Tuesday, January 24th 2012
Marketing and Prejudice Get the Better of Consumers with PC Processors: Test
At the AMD & HardOCP Game Experience event held in Texas, gamers were asked to participate in a blind test. The test involved gaming on two sets of gaming PCs with two PCs each, in each set is an AMD-powered PC, and an Intel-powered one. Participants weren't disclosed which PC was driven by what, as they were assembled in identical-looking cases (no window), with identical monitors and other peripherals. The first set is of budget single-monitor HD gaming, while the second set is high-end three-monitor gaming.
After gaming on both rigs in each set, respondents were asked to tick on a sheet of paper, which rig gave them a better gaming experience, or if gaming both had no observable difference. AMD went into this exercise expecting that most respondents will select "no difference" as their option, and so that would bring good PR to AMD, but to their surprise, most respondents selected the rigs that was powered by AMD processors.
In the budget single-monitor gaming machine, the AMD machine (system B) was powered by AMD A8-3850, ASRock A55 chipset motherboard; the Intel machine (system A) was powered by Intel Core i3-2105, and ASRock H61 chipset motherboard. The goal was to configure the PCs to cost under US $500. Both machines were made to use CPU-integrated graphics Ofcourse the respondants were not told which machine was driven by what. The results are as follows:
Source:
LegitReviews
After gaming on both rigs in each set, respondents were asked to tick on a sheet of paper, which rig gave them a better gaming experience, or if gaming both had no observable difference. AMD went into this exercise expecting that most respondents will select "no difference" as their option, and so that would bring good PR to AMD, but to their surprise, most respondents selected the rigs that was powered by AMD processors.
- System A (Intel Core i3-2105) better: 5 votes
- System B (AMD A8-3850) better: 136 votes
- No difference: 2 votes
- System A (Intel Core i7-2700K) better: 40 votes
- System B (AMD FX-8150) better: 73 votes
- No difference: 28 votes
80 Comments on Marketing and Prejudice Get the Better of Consumers with PC Processors: Test
it's all about marketing and displays which of the 2 companies excel at it.
Otherwise, I would simply chalk up the first test to better image quality.
I'd be really interested to know WHY they thought the high-end AMD system was better
I think the Low-End system is a given though. The AMD Machine was overwhelmingly picked because the Fusion Platform has way better integrated GPU's. Nobody is really surprised by that fact. The only way they could prove marketting prejudice is if they did 2 groups of equal size, and told 1 which setup was which, but not the other. If the one that was told skews in the opposite direction as the one that wasn't, they are clearly having clouded judgement.
Call me cynical but I've learned lately that AMD's viral marketing needs to be taken with the contents of the Bonneville Salt Flats (Did anyone check to see if John Fruehe was in attendance?)I'm surprised that the Intel system garnered 5 votes...which kind of throws the other results into a dubious light
System B (AMD A8-3850) better: 136 votes
No kidding the A8 would give a better gaming experience
And if you are, I am at a loss for words other then "please learn to read".
With it capped at 60fps is there really much of a perceived difference?
As for the bigger test, using an AMD gfx card (7970) with either an Intel chip or an AMD chip isn't a very good test scientifically. It would need various combinations with AMD cpu + AMD gfx, AMD cpu + Nvidia gfx, Intel cpu + AMD gfx and Intel cpu with Nvidia gfx. That gives four options and an analysis of variance would provide more insight.
All that being said, i dont think there would be a perceivable difference bewteen cpu's using a 7970 (unless there is inherent programming bias from the same brand combo). The sample size is too small and also, if Intel did the same test and came up with the same results (but favouring themselves - on the expensive rig) we'd all be suspicious too.
They shoulda stuck a phenom II in there instead of the Intel but they'd have probably known what would've happened. (Point being, despite brand loyalty they are still trying to flog BD, therefore using a Phenom II might have upset that sales trip).
"Did you five succeed?"
"Yes master. We successfully sabotaged AMD's event by casting our votes for the i3 system."
"Excellent! Those five votes will be the start of our revolution!! If people will stop and think about why those five chose the i3...they can be made to think anything!!!"
"But, we lost on both tests!"
"Yes well...out my sight! I don't pay you to think! Go back to IGP R&D!"
"Oh boy! Hey guys, lets celebrate with an wafer fight!!"
"Yay! Silicon on silicon action!!!"
"Dibs on HD3000 wafers!!"
"Awww, no fair those fly better!"
"Oh I am so pulling out my GMA950 ninja star wafers!!"
And then...
"Useless engineers. They'll never see the grand picture! I will show them with my evil laugh!"
"Muhhahahahahahaha hahahah ahahahahah haaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaahhhahaaaaaa!!"
How much (if any) difference is largely going to come down to the game being played. AMD and their fans are very quick to point out BF3 and F1 2011as being "representative" of the overall abilities of each CPU (games that along with AvP don't really care what CPU is in the system...anyone care to guess what the people were playing?)....I'm pretty certain Civ 5 wasn't on the menu.
AMD should have been ballsy...pit Bulldozer against i3 2300 or an 1100T and see if anyone noticed the difference.