Earlier quoted context omitted.
Delta makes you sound smarter.
it is less typing, and less data. save the planet.
'Δ' must be a sign of Greenpeace membership, then.
Intel's New Low: Commissioning Misleading Core I9-9900K Benchmarks [video]
51–60 of 78 posts
Re: Intel's New Low: Commissioning Misleading Core I9-9900K Benchmarks [video]
#52Preorders for the 9900K are 578$ USD. For that you can get a Ryzen 2700X, a nice motherboard and a 256GB SSD. Performance delta shouldn't be more than 15% deficit for the Ryzen for a few specific games.
Keep seeing this 'delta' word. From context it is basically like 'difference'. But is there a delta between difference and delta?
Delta = numerical comparisons only, or at least that's the only context I've ever seen delta used in.
Re: Intel's New Low: Commissioning Misleading Core I9-9900K Benchmarks [video]
#53Also they seem to have tested AMD CPUs in "game mode" which disabled half of the cores (one of two CCXes)...
I like that the "Game mode" makes the AMD CPU's perform worse in game benchmarks...
Game mode was added for threadripper (workstation cpu) which has multiple dies - many games were hit heavily by numa.
It's also available for desktop parts to disable one ccx when game doesn't use more than 8 threads and you want to squize a couple more % of perf.
Game mode is disabled by default, requires AMD software to be installed to enable - they went extra mile to gimp competition..
Re: Intel's New Low: Commissioning Misleading Core I9-9900K Benchmarks [video]
#54Decent summary: > I don’t have too much of an issue with Intel commissioning the report itself, and the Principled Technologies report is very transparent as they clearly state how they tested the games and configured the hardware. The results and testing methods are heavily biased, but they haven’t attempted to hide their dodgy methods. You can dig into the specs and find all the details, it’s still dodgy but it’s a…
I disagree.
Vast majority of buyers and sadly huge chunk of tech press won't be able to tell looking at the settings if our how much was benchmark skewed in Intel's favor.
And it plenty skewed.
Re: Intel's New Low: Commissioning Misleading Core I9-9900K Benchmarks [video]
#55Earlier quoted context omitted.
yeah. I went Ryzen for my new laptop. 100% happy with it, and this kind of crap from Intel just solidifies my decision.
Which Laptop?
I got an HP ENVY x360 15z about a month ago now on HP's labor day sale.
Ryzen 5 2500U 256GB SSD 16GB RAM
for only $859. I'm perfectly happy with the speed of the CPU, and the integrated GPU is fantastic (can even play Destiny 2 on low settings at 720p). That, and the build quality is absolutely superb.
Keep in mind, I bought this for programming at home, not gaming. But I'm glad that it works as a portable light gaming rig when needed.
Re: Intel's New Low: Commissioning Misleading Core I9-9900K Benchmarks [video]
#56Earlier quoted context omitted.
In the video he portrays the decision as out of respect for the sources under NDA, not out of respect for Intel Not sure I fully get it though, a scoop is a scoop
The point of a review embargo is to prevent things from collapsing into a race to be first with the scoop, by encouraging/forcing everyone to take a reasonable amount of time to prepare their review. Cooperating with review embargoes is usually the best way to promote honest and fair coverage, which is what most professional tech journalists really want. NDAs that try to restrict the content of a review and not just…
That isn't always the point of a review embargo. Take a game with heavy marketing that the corp realizes is going to get bad reviews. Sometimes they will delay reviews of things like that as long as possible, until day before or day of release.
Re: Intel's New Low: Commissioning Misleading Core I9-9900K Benchmarks [video]
#57I worked in HPC when NVIDIA started taking serious market share from Intel. My memory of Intel’s performance comparisons were that they were often technically unsupportable once you scratched the surface. In one case a third party who were demonstrating how much faster Intel Xeon Phi was for deep learning admitted that they were comparing highly-optimised code to unoptimised code in their results. This doesn’t surpri…
I've been in the same boat and I completely agree. One thing that's unexpected to people is that getting decent performance out of a GPU is actually easier than CPUs - vectorization and multithreading is unified in the parallel programming model, cache optimizations are mostly not needed. These are the two biggest time sinks you have when optimizing for CPU, solved right there. What you instead have to care about is…
Are there any good guides or tutorials?
I've found GPUs difficult, in part because I don't really know where to start.
FWIW, I have an AMD GPU with ROCm. HIP it's a lot like CUDA, so NVidea-focused tutorials ought to be fine. With the caveat that I'd have to be aware of hardware differences.
Re: Intel's New Low: Commissioning Misleading Core I9-9900K Benchmarks [video]
#58Also they seem to have tested AMD CPUs in "game mode" which disabled half of the cores (one of two CCXes)...
I like that the "Game mode" makes the AMD CPU's perform worse in game benchmarks...
The reviewers used Game Mode on a CPU without NUMA, so it was pointless and only meant to damage.
Re: Intel's New Low: Commissioning Misleading Core I9-9900K Benchmarks [video]
#59Earlier quoted context omitted.
the video doesn't dispute the benchmarks of the 9900, but rather they dispute the published compared benchmarks of the ryzen 7 2700X, which used default, unconfigured memory settings to push the benchmark down, while the 9900 benchmarks used configured memory settings (as it should) Did you even watch the video?
The last line of your comment is wholly unecessary (and explicitly not allowed on HN)
so we can't call someone out who apparently didn't even watch the linked content, while still posting a comment that criticizes the content?
I'm curious about where in the rules it says we shouldn't call someone out on their BS.
Re: Intel's New Low: Commissioning Misleading Core I9-9900K Benchmarks [video]
#60Decent summary: > I don’t have too much of an issue with Intel commissioning the report itself, and the Principled Technologies report is very transparent as they clearly state how they tested the games and configured the hardware. The results and testing methods are heavily biased, but they haven’t attempted to hide their dodgy methods. You can dig into the specs and find all the details, it’s still dodgy but it’s a…
They disabled half the AMD cores.