• Competitor rules

    Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.

*** AMD "Zen" thread (inc AM4/APU discussion) ***

Martini1991 said:
I can't even anymore.

You just don't get it.
Click to expand...


Its really not difficult, if AMD image has 600m pixels and the one Toms used has 400m Pixels then the image AMD used will take longer to render out on exactly the same hardware.

Toms used a different image, right? you cannot compare the times, its apples for oranges.
 
56406107.jpg
 
humbug said:
Its really not difficult, if AMD image has 600m pixels and the one Toms used has 400m Pixels then the image AMD used will take longer to render out on exactly the same hardware.

Toms used a different image, right? you cannot compare the times, its apples for oranges.
Click to expand...

What are you on about?

Tom's will have used the exact same image for THEIR results with THEIR times.

In THEIR benchmarks there's a ~25% difference between the 4770K and the FX83, that THEY benched.


In AMD's bench ; http://www.amd.com/en-us/innovations/new-horizon

There's a 100% difference between the FX83 and i7 4770K, based on the results I'VE taken and OTHERS have taken.

And as JS's just alluded to, that version of Cinebench performs worse on FX83's than older versions.

I really need to go to sleep now.
Humbug, you never cease to amaze with how poor you are at analysis.
 
humbug said:
Its really not difficult, if AMD image has 600m pixels and the one Toms used has 400m Pixels then the image AMD used will take longer to render out on exactly the same hardware.

Toms used a different image, right? you cannot compare the times, its apples for oranges.
Click to expand...

It's for comparative purposes, for example if the 4770k is 25% faster than the 8350 in Tom's render I'd expect the same thing for the AMD render.

It wasn't, so I got suspicious and downloaded an older version of Blender (2.71) and lo and behold I got a render time of 1:58 vs 2:34 on AMDs benchmark.
 
Martini1991 said:
What are you on about?

Tom's will have used the exact same image for THEIR results with THEIR times.

In THEIR benchmarks there's a ~25% difference between the 4770K and the FX83, that THEY benched.


In AMD's bench ; http://www.amd.com/en-us/innovations/new-horizon

There's a 100% difference between the FX83 and i7 4770K, based on the results I'VE taken and OTHERS have taken.

And as JS's just alluded to, that version of Cinebench performs worse on FX83's than older versions.

I really need to go to sleep now.
Humbug, you never cease to amaze with how poor you are at analysis.
Click to expand...

"Will have"? you don't sound so sure even yourself, where is this, we can settle this right now if you just link me to what you are talking about.
 
Why would Toms review CPU's and use a different image for the benchmarks, that wouldn't make any sense.
I don't know what image Tom used, it's not relevant as long as it's consistent
Read the God damn pages.
 
pathetic straw man argument trying to compare fx83 to zen.

dont forget 95w vs 140w.

thats well and truly ass whupped in my book.

intel needs 50% more power for 10% less performance according to todays news.

poor haters got nothing to hate on so they ridicule the name.
 
Last edited:
Martini1991 said:
Why would Toms review CPU's and use a different image for the benchmark, that wouldn't make any sense.

Read the God damn pages.
Click to expand...

Are you serious? you clearly don't even know yourself and yet you keep insisting on this nonsense, now i know why you are avoiding linking me to it, you ##### know i'm right :D
 
Comparing Zen to an FX-8350 is perfectly valid, because a lot of people have them and it is the previous version of AMDs architecture. Unfortunately it seems like there are some issues with the newer version of Blender and FX processors so whilst we'd like to do a proper comparison, it seems like we can't.

I'd like to see something like Cinebench since it's far more consistent, so I guess we're going to have to wait a while longer.
 
Martini1991 said:
http://www.tomshardware.co.uk/core-i7-4770k-haswell-review,review-32699-14.html

JS linked to it.
It's not relevant what the image is. As long as it's doing its job and maxing the CPU. What is relevant is the performance difference, and how it has a massive disparity with AMDS benchmark and blender they link to.
Click to expand...

Dated Jun 2013... no they did not use the same image as that image was one made by AMD, its an image of a Zen logo.
The comparison is utterly flawed, sorry, no victory dance, it just is what it is :)
 
humbug said:
Dated Jun 2013... no they did not use the same image as that image was one made by AMD, its an image of a Zen logo.
The comparison is utterly flawed, sorry, it is :)
Click to expand...

You still don't get it.
It doesn't matter that Toms used a different image. It's not comparing Toms to AMD's times.

It's comparing the results and performance disparity between them. And as found, it's iffy if you'd pay at the attention.

Spend some time actually reading.
 
Last edited:
Martini1991 said:
You still don't get it.
It doesn't matter that Toms used a different image. It's not comparing Toms to AMD's times.

It's comparing the results and performance disparity between them. And as found, it's iffy if you'd pay at the attention.

Spend some time actually reading.
Click to expand...

I get what you mean, some people just like to waffle and scratch their peanuts and not take in what your saying :D
 
Martini1991 said:
You still don't get it.
Click to expand...

Stop it, i get it completely and so do you, you know you made a simple mistake, an honest mistake but for some strange reason you just cannot handle that.

Different images take different times to render out even on exactly the same hardware, we don't even know how Toms images differ to the ones AMD used so we cannot even take those differentials into the equation, the whole premiss is utterly flawed, its no different, in fact exactly the same as benchmarking Sniper Elite V2 on one GPU and benchmarking Crysis 3 on another GPU and then using the results to compare equal performance for those GPU's.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom