Page 8 of 8 FirstFirst ... 678
Results 71 to 76 of 76

Thread: Intel Core i7 4770K "Haswell" Benchmarks On Ubuntu Linux

  1. #71
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Washington State
    Posts
    509

    Default

    I definitely don't regret going AMD.

    I bought the GIGABYTE GA-990FXA-UD3 AM3+ when it was $159 with a warranty extension from Newegg and 6 months later it dropped down to $119 on special, now back up to $139.

    Then you can find the FX-8350 going for as low as $179 on Amazon.

    I look forward to Steamroller and when Excavator comes out I'll still have this box in a Corsair 650D humming along maxed out.

  2. #72
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Linuxland
    Posts
    5,278

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by duby229 View Post
    Thats just a copout. You should really look into their gameplay benchmark methods. It's a really good way of doing things.
    OK, I looked: http://www.techpowerup.com/forums/sh...ad.php?t=52269

    Let’s take Anandtech’s canned Crysis GPU benchmark results for example. They show a 3870 X2 averaging over 31fps at 1680 resolution with High Quality settings and about 28fps at 1920 resolution at High Quality settings in Crysis. We trust Anandtech to relate benchmark data to us that is “correct.” But I also believe the benchmarking tools it has used in no way relate to real world video card performance you are going to experience at home playing the game. We have actually used the ATI HD 3870 X2 to play the game Crysis and our gaming experience in no way mirrors those graphical settings at those framerates. What if we play Crysis with the resolution and quality settings represented in their review?

    To put it plainly, it was a painful gaming experience.

    Anandtech’s results in no way suggest to the reader what the video card might actually perform like in Crysis or what resolutions or quality settings might be configured.

    Do you want video card reviews that suggest “relative performance of a graphics card” based on timedemo benchmarks when some cards benchmark better than others, or do you want an evaluation of those video cards' in-game performance in the latest and greatest computer games that you are going to be playing with it?

    HardOCP is very firm in its commitment to give our readers video card evaluations that will allow them to make good purchasing decisions based on real world expectations of the product. We have no interest in showing you “relative performance” based on a “benchmark.” We sit down and spend hours and hours playing the games on each video card and then share our thoughts and analysis. The simple fact of the matter is that HardOCP’s video card evaluation experiences cannot be replicated by clicking a single mouse button and putting a number on a graph.

    Timedemo benchmarking of video cards is broken. We have proven this on the preceding pages with today’s most graphically intensive gaming title. Many will argue that timedemo benchmarking is the only scientific approach to video card performance analysis that can be trusted. Why you would want to trust a performance metric that is in no way shape or form going to relate to your gaming experience is beyond me. There is also no doubt that there are some games out there that benchmark perfectly in relation to their real world gameplay. We just don’t know what they are, and quite frankly we don’t care. Today's Crysis benchmarks that in no way reflect real world gameplay are enough validation for us to keep on doing it “our way.” If you want someone’s idea of overall "relative performance" of a graphics card based on timedemo benchmarks, HardOCP.com is not for you. We are going to make sure that our video card evaluations give you a solid idea of the actual gaming performance you will experience at home when playing the game.
    And I disagree with that. It still stands that a number that can't be repeated is something they could have pulled out their asses.

    If some timedemo is not representative, that is a problem with that timedemo, not with the scientific method. Any number pulled with manual unrepeatable work is by definition unrepeatable - even if they actually got that number instead of making it up, there's no guarantee you will see a similar number with a similar hw setup.

    "Feel-based" reviews belong in game reviews, not in benchmarking. If the game is laggy on level 4 when you look at the tower, that's something about that game, and has no place when comparing gpus/cpus/etc.

  3. #73
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    565

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by bridgman View Post
    Sounds like the issue might just be a feature that defaults to off in radeon but on in the intel driver. Not sure what current state is, but floating point textures and texture compression/s3tc used to be the main areas.
    (For the record, Brigman was answering to my "... but a lot of the humble bundle games will not run (and run instead on my son's $200 intel's chromebook, which makes you wonder)."

    For the sake of justice, I did a serious comparison. The stuff that is not running in AMD Rig with Open Source radeon is actually a few older games like trine and shadowgrounds which are having issues with 32 libraries in a 64 bit rig. So, it's not really a display issue. It seems like some old binaries that were provided by ia32-libs have been upgraded with the Ubuntu upgrade, since they are not being found anymore. Sigh.

    Sorry for the FUD. I installed a few of the games my son installed on the chromebook, and they run on the AMD open source box as well

    Cheers!

  4. #74
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    63

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Michael View Post
    Except that I haven't gotten any hardware out of AMD in a long time now...
    Another question: what timings (speed, latency) were selected for the RAM in the tests?

    Does the 3700k, 4770k, A10, and FX-8350 use 1600 MHz memory or the AMD chips use the correct 1866 MHz stock speed?

  5. #75
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    780

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by duby229 View Post
    Gameplay benchmarks cannot be repeatable. It's not science, it's gameplay.
    Then it's gameplay, but not benchmark.

    You can't "benchmark" some medicine by taking a different one each time you get a cold, and then measure how long it takes you to get better, even if you follow the prescription very seriously.

  6. #76
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Java Island
    Posts
    3

    Default

    AMD rocks my world..

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •