The only epic fail I see is people that are not willing to test to see if this is something concrete that can be measured.Originally Posted by TL1000S
Why? What are you scared of?
The only epic fail I see is people that are not willing to test to see if this is something concrete that can be measured.
Why? What are you scared of?
FX-8350, Powercolor ATI R9 290X LCS, OCZ Vertex 4, Crosshair V Forumula-Z, AMD Radeon DDR3-2133 2x8Gb, Corsair HX1000W, Thermaltake Xaser VI, Xonar D2X, Water Cooling 140.3
Agreed.
@ Glow9 try to post with out the word Fanboy.
Its not a Requirement.
Hello... is there anybody in there?
What do you think this thread is about? It is about clarifying that definition AND finding a way to measure it. This isn't really a thread for Intel fans to come and make fun of AMD fans because they see a difference and actually want to know what causes that difference.
Let me review:
Many people believe that something exists that causes a noticeable difference. Many of these people are timid to post anything because they they see too many people being slammed and flamed for even mentioning it.
I see another group that doesn't believe it and doesn't want anyone else to believe it so they ridicule anyone that even attempts to question that opinion or attempts to quest for a method find out the truth.
Let me be more specific: You will not stop us from seeking the truth.
FX-8350, Powercolor ATI R9 290X LCS, OCZ Vertex 4, Crosshair V Forumula-Z, AMD Radeon DDR3-2133 2x8Gb, Corsair HX1000W, Thermaltake Xaser VI, Xonar D2X, Water Cooling 140.3
Glow9 has already answered (quite harshly).
I see you (and others) repeat these arguments.
I hope you (all) see the epic failure in such arguments.
1st:
Most of you "hate" Intel for some reason.
2snd:
Most of you only own/use/care about tuning an AMD rig.
3rd:
You *must* comprehend that a "smoothness" test ideally will mean identical hardware apart from CPU (motherboard with similar chipset).
Sidenote:
Using a "lappie" with C2D as "proof" even make your arguments even more epic.
When I had S754, S939, S478 and S775 (at the same time), the best benches was on the AMD rigs.
The Intel systems with HT CPU's *appeared* smoother - for me.
Smoother does not mean hourglass/pointer, but switchin/starting apps.
Current rigs (C2D/C2Q/S775 and several AM2\X2 rigs) I cannot see any big difference in "smoothness".
The "worst" rig though is the one I am writing from now.
Gigabyte GA-MA69G-S3H(RS690/SB600) & X2 6000+.
I will *not* conclude this is related to the CPU/chipset, but a XP install upgraded from S939.
Not to sure about the most hate Intel as there are technical differences to take into consideration.
I was going Intel with the i7 with its IMC that i prefer but the price of the unlocked multi's has really put me off.
Damn! I wish i could put things that way.
It's rather simple guys, the phenomenon you are trying to measure did not exist pre 939. In fact it was present with intel back then. I think it was hyperthreading back then. With amd its hypertransport. Most of you guys including me has not used C I7 so your experiences in the past are negligible. I'ts not that hard, its hypertransport, and with intels new cpu's they probably feel equally as smooth with hyperthreading again.
All you really need is a program to measure chipset performance to and from CPU, to and from GPU and 2 and from SB and possibly a combination of all 3.
Little tip , If you want lets say games for instance to be smooth just lock your FPS at a rate your system can manage stably.........for those with LCD monitors 60fps is a good place to lock if the system is capable of it. People who game competitively/professionally never ever leave fps rate uncapped.
Last edited by chew*; 01-02-2009 at 09:46 AM.
heatware chew*
I've got no strings to hold me down.
To make me fret, or make me frown.
I had strings but now I'm free.
There are no strings on me
I think the answer is much more logical. There exist a cheap processor that is more pleasant to work with.
Regarding harddrive problems. Don't think this is the problem. Have tried three hardrives, all with 7200 rpm and one of those was a fast external with eSATA. of course you will not notice this very short freezing if just the processor spins, as long as the data is in the cpu for intel then it is fast. It is probably a communication thing.
Guys, there is realy nothing more to say about this subject. I am one of many who has noticed this but I also know that until somebody posts some benchs or proof of some kind this is gonna be nothing but ............"Yes I do", "No you dont", "yes I do", "no you dont", "yes i....................This will be a thread that is nothing but bickering.
Particle's First Rule of Online Technical Discussion:
As a thread about any computer related subject has its length approach infinity, the likelihood and inevitability of a poorly constructed AMD vs. Intel fight also exponentially increases.
Rule 1A:
Likewise, the frequency of a car pseudoanalogy to explain a technical concept increases with thread length. This will make many people chuckle, as computer people are rarely knowledgeable about vehicular mechanics.
Rule 2:
When confronted with a post that is contrary to what a poster likes, believes, or most often wants to be correct, the poster will pick out only minor details that are largely irrelevant in an attempt to shut out the conflicting idea. The core of the post will be left alone since it isn't easy to contradict what the person is actually saying.
Rule 2A:
When a poster cannot properly refute a post they do not like (as described above), the poster will most likely invent fictitious counter-points and/or begin to attack the other's credibility in feeble ways that are dramatic but irrelevant. Do not underestimate this tactic, as in the online world this will sway many observers. Do not forget: Correctness is decided only by what is said last, the most loudly, or with greatest repetition.
Remember: When debating online, everyone else is ALWAYS wrong if they do not agree with you!
Ah but that is the problem. How can we have a discussion of HOW to measure or clarify the definition of this concept when all we get is a bunch of people flaming and trolling because they have some reason to not want the discussion to take place?
SO in fact they are being successful in their goal. (The goal being to make sure nobody actually does find out if this is something that is measurable.)
But I still believe it will end up coming out in the end because of the i7. People with i7's are eventually going to ascribe to this concept. (They will most likely come up with another word or term to describe it because the "smoothness" term has been ridiculed too much; probably often by them before they owned i7's.)
FX-8350, Powercolor ATI R9 290X LCS, OCZ Vertex 4, Crosshair V Forumula-Z, AMD Radeon DDR3-2133 2x8Gb, Corsair HX1000W, Thermaltake Xaser VI, Xonar D2X, Water Cooling 140.3
i don't think the hdd is the problem every single time.
its more than just load times to find a way to test this it will be really complicated. although i do think that just looking at the changes in fps during a game can tell a lot.
ummmmmm what is anyone fighting? i just see it as common sense that fps isn't the only thing that decides smoothness. fps = frames per second. thats the amount of video frames in a second. you can pump out a lot of frames in a second but display them at unequal rates and its not smooth. isn't that just common sense? and where is this cpu and a cpu that gives half the fps? in those tests we are seeing huge fps numbers some around 600 fps. none of those are going to look smooth at all because of tearing on the monitor. and then if you turn v sync on they will look equal. again this is not about fps its about smoothness. and roflmao how many times have i said that the people that have tested this have had them both side by side and have thought one was smoother. many people in this thread are saying yea i feel like my phenom is faster but that means nothing. im saying there are people out there that are completely neutral and don't fall to one side that have tested them together and chosen the amd as the faster one. the architecture of the cpu then supports this by showing that there is such a low latency on the cpu that it can display frames at a smooth rate. im getting tired of intel fanboys and such close minded people coming in here and just saying o thats not true without any facts at all or anything to back it up. they will usually respond saying the intel has a higher fps so no doubt its faster. if you really believe that it would be faster for that reason alone then im sorry theres no help for you. or they will say well its the hdds fault or its the rams fault or something else. when the systems are the exact same whos fault is it? people have compared it side by side, they have switched out every single part and put it back together again with the only differences being the motherboard and the cpu. theres plenty of proof showing that this could be true so the fact that you think you can come in here and just ummmmm no thats not true is not getting anythign accomplished. at this point we are trying to find a good way to test it so if you really want to find out then how about not posting at all or just have an open mind.
This whole thread itself is considered as Epic Fail... as well as the advocates of "smoothness"...
The "Smoothness" thing is really subjective. At the end of the day performance is all it counts... Yes, I know what you meant by "smoothness".. actually I would prefer to call it RESPONSIVENESS.
Back then during the K6-III 450MHz days, that rig was able to boot up faster than my PII @450MHz.. surprise surprise.. why? Its because of the VIA chipset, even on Intel systems VIA chipsets boots faster than Intel's own chipsets. At the end of the day, performance counts... The K6 had problems running DVD videos smoothly (it was jerky all over the place) while my PII was fine and dandy even when I revert back to stock 300MHz.
The came the P4 and Athlon days. Again I noticed those AMD systems boots up faster.. and that's about it! I had an Athlon 3000+ and Pentium4 HT 2.8GHz... guess which one is more RESPONSIVE, should I say SMOOTHER? The Pentium4 HT! Yes its true, the slower Pentium4 HT was "smoother"! However it was the Athlon 3000+ which is always faster when it came to gaming. Even AMD-owning friends thought the same thing when they used my P4 machine during those LAN gaming parties.
At the end of the day, its performance that counts... not "smoothness"
Unfortunately this subject is subjective and there's no way to quantify something that's subjective. It's equivalent to trying to scientifically prove that God doesn't exist.
This all makes a valid point exept for the bolded part. You cannot speak for everyone with that statement. Performance is all that matters to you, and basicly thats all that maters to me but that dont mean for everyone.This whole thread itself is considered as Epic Fail... as well as the advocates of "smoothness"...
The "Smoothness" thing is really subjective. At the end of the day performance is all it counts... Yes, I know what you meant by "smoothness".. actually I would prefer to call it RESPONSIVENESS.
Back then during the K6-III 450MHz days, that rig was able to boot up faster than my PII @450MHz.. surprise surprise.. why? Its because of the VIA chipset, even on Intel systems VIA chipsets boots faster than Intel's own chipsets. At the end of the day, performance counts... The K6 had problems running DVD videos smoothly (it was jerky all over the place) while my PII was fine and dandy even when I revert back to stock 300MHz.
The came the P4 and Athlon days. Again I noticed those AMD systems boots up faster.. and that's about it! I had an Athlon 3000+ and Pentium4 HT 2.8GHz... guess which one is more RESPONSIVE, should I say SMOOTHER? The Pentium4 HT! Yes its true, the slower Pentium4 HT was "smoother"! However it was the Athlon 3000+ which is always faster when it came to gaming. Even AMD-owning friends thought the same thing when they used my P4 machine during those LAN gaming parties.
At the end of the day, its performance that counts... not "smoothness"
As a thread about any computer related subject has its length approach infinity, the likelihood and inevitability of a poorly constructed AMD vs. Intel fight also exponentially increases.
Likewise, the frequency of a car pseudoanalogy to explain a technical concept increases with thread length. This will make many people chuckle, as computer people are rarely knowledgeable about vehicular mechanics.
When confronted with a post that is contrary to what a poster likes, believes, or most often wants to be correct, the poster will pick out only minor details that are largely irrelevant in an attempt to shut out the conflicting idea. The core of the post will be left alone since it isn't easy to contradict what the person is actually saying.
When a poster cannot properly refute a post they do not like (as described above), the poster will most likely invent fictitious counter-points and/or begin to attack the other's credibility in feeble ways that are dramatic but irrelevant. Do not underestimate this tactic, as in the online world this will sway many observers. Do not forget: Correctness is decided only by what is said last, the most loudly, or with greatest repetition.
Remember: When debating online, everyone else is ALWAYS wrong if they do not agree with you!
and whats performance supposed to be? fps values? fine you can take 100 fps but every half a second the screen will freeze. ill be happy with my constant 60 fps. the fact is that if something doesn't PERFORM fast enough then it won't be smoother. can you please stop posting in this thread unless you have something legit to say. as i recall every single person that has posted in this thread and disproved it is currently running intel. if you have something worthwhile to the topic with some relative information then post it but last time i checked the topic had nothing to do with one cpu getting higher fps and then being faster.This whole thread itself is considered as Epic Fail... as well as the advocates of "smoothness"...
The "Smoothness" thing is really subjective. At the end of the day performance is all it counts... Yes, I know what you meant by "smoothness".. actually I would prefer to call it RESPONSIVENESS.
Back then during the K6-III 450MHz days, that rig was able to boot up faster than my PII @450MHz.. surprise surprise.. why? Its because of the VIA chipset, even on Intel systems VIA chipsets boots faster than Intel's own chipsets. At the end of the day, performance counts... The K6 had problems running DVD videos smoothly (it was jerky all over the place) while my PII was fine and dandy even when I revert back to stock 300MHz.
The came the P4 and Athlon days. Again I noticed those AMD systems boots up faster.. and that's about it! I had an Athlon 3000+ and Pentium4 HT 2.8GHz... guess which one is more RESPONSIVE, should I say SMOOTHER? The Pentium4 HT! Yes its true, the slower Pentium4 HT was "smoother"! However it was the Athlon 3000+ which is always faster when it came to gaming. Even AMD-owning friends thought the same thing when they used my P4 machine during those LAN gaming parties.
At the end of the day, its performance that counts... not "smoothness"
DANG. You beat me to it. Well said.
FX-8350, Powercolor ATI R9 290X LCS, OCZ Vertex 4, Crosshair V Forumula-Z, AMD Radeon DDR3-2133 2x8Gb, Corsair HX1000W, Thermaltake Xaser VI, Xonar D2X, Water Cooling 140.3
I rest my case with this...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Is7frW9Z-rw
"Smoothness" or "Responsiveness"
is there someone that has both intel and amd and thinks intel is smoother?
regarding all performance tests out there this should be much more common. I can't remember that I have seen anyone that has had that experiance
im a little confused here. no where does this show any smoothness. all it shows is that one thing can complete a task faster than another. what i am saying is that like when you are playing a game and you have two systems that are the exact same xcept for the mobo and the cpu and you test them together. one system might get higher fps values but its not necessarily smoother. right now all we have is info from many people saying that amd seems smoother even tho it doesn't get as high of fps values. and its coming from people that aren't biased to one side. so we are trying to get this information and test it. think of it like myth busters. and also i believe i don't think that they argue the entire time on that show either. they go out there and test it. we are trying to come up with a testing method and then we will try it out and see how it works. so i really don't understand why people in here keep posting showing information that has absolutely nothing to do with the topic and then just disprove it. also that HT system was only faster because of the hdd and ram.I rest my case with this...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Is7frW9Z-rw
"Smoothness" or "Responsiveness"
Like I said its subjective.. since lots of advocates of "smoothness" were mostly talking about using their everyday desktop applications being more "smoother" though they cannot "explain" it... Yes, something like... click this and it comes out almost instantly or it loads faster. Been down this path many times before. As for games I doubt anyone can feel a few FPS drop difference when playing unless its really very low FPS... for that you have to look at the MINIMUM FPS to tell, which is where benchmarking comes in... As for the freezes, mostly due to paging.. it happens sometimes.
Both systems have the same RAM, motherboard and HDD.also that HT system was only faster because of the hdd and ram.
I am not scared my friend.
I build, benches, uses lotsa rigs. From both "camps".
I know what "smoothness" means, and yes, it can be observed and apreciated.
*My personal view/experience* is that "smoothness" has little to do with CPU, apart from the above mentioned experience with HT-cabable CPU's (regarding swithcing/starting task).
I really wish AMD could use this technology for next gen PHII/III/IV, as much of the "superiority" by ci7 in multitasking benches/use is due to HT.
Do *NOT* compare AMD HyperTransport with Intels HyperThreading. It is two completely different animals. The first for single path/app thruput/performance, the latter for *multitasking* performance (and as a "side-effect" it gives an impression of "smoothness").
I also apreciate RoofSnipers (and others) interest in measuring "smoothness".
But it is *you* guys that must "prove" it. If possible.
I have no such problems compiling even with a Dothan 1.6GHz. The only times that I've seen the mouse skip under HD access is when XP decided to switch the HD from UDMA 5 to PIO mode. The other possibility is your compilation threads are set to absurdly high priority thereby starving the OS of CPU time to service interrupts.
Yep, I used smoothness to justify going with AMD... and going with intel and going with intel and going with intel and going with AMD and going with intel and going with AMD and going with AMD.
Ok. Following is a description of my hardware addiction:
The AMD chips I currently have in my possession are: X2 3600+, 4000+, 5000+ BE, Phenom 8450, and Phenom 9950.
The intel chips I currently have in my possession are: (had) E2180, E5200, E7200, E8400, Q6600.
For AMD mobos I have a Biostar Tforce550, and Biostar 790GX. For intel, Gigabyte P35 DS3L, and MSI X48 (dead).
I have three different sets of DDR2 800 memory. One G.Skill 2x2Gb, one Corsair XMS 2x1Gb, and one Kingston value 2x1Gb.
For GPU's I have (had) an evga GTX 260 core 216, (had) Visiontek 4850, (had) Visiontek 4870 512, and my current card, Powercolor 4870.
I have played with nearly every conceivable configuration of this hardware, and the "cleanest" or "smoothest" (evidently BS from what I hear) running setup out of them all has been my 790GX/9950/4870 combo. That means least stuttering, best framerate stability, least crashes (stock or OC), least trouble with driver errors, least trouble with hardware changes.
Why is this?
Could be:
1. Mobo peculiarities
2. Ram peculiarities
3. Defective CPU's (umm not likely)
4. An all AMD platform runs better (dunno, maybe)
5. Luck of the draw?
I prefer my Phenom/790GX over my Q6600/P35 in gaming, whether stock or OC'ed. It just seems to run games smoother. Although the average framerate is lower, I seem to get better framerate stability.
Some may say I am imagining it or spouting BS, but I most certainly do not feel that I am.
I am not necessarily saying that AMD or intel is "better" for gaming, all I am saying is "Here is the hardware I have, and here is what I consider to run the best out of the hardware I currently possess"
The funny thing is that I am not the only person I have seen have the same experience, so either we are all imagining it, or there is something going on that can't easily be shown with benchmarks and graphs.Your post is epic fail.This whole thread itself is considered as Epic Fail... as well as the advocates of "smoothness"
It's oooookay to insult people because I don't agree with them.
Go away if you are going to troll. Stay if you are going to make polite and logical discussion.
I am here to discuss this with other people experiencing the same thing (or those that accept it as a possibility and are interested in quantifying it), not "prove" it to a bunch of cynical, troll-happy, blinder wearing intel fanboys (not necessarily directed at anyone in particular).I am not scared my friend.
I build, benches, uses lotsa rigs. From both "camps".
I know what "smoothness" means, and yes, it can be observed and apreciated.
*My personal view/experience* is that "smoothness" has little to do with CPU, apart from the above mentioned experience with HT-cabable CPU's (regarding swithcing/starting task).
I really wish AMD could use this technology for next gen PHII/III/IV, as much of the "superiority" by ci7 in multitasking benches/use is due to HT.
Do *NOT* compare AMD HyperTransport with Intels HyperThreading. It is two completely different animals. The first for single path/app thruput/performance, the latter for *multitasking* performance (and as a "side-effect" it gives an impression of "smoothness").
I also apreciate RoofSnipers (and others) interest in measuring "smoothness".
But it is *you* guys that must "prove" it. If possible.
Me neither. I in fact, do have both AMD and intel.
Last edited by iandh; 01-02-2009 at 03:20 PM.
Asus G73- i7-740QM, Mobility 5870, 6Gb DDR3-1333, OCZ Vertex II 90Gb
might as well close the thread since all im trying to do is find a repeatable testing method but everything you say in the amd forums these days just feeds the trolls.
Even if a bench could be made that shows a difference the non-believers would pooh-pooh it off. They'd talk about how AMD-biased the bench was and they would not believe. In short, I express the same sentiment many have already pointed out - it's a moot point that will never be taken seriously.
Now, the i7 issue is one place where there could be a few halting steps forward. If Intel guys start saying this as well about Intel CPU's then, eventually, this effect may become "common knowledge". But by then, going back and saying "I told you so" won't matter much either - it'll be ancient history, a non-issue ... :-/
.
Opteron 180 @ 2.8 GHz || A8N32-SLI || 2x 1Gb Corsair 3500LL Pro || 7900 GTX || Tt 680W PurePower
MCP655 > Storm > MCW60 > 3/4" T-line > MCP655 > Storm (Opty 165) > 2-302 HC w/2x 140CFM Deltas
Latest Toy: 940BE || M3A32-MVP || Corsair TwinX2048-6400C4D || OCZ Stealth 600W
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks