Friday, October 19th 2018
AMD Expresses its Displeasure Over Intel's PT Benchmarks for 9th Gen Core
AMD gave its first major reaction to the Principled Technologies (PT) controversy, in which it came out strongly against the questionable methods PT employed, in its performance comparison between the Core i9-9900K and AMD Ryzen 7 2700X, in addition to certain other Ryzen Threadripper series products. In its response, AMD made its official position on controversy clear - it is not happy with PT.
AMD prepared a long list of flaws with PT's original testing, and the areas where it did not correct the mistakes in its second testing. The company also put out a list of its own "best practices" for comparative benchmarking, which prescribes "sanitizing the operating system," "sanitizing the platform" for stock vs. overclocked testing, "sanitizing the data," and to not create a vast disconnect between the test environment and the real-world.
AMD prepared a long list of flaws with PT's original testing, and the areas where it did not correct the mistakes in its second testing. The company also put out a list of its own "best practices" for comparative benchmarking, which prescribes "sanitizing the operating system," "sanitizing the platform" for stock vs. overclocked testing, "sanitizing the data," and to not create a vast disconnect between the test environment and the real-world.
26 Comments on AMD Expresses its Displeasure Over Intel's PT Benchmarks for 9th Gen Core
And to think, AMD has contracted PT in the past to do testing on their stuff as well...
www.principledtechnologies.com/portfolio-marketing.php#AMD
- the right way, as described in the 2nd pic of the OP
- the wrong way, as made in version one of PT's review but, in this occasion, favoring AMD instead of Intel, obviously
Would be interesting to see the comparison ...
The show must go on...
Testing between AMD/Intel CPUs was so much easier when they used the same socket/platform lol, such a shame Intel had to block that >.>
AMD should have people doing a slew of tests live with specs all posted on Youtube.
Obvious they can't trust PT for their unprofessional style.
My curiosity on the matter is if PT's original testing was carried out as Intel asked, purposefully giving them the numbers they wanted, and then the follow up was OK'd by Intel to try and stop the bleeding.
I know Steve from Gamer's Nexus interviewed one of the founders of PT, and according to him they tested it how they wanted and how they thought was appropriate, but if a big corporation is paying you big money for something, you're not going to throw said corporation under the bus.
"sanitizing the operating system," "sanitizing the platform" for stock vs. overclocked testing, "sanitizing the data,"
let's santize PT...
How did that turn out?
Says a lot about Intel eh.
Raja probably botched Vega because Intel told him to do that, and if he do it right Intel will cut him a fat check and give him a management position so Intel can take on much weaker GPU maker AMD before taking on Nvidia...
Everything makes sense now.
Software and workloads used in performance tests may have been optimized for performance only on Intel® microprocessors. Performance tests, such as SYSmark* and MobileMark*, are measured using specific computer systems, components, software, operations and functions. Any change to any of those factors may cause the results to vary. You should consult other information and performance tests to assist you in fully evaluating your contemplated purchases, including the performance of that product when combined with other products. For more complete information visit www.intel.com/benchmarks.
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.
Source:
www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/benchmarks/intel-product-performance.html