled Technologies does. I see the youtubers as far worse than PT is. Even negative attention is attention, for marketing. Look ,everyone's talking about Intel's latest, and there's no real reviews, and you can't buy them yet.

PT did an awesome job.

I’m with you as far as your conclusions RE: publicity, though I don’t think this was Intel’s goal I agree it will likely have no tangible negative effect, but that’s an entirely different conversation.


RE: PT & the i9 though, They’re up for pre-order, and there’s a single source of benchmarks for interested parties. That’s my entire point, amateur youtuber’s are the (legitimate) benchmark for all that is substandard and yet compared to this “study” they come out looking like perfectionists, if you conclude the problems with this report were incompetence.

If you conclude they knew what they were doing, then it’s difficult to excuse such amateur errors conveniently placed as they were. From Seasoned vet to rookie and back again repeatedly? No clue something might be up with a test showing 1500% > performance for the i9, by the same person competent enough to set up such a test and competent enough to know to look into all the little motherboard specific nuances necessary to unleash the Intel/AMD sku’s but they just happen to accidentally cripple the performance of the SINGLE-MOST relevant AMD part, the most direct competitor, the one cpu that you or I would have been most focused on ensuring was properly respresented before putting our name on it.

And then thoroughly documenting every step so that any half competent amateur youtuber’s can attempt to reproduce the results and will indeed see the same thing, if they follow them to a tee.

And Intel has the balls to come out and co-sign it and say they see the same in their labs without any further clarification, while critical pre-order hours pass by literally the only benchmark available on the internet conveniently shows an i9 that miraculously performs exponentially better than even intel’s Own skylake-x 8 core sku’s.

Ok yea I guess that’s reasonable, seems like it belongs in a Lemony Snicket tale to me though.

 

[Xzibit]

 

[cadaveca]

Ok yea I guess that’s reasonable, seems like it belongs in a Lemony Snicket tale to me though.

I blame NVidia.

 

[Fiveohfour]

As an enthusiast reviewer, I agree.

As a technical writer, I can see why they did what they did, and actually I kind of agree with how they did things.

Now, would I have run tests like that? NOPE.

Will I run tests like that? NOPE.

Could I have done it differently, and would Intel still have won the majority of benchmarks?

You bet your ass I could.

And that... that's what makes it bad for me.


But do I care? NOPE...

...and because it was used for marketing. It just all the more reason for people like me to do what we do.

BTW, amateur youtubers are some of the worst sources of info there is, and the fact you mention them... man... they often have it so misconstrued, and are doing their thing to make money with views, just like Principled Technologies does. I see the youtubers as far worse than PT is. But they serve a purpose too. Even negative attention is attention, for marketing.


Like...Look... everyone's talking about Intel's latest, and there's no real reviews, and you can't buy them yet.

PT did an awesome job.

tbc I don’t have an issue with the way they did things, in a vacuum and with proper disclosure/drawing reasonable conclusions. I just don’t think this is that, and I guess it irks me because it’s so unnecessary, as Unnecesary as removing hyperthreading from i7 sku’s suddenly. This should have been a period of majority positive coverage, an 8 core mainstream, if barely, Chip. I really didn’t see any way for them to screw It up.

I blame NVidia.

Of course, Jensen is the only one who benefits here, that sneaky bastard

 

[mcraygsx]

CEO of principled tech believe that 64GB of RAM is standard for average consumers who buy 9900K or 2700X .

 

[cadaveca]

tbc I don’t have an issue with the way they did things, in a vacuum and with proper disclosure/drawing reasonable conclusions. I just don’t think this is that, and I guess it irks me because it’s so unnecessary, as Unnecesary as removing hyperthreading from i7 sku’s suddenly. This should have been a period of majority positive coverage, an 8 core mainstream, if barely, Chip. I really didn’t see any way for them to screw It up.

Business is business?

Great thoughts though; I'll have to digest these and comment later.

Of course, Jensen is the only one who benefits here, that sneaky bastard

NO, but really, the recent NVidia launch and pre-order time benefitted NVidia just as much as this might benefit Intel. Paper launches are dumb, but NVidia showed how great they can be.

Oh yeah, I guess Apple and many other companies do it too. Funny how we make circuits on glass and circuit boards interesting these days, huh?

 

[londiste]

Ram prices and diminishing returns over 32GB is why 64 is absurd, 300 for 32GB of ram.

CEO of principled tech believe that 64GB of RAM is standard for average consumers who buy 9900K or 2700X .

Focusing on the wrong thing here. They specifically went for 4 modules to make sure AMD Threadrippers and Intel's X-series have all the bandwidth they can have as both support quad-channel memory. They even say as much in their press release.
4x16 probably because they had a bunch of these in hand. 4x8 (or 4x4) would not have made much of a difference in context of test results.

 

[Xzibit]

Focusing on the wrong thing here. They specifically went for 4 modules to make sure AMD Threadrippers and Intel's X-series have all the bandwidth they can have as both support quad-channel memory. They even say as much in their press release.
4x16 probably because they had a bunch of these in hand. 4x8 (or 4x4) would not have made much of a difference in context of test results.

He contradicts himself several times on what their intentions are on testing. Watch the Interview

 

[londiste]

He contradicts himself several times on what their intentions are on testing. Watch the Interview

Yeah, he blabbers a lot and contradicts himself. Judging from the interview this guy does not know much about what is going on.
On the other hand I suspect press release is written by someone (or with input from someone) who does.

I mean, I get it. Ryzen really does not like 4 memory modules. But it does not invalidate the idea of using the same 4 modules across all different systems. If they would use 2 modules for some systems and 4 for others there would be different questions about specific modules, memory capacity etc.

 

[Vayra86]

Well, I guess if you work at PT, now's the time to start packing your stuff and find greener pastures. Maybe CTS Labs is hiring? Seems like a good fit, if you willingly took part in this badly executed lie.

Incredible clumsiness. Even having to correct actual errors in their writing in the same piece where they say they are the greatest. LMAO

 

[Eric3988]

PT has to run interference for their shoddy work now? Big shocker! In other news, the world is round and politics are controversial. These guys really exposed themselves as the hacks they are when they posted their results initially. Nobody will ever use them to find objective results. The thing that gets me is why Intel feels the need to blow money on crap like this. They have held the advantage forever in gaming FPS when it comes to gaming while AMD has been the price/performance leader especially in the value segment.

 

[stimpy88]

Principled Technologies is sponsored by Intel and Intel is also a major developer of BenchmarkXPRT family of benchmarks, which is published by none other then Principled Technologies.

But did you know that AMD has commissioned not one but thirteen reports from them as well?

In the same vein that AMD took when they joined BapCo. They try to use Intel's own agents against Intel, by giving them lots of money, and expecting them to be nice to them the next time Intel ask that company to perform a new benchmark.

It is common knowledge that to call AMD's press/marketing strategy amature, is actually a big compliment. AMD have always been their second worst enemy.

 

[Fx]

seriously? I run 32gb, and bet I'm way outside the norm, or at least I was when I did that 3 years ago....

I just moved to 32GB myself and it is overkill for the vast majority of the time. I have only received a warning for low memory while using 16GB once or twice and that was over the last two years so that let me know that it was finally time to increase. I would imagine that most power users are content with 32GB.