Con Lake Con firmed [Warning: AdoredTV]

[AmateurExpert]

Pretty sure ocuk manage to sell stock rated Intel based computers that boost to the levels seen in reviews and still make a profit but then ocuk are not a completely **** provider of PC's to consumers

Pretty sure OcUK (fantastic though they are (PS - PM me my special discount, I'll keep it quiet)) are pretty far from being the majority or the whole of the retail PC market.

 

[Caracus2k]

Folk wont like his videos because

..... He's completely biased for AMD

 

[muon]

And yet some will boost better due to the manufacturers inbuilt boosting mechanisms be it a CPU or GPU without any manufacturer or end user 'overclocking'

Not unless they don't increase the power limit above spec. This chip is power limit throttling. Not due to temperatures.

CPUs don't have the equivalent of EVGA etc. to play around with those settings. Even then there looks like there is a 100 second limit.

 

[Caracus2k]

Pretty sure OcUK (fantastic though they are (PS - PM me my special discount, I'll keep it quiet)) are pretty far from being the majority or the whole of the retail PC market.

Other quality OEM's are available... It was an example and forum rules don't particularly approve of promoting competitors

 

[muon]

..... He's completely biased for AMD

I agree he deliberately targets Intel. Nevertheless he isn't wrong.

 

[sideways14a]

What's particularly comical is the implied message in this thread that a reviewer looking at a CPU (not a complete PC) should artificially hold it back by testing it with low quality hardware because this makes the competition look better!

If you want to go buy some low end medion style pc go look at a review of that PC or try a better OEM

Well done for not getting the point.
I would like to see a reviewer give an honest opinion of a product under more normal circumstances as well as best case.

 

[AmateurExpert]

..... He's completely biased for AMD

He is biased, but then so are we all.

It doesn't mean the points he brings up are automatically invalid - that's the joy of bringing them up here to discuss

 

[muon]

What's particularly comical is the implied message in this thread that a reviewer looking at a CPU (not a complete PC) should artificially hold it back by testing it with low quality hardware because this makes the competition look better!

If you want to go buy some low end medion style pc go look at a review of that PC or try a better OEM

He was just asking for some commentary of this in reviews. Never said anything about deliberately crippling performance.

 

[AmateurExpert]

Even then there looks like there is a 100 second limit

I have to pick up on this - AdoredTV was wrong on this, as the slide said ~100s seconds - which I read as "hundreds of seconds" not "100 seconds". So it could well be 200-900 seconds...

 

[Caracus2k]

Well done for not getting the point.
I would like to see a reviewer give an honest opinion of a product under more normal circumstances as well as best case.

I'd rather not see a product like a CPU being held back as that is a test with no consistency between reviews...

Want to test a PC as a whole...... Different story

People who buy a CPU like a 1800x or a 8700(k) on its own and hence are interested in a review of that CPU are more than likely to have an inkling as to what components will be needed to get the most out of it.

If I was looking for a performance component for my sports car I would not want to read a review of how it performed when used in a big standard family hatch....

 

[muon]

I have to pick up on this - AdoredTV was wrong on this, as the slide said ~100s seconds - which I read as "hundreds of seconds" not "100 seconds". So it could well be 200-900 seconds...

If that is what it says then fair enough. I would also read that as hundreds of seconds.

 

[Caracus2k]

I read the linked review of the Medion PC....

(translated from German)

Made me feel kinda dirty.... 1300 euros for that stinking pile.....

Its a typicaly poor example of an OEM PC..... some big hitters to drag the uninformed in... It's got a 8700 and a 1070! But the rest of its the barest minimum...

As one (translated) commenter stated

' I then read ECS board again. I would not screw such a thing in my PCs even as a gift ...'

 

[TrixP10]

Intel have always rated their parts quite conservatively if you run them at stock and '100% in spec'...

Adored doesn't get watched by average Joe public. He's whinning on his channel to people who would never buy this sort of stuff.

He's an AMD zealot proved time and time again with a complete lack of objectivity

Re Adored TV.
I think you have to remember that there are very few independent 'tech review sites'. Most of the most popular review sites TH - AT etc. are owned (or sponsored) by the same company. look it up. That company is sponsored by guess who - insert big name brand here.

Adored TV is not sponsored by - insert big named brand here. He is right to question their claims. I trust him rather than Intel's PR.

 

[sideways14a]

On its own yes you are correct, i would assume they know at least a little of what they are doing.
Problem is when you get folk googling these components for an idea of what to buy from there local box shifter..
I mean just look at Linus's review, if your a noob looking for information on a processor for a new box your thinking of buying then.. well the difference between what Linus says you can get and what you might actually (probably) get is ... well sizable.

This chart is shocking in how much deviance there is between each end for just one cpu (ok i know its an 8700k but still)

multiple image

 

[Jono8]

Look at the garbage posted on On Reddit about this now -

"Looks like 8000 non k are very risky to buy. Even non k cpus need expensive motherboards and cooling to exceed base clock."

Totally not true.

 

[Jono8]

On its own yes you are correct, i would assume they know at least a little of what they are doing.
Problem is when you get folk googling these components for an idea of what to buy from there local box shifter..
I mean just look at Linus's review, if your a noob looking for information on a processor for a new box your thinking of buying then.. well the difference between what Linus says you can get and what you might actually (probably) get is ... well sizable.

This chart is shocking in how much deviance there is between each end for just one cpu (ok i know its an 8700k but still)

multiple image

The ones in the 1500's will have MCE enabled and the ones in the 1200's will have something going on that is throttling it.

My non k 8700 has scored ~1400 (give or take 1% or so) on every cinebench run i have done on it.

 

[sideways14a]

Yes the right hand side ones are out of spec overclocked MCE tests, but did you notice that as a viewer of the reviews at the time? Maybe as we are enthusiasts.. but jo bloggs who struggles to fit a usb cable right???? This was Adored's initial video.

As for the ones on the left they are more realistic for a box shifter like Aldi (the subject of the second video) or dell/hp ect..
The big 8700k doesn't look quite as appealing now does it.

 

[Jono8]

Yes the right hand side ones are out of spec overclocked MCE tests, but did you notice that as a viewer of the reviews at the time? Maybe as we are enthusiasts.. but jo bloggs who struggles to fit a usb cable right???? This was Adored's initial video.

As for the ones on the left they are more realistic for a box shifter like Aldi (the subject of the second video) or dell/hp ect..
The big 8700k doesn't look quite as appealing now does it.

I still fail to see what this has to do with conning people or how Intel are being underhand though. They have the specs available, alongside information on how turbo boost works publicly available to all.

People just need to learn about and research their purchases more if they care about having top performance.

 

[james.miller]

The ones in the 1500's will have MCE enabled and the ones in the 1200's will have something going on that is throttling it.

My non k 8700 has scored ~1400 (give or take 1% or so) on every cinebench run i have done on it.

The low scores are explained in the video.

 

[AmateurExpert]

I still fail to see what this has to do with conning people or how Intel are being underhand though.

Intel only publish (and stand by) base and single core turbo boost speeds, yet the vast majority of benchmarks in the tech press are performed on systems that are decently built (not a problem in itself), with CPUs that have generous PL2 & PL2 Tau settings and so sustain favourable all-core boosts (the grey, unpublished area).

If you only consider the likes of us, then I can see your point of view - we make decent builds and so attain the performance seen in the benchmarks and we see nothing wrong. However, the CPUs are actually being run far above rated TDP and base clocks, which leaves the possibility of mass market SIs marketing machines with ostensibly the same CPUs to the ordinary punter, only for their CPUs to have gimped PL settings (but all still perfectly fine since within Intel spec!) and which are incapable of achieving the same headline performance as in the tech press.

It's a bit much to expect laypeople to understand the impact of system design, cooling and power specifications (not to mention the custom PL configuration applied by SIs) on what seems like a standard part that the tech press is happy to oblige with reams of benchmarks for, with nary a mention of the CPUs actually being run way over spec.

We might find it trivial to know the ins and outs - but we're not the average PC buyer, who might not be after top performance, but just expecting the performance shown in the shiny charts in the press.