AMD's smoothness factor put to the test by AMD & HardOCP...

[naokaji]

It seems that you don't know what micro stuttering is, which is the timings between frames on multi GPU systems and nothing to do with the minimums, of course frame rates of 30-25 are not going to seem smooth, buts that's not micro stutter.

The blind test AMD and HardOCP did involved no multi gpu system.
And while they used the integrated Gpu with the low end rigs they used the same Gpu for the "proper" Pc, so if there was micro stuttering involved it would have had to come from somewhere else than the Gpu.

[Mechromancer]

Maybe there is a difference in frame time rendering between AMD and Intel systems like Tech Report now accounts for in their tests:

http://techreport.com/articles.x/22192/11

[ice_chill]

With the GPU the results are consistent, the GPU with a higher FPS score takes less time to render a frame.

But with AMD there is NO consistency, they are saying the CPU that produces lower FPS is smoother.

[STaRGaZeR]

How AMD marketing works:

[dstedman]

As an owner of a 2600K and a Phenom II X6, I can promise you there is a difference in the smoothness and AMD wins. I was called a fanboy when I only had my AMD system and compared it to my friends Sandy setup, but when I got my 2600K for WCG and made it my daily driver, I noticed it immediately. I am not a fanboy, I don't care who gets my money as long as the product does what I want it to do at a good price.

I don't have any rational reason why, but it is what it is. I have similar setups between my HTPC and Work system (even down to the keyboard/mouse) and playing BF3, League of Legends, TF2...you name it, it is smoother on the AMD rig. It's hard to qualify, but its noticeable for me.

Have you tried turning off hyper threading on your Sandy? Seems to help a lot in some games (BF3 for example).

[jazkat]

Have you tried turning off hyper threading on your Sandy? Seems to help a lot in some games (BF3 for example).

this could be true, i have seen a few posts on the EA forum where users are complaining of slight stutering and asking for a fix for bf3.

but this has still been reported even when turning off HT?

[Leeghoofd]

Repeat this test with fps caped at 60 and ppl can't tell anything.

If the minimum FPS is well below 60, you could run into laggyville...I had this with BF3, Vsync on

Let people play a game without knowing the used hardware parts. They will prolly not feel much difference, if they feel anything at all... but there's more to life than just pure FPS numbers in games... but to me it feels another way of disguising how the product performs versus another one...

[Manicdan]

i think a more interesting test would be to take those 2 same systems, but with 3 groups of testers
one group is given a blind test
another they list out the specs of the machines
and the last they reverse the listed specs

then see what people say.

[thematrixhazune]

i think a more interesting test would be to take those 2 same systems, but with 3 groups of testers
one group is given a blind test
another they list out the specs of the machines
and the last they reverse the listed specs

then see what people say.

+1 We need more data!

[Mats]

Maybe this test isn't perfect, but it's a start. Hopefully we'll see more of these tests in the near future, maybe even with ABX testing.

Benchmarks gets boring in the long run. Yes they are needed, but I'd like to hear the impressions from users, and not only FPS count.

[cold2010]

Maybe there is a difference in frame time rendering between AMD and Intel systems like Tech Report now accounts for in their tests:

http://techreport.com/articles.x/22192/11

lol

[Final8ty]

The blind test AMD and HardOCP did involved no multi gpu system.
And while they used the integrated Gpu with the low end rigs they used the same Gpu for the "proper" Pc, so if there was micro stuttering involved it would have had to come from somewhere else than the Gpu.

If there is any stutter it will not be MicroStutter.

[Hornet331]

Since you don't like the results you want to configure the systems so you can get the answer you prefer?

I think other people were just discussing unethical, illogical, and other shady things that could be done to bias results. Your suggestion would fit
perfectly into that category.

Actually it is interesting how so many people who obviously don't like these results feel the need to jump in and try to justify why a blind test is somehow "not real". Often these are the same people that will not question the bias of a reviewer creating a brand new review and including results from a 6 year old game or some older version of an application that has 3 or 4 newer versions. (That are now optimized for newer architectures.)

oh boy here we go again... and seeing who posted I am not surprised at all...

You know that this would help both systems right? Especial when we have such cases:
http://www.hardocp.com/image.html?im...hfNV81X2wuZ2lm

Guess which on of the two will be "smoother"... but yeah its so unethical, illogical and shady to actually want to suggest a level playing field... well I'll be damned. Guess its intels fault that there cpu can spit out more fps in none gpu limited scenes and gets hit harder if gpu limit kicks back in..

But if you think AMD doesnt suffer from this take a look at this (even if its is SLI)...

http://www.hardocp.com/article/2011/...mance_review/5

With GeForce GTX 580 SLI this game mimics what we saw in DiRT 3. Average performance is very close between the two CPUs. However, the big difference is an inconsistency in performance similar to what we experienced in ARMA 2. So while the performance is similar, the smoothness and consistency is certainly better with the Intel 2500K.

If the minimum FPS is well below 60, you could run into laggyville...I had this with BF3, Vsync on

Maxfps is not the same as vsync. With vsync on it always tries to run at 60fps, if it fails to it runs at 30fps stable and so on and often this makes it worse then vsync off. maxfps just sets an upper celling at a certain fps rate.
What you eliminate with this is the huge fps drops lets say going form 120fps to 40fps and then back up to 90fps. Instead you go 60-40-60.

Just look at the Hardocp pic I linked at imagine everything cut off above the green 60fps line.

[cold2010]

This occasion there a new review

Our goal today is to find out how the latest ecosystem improvements help AMD's early-adopting customers. We're going to test with the benchmarks we normally run, too, and not the hand-picked titles AMD is using to illustrate the gains enabled by Microsoft's new patches.

Skyrim







http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/...ance,3119.html

[Manicdan]

skyrim is very single threaded limited. patch it for multithreading first and then watch it be gpu limited

[kl0012]

Those AMD "benchmarks" pretty much reminds me their first Zacate benchmark vs. core i5 (with really old intel's driver w/o working Direct2D acceleration)
http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/...-Core-i5/page2
I would not be surprised if they gently "tuned" intel setup.

[jimbo75]

[AliG]

^
I like this Tim guy

[STEvil]

This is the only warning: those not constructively contributing to this thread from this point on will be receiving vacations and/or restricted forum access.

[Mungri]

skyrim is very single threaded limited. patch it for multithreading first and then watch it be gpu limited

Actually its not. Skyrim puts load on every possible physical core, it just uses the main thread more (about 80%), and every other core to around 20%.

BD should perform better than a 2500k because it has 4 more cores offloading so much strain.

I would have liked to have taken such a smoothness test too, and also 130 people is a very small sample number. Id probably have noticed that neither system was as smooth as my own tbh, I see so many people whining about lag and microstutter which has never been an issue for me.

[defect9]

curiosity makes me want to build a BD rig for the heck of it; see if I notice anything.

[FlanK3r]

Guys...relax. We talking here about eyefinity resolution, not about standart resolution. I think, BF3 is good example for comparsion. 2600K+hyperthreading (8 logical cores, 4 threads Ok, 4 weak). Its only theory but BF3 scaling up to quadcores. In high resolution (special eyfinity) are diference smaller and smaller with single GPU card. If they compared 2600k and 8150 FX, maybe there was no diference in eyes between XX FPS at AMD FX and XX FPS at 2600k. But there could be some "lags" between jumping loading threads. And FX threads are more balanced than core vs hyperthreading unit.

[tiro_uspsss]

Any one who claims that AMD must have manipulated the test rigs to make AMD look better have any real hard proof if not you are sticking to your agenda &

Please dont give reasoning such as PR goof ups of past as proof of your claims because then both the side equally have their share fare of goof-ups.

maybe you need to re-read the thread title: " AMD's smoothness factor put to the test by AMD

it's like you walk into a GM showroom & the sales rep says: "GM make the best cars in the world"

it almost doesn't matter if it is smoother or not, the biased-ness instantly voids the results

& I also find it odd that you mention agendas given what you have written in light of your sig

here is something I would bet on, that AMD fan-boi's would hate: Intel could run a similar test.. whack in a 2700 or 3930 vs a duron-8150, 2x8GB each (keeps things in dual channel), one high end v.card & an SSD.......... then run the same test............. AMD rig 'wins' in 'smoothness'.......... Intel publishes results that show against them........ & still win in sales oh sure, it doesn't affect me, just saying.. it could be done.. & Intel would still be $$ ahead regardless, kinda ironic

i think a more interesting test would be to take those 2 same systems, but with 3 groups of testers
one group is given a blind test
another they list out the specs of the machines
and the last they reverse the listed specs

then see what people say.

+1

let's make it happen!

[Andrew LB]

and remember that u have to buy the K edition intel to oc but the amd u dont so even here were people are almost always intel all the way if dont have the $300 to spend amd will be better every time by the time u can oc it anyways.

Intel 2600k = $249.99
Intel 2500k = $179.99

AMD FX8150 = $259.99
AMD FX8120 = $199.99

hmm.... I don't know why anyone would buy an FX over the cheaper (and faster) Intel chips right now.

[FlanK3r]

I think, there is real problem (as AMD fan)...FX 8150 is expensive, think, real price could be better about 189$-199, FX 8120 example 169$