Anand: PII vs. Q9550 vs. i7 crossfire, Phenom II = smoother

[eleeter]

Sadly you don't realize that you can troll without actually having the blatant intent.

Exactly.

I fail to understand why some of you here are so narrow minded, even simplistic. You want "hard numbers" otherwise you refuse to believe AMD can actually deliver a better experience. Being hyper fixated on bar graphs doesn't begin to paint the entire picture.

The doubters need to actually experience the systems themselves, otherwise quite honestly you're talking out your ass.

[demonkevy666]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kPuV5XMQnFw&

3:51- 4:29 that's how this thread is going.

[Mav451]

Exactly.

I fail to understand why some of you here are so narrow minded, even simplistic. You want "hard numbers" otherwise you refuse to believe AMD can actually deliver a better experience. Being hyper fixated on bar graphs doesn't begin to paint the entire picture.

The doubters need to actually experience the systems themselves, otherwise quite honestly you're talking out your ass.

What is "narrow minded" about demanding proof? My point is that people can (and will) argue about opinions till the sun goes down, but hard numbers will stand the test of time (and hyperbole for that matter).

[Zucker2k]

Mav, you're wasting your time. I know this, sorry I can't prove it to you.

[Hornet331]

What is "narrow minded" about demanding proof? My point is that people can (and will) argue about opinions till the sun goes down, but hard numbers will stand the test of time (and hyperbole for that matter).

OT:
Man i would give an arm and a leg to base my diploma thesis on opinions instead of hardfacts and numbers, that would save so much time.

[Sparky]

I'm planning around the April/May timeframe to get a phenom II. If nobody has done a frame to frame time analysis chart by then, I'll do one. A direct comparison of my q6600 and the phenom II at the same clockspeeds, with the same ram, same video card, same hard drive, same drivers (aside from mobo chipset of course), heck even the same friggin' power supply, chassis, and sata cables

[charged3800z24]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kPuV5XMQnFw&

3:51- 4:29 that's how this thread is going.

That was hilarious...

I can't believe this thread is still going.

[eleeter]

...but hard numbers will stand the test of time (and hyperbole for that matter).

Numbers are not the actual experience, obviously. If you want "proof" only by looking at graphs, good for you.

The user experience is what matters. Some of you are completely incapable of understanding that. Anyone that is in audio/video will tell you that specs are not the end all be all. In fact they don't mean a damn thing if the actual equipment sounds like crap. In fact people that only buy audio equipment because of S/N ratios and wattage ratings are idiots, although there are a lot of these types of buyers.

[eleeter]

OT:
Man i would give an arm and a leg to base my diploma thesis on opinions instead of hardfacts and numbers, that would save so much time.

This is not a thesis. Do you think you could write your thesis on automobiles, I could read it, and find out what the best car out there was? You probably do.

[charged3800z24]

I'm planning around the April/May timeframe to get a phenom II. If nobody has done a frame to frame time analysis chart by then, I'll do one. A direct comparison of my q6600 and the phenom II at the same clockspeeds, with the same ram, same video card, same hard drive, same drivers (aside from mobo chipset of course), heck even the same friggin' power supply, chassis, and sata cables

Don't forget same mouse

[Sparky]

Don't forget same mouse

of course. And keyboard too

[Barrok]

So am I to understand that the reason the AMD is more "smooth" is because it fluctuates less from high fps to low fps? Wouldn't that mean that it is actually LESS powerful of a CPU as an intel because the intels are producing such high FPS that when they fall the same percentage of FPS as an AMD it actually is a larger number thus contributing to some sort of stutter?

For example, if a game is running between 30 and 90 fps on an intel and 25-50 on an AMD, it seems to me that the AMD might be more smooth but also less powerful of a processor? Am I missing something?

[Mav451]

Numbers are not the actual experience, obviously. If you want "proof" only by looking at graphs, good for you.

The user experience is what matters. Some of you are completely incapable of understanding that. Anyone that is in audio/video will tell you that specs are not the end all be all. In fact they don't mean a damn thing if the actual equipment sounds like crap. In fact people that only buy audio equipment because of S/N ratios and wattage ratings are idiots, although there are a lot of these types of buyers.

Lol why are we suddenly talking about audio equipment? Or video? AVS and Head-Fi have some of the most stubborn and opinionated users on the Internet. What one person likes is not going to be the same as another likes, it comes down to preference. E.g. Grado fans vs. Senn fans. They will never agree with each other, and numbers or tech specs have no bearing (or relevance) to that discussion.

What we are talking about here has no subjectivity to it. If it truly is smoother, it will ALSO be reflected in the numbers. If we see that AMD has greater consistency in frame rate, backed by real data and not anecdotal evidence, then the discussion based on opinion is over. Numbers will be there to prove it. Likewise, if we see that AMD and Intel are similar in frame rate consistency, then well...there's always other stuff to argue about.

[keithlm]

I can't believe this thread is still going.

There is actually is a serious conversation going on when you ignore the attempts to derail the thread.

[eleeter]

Lol why are we suddenly talking about audio equipment?

You are completely incapable of grasping the analogy, not that I am surprised.

AVS and Head-Fi have some of the most stubborn and opinionated users on the Internet

"stubborn and opinionated" that sounds familiar.

[Mav451]

Actually Barrok brings up a good point. Say a scene varies from 30fps (most intensive areas) to 120fps (least intensive: looking at a wall in the corner). Let's say you make a timedemo out of this. The question is - does the discrepancy in GPU load affect the consistency of a smooth experience? Yes. Low minimum FPS is inherently less smooth, but it is not what we are trying to study. Therefore, we need a control application to compare the two.

1) Real-world example, where wild fluctations of average FPS occur (due to differing GPU loads)
vs 2) Synthetic load, where there are no wild fluctuations of average FPS, and thus the only fluctuation is the consistency of generating a certain, pre-set FPS.

E.g. synthetic "control" time demo that averages 60FPS, with little differences in GPU load. How consistent is the rate of frame generation (time/frame)?
Compare that control to another time demo where we EXPECT high and low GPU loads. Is the rate of frame generation just as consistent? And is this going to interfere with our study at hand?

[Sparky]

So am I to understand that the reason the AMD is more "smooth" is because it fluctuates less from high fps to low fps? Wouldn't that mean that it is actually LESS powerful of a CPU as an intel because the intels are producing such high FPS that when they fall the same percentage of FPS as an AMD it actually is a larger number thus contributing to some sort of stutter?

For example, if a game is running between 30 and 90 fps on an intel and 25-50 on an AMD, it seems to me that the AMD might be more smooth but also less powerful of a processor? Am I missing something?

It is more framerate stability overall that is in discussion/arguement/firefight/whatever you want to call it right now, not necessarily a set percentage or anything like that. The original post linking to the Anandtech article I believe mentioned higher minimum framerates in some of the games tested. That isn't a sign of an inferior CPU. Not sure what you are getting at.

[eleeter]

What we are talking about here has no subjectivity to it.

I'm not sure you realize how utterly ridiculous this statement is. Everything has some measure of subjectivity. You lose any shred of credibility saying this.

[Zucker2k]

I'm not sure you realize how utterly ridiculous this statement is. Everything has some measure of subjectivity. You lose any shred of credibility saying this.

How much subjectivity should we factor into these tests?

[Barrok]

It is more framerate stability overall that is in discussion/arguement/firefight/whatever you want to call it right now, not necessarily a set percentage or anything like that. The original post linking to the Anandtech article I believe mentioned higher minimum framerates in some of the games tested. That isn't a sign of an inferior CPU. Not sure what you are getting at.

For example, you guys have talked about Crysis Warhead right? With both the I7 and the P2 are head to head, both at 4.0 ghz (roughly) the I7 has a fps range of 19-76 while the P2 is 21-60. Right there the i7 has a 27% fps MAX advantage over the P2. So when it falls from high to low its a much greater fall thus possibly accounting for stuttering, If I understand this whole argument correctly. So the fact the i7 is so powerful is the exact reason that the stuttering exists? (also a 10fps difference in average fps at 1680x1050).

I am just saying that it seems by arguing that the AMD is more smooth you might also be saying that it isn't as powerful thus not as many fluctuations as the intel. I am just saying...

[roofsniper]

So am I to understand that the reason the AMD is more "smooth" is because it fluctuates less from high fps to low fps? Wouldn't that mean that it is actually LESS powerful of a CPU as an intel because the intels are producing such high FPS that when they fall the same percentage of FPS as an AMD it actually is a larger number thus contributing to some sort of stutter?

For example, if a game is running between 30 and 90 fps on an intel and 25-50 on an AMD, it seems to me that the AMD might be more smooth but also less powerful of a processor? Am I missing something?

but what if both cpus get the same average fps. one could be smoother than the other. of course is one system is running at 20 fps constantly while one is running between 40-50 fps the 40-50 fps one would look smoother. but the values aren't that different. they stay at about the same levels.

For example, you guys have talked about Crysis Warhead right? With both the I7 and the P2 are head to head, both at 4.0 ghz (roughly) the I7 has a fps range of 19-76 while the P2 is 21-60. Right there the i7 has a 27% fps MAX advantage over the P2. So when it falls from high to low its a much greater fall thus possibly accounting for stuttering, If I understand this whole argument correctly. So the fact the i7 is so powerful is the exact reason that the stuttering exists? (also a 10fps difference in average fps at 1680x1050).

I am just saying that it seems by arguing that the AMD is more smooth you might also be saying that it isn't as powerful thus not as many fluctuations as the intel. I am just saying...

the max fps doesn't represent the pure performance tho. the max fps just shows the highest value it got during the test. you can't determine which cpu is better by just seeing the max fps values. you need to see more.

[eleeter]

How much subjectivity should we factor into these tests?

A better way to put it would be, remove the guess work and try both platforms, look at the data, then decide for yourself. That is what matters.

Pounding people over the head and insisting that the raw numbers are the only thing that matters is silly. It also depends on what you are doing. For example, I have an Intel quad box, for encoding work it gets the job done quite a bit faster than my AMD system. But for gaming, I prefer the AMD box, games "feel" smoother, more enjoyable, which actually surprised me. I was certain it would be the opposite.

Let me ask you rabid Intel supporters posting here, why do you care so much? What if the Phenom platform was actually able to deliver a more enjoyable gaming experience? Would that make you consider it? Are you even open to that possibility? And if you did see graphs that illustrated this, would you actually believe them?

[Barrok]

the max fps doesn't represent the pure performance tho. the max fps just shows the highest value it got during the test. you can't determine which cpu is better by just seeing the max fps values. you need to see more.

Which is why i included the average fps in which the core i7 gets around 10fps more than the P2.

Are you telling me roofsniper that if a core i7 got an FPS range of 30-60 with an average of 45fps, and a P2 got an FPS range of 30-60 with an average of 45FPS that you would be able to see some sort of stuttering with the intel and some sort of smoothness with the P2?

[Sparky]

For example, you guys have talked about Crysis Warhead right? With both the I7 and the P2 are head to head, both at 4.0 ghz (roughly) the I7 has a fps range of 19-76 while the P2 is 21-60. Right there the i7 has a 27% fps MAX advantage over the P2. So when it falls from high to low its a much greater fall thus possibly accounting for stuttering, If I understand this whole argument correctly. So the fact the i7 is so powerful is the exact reason that the stuttering exists? (also a 10fps difference in average fps at 1680x1050).

I am just saying that it seems by arguing that the AMD is more smooth you might also be saying that it isn't as powerful thus not as many fluctuations as the intel. I am just saying...

Yes, it has a higher max fps, but it also has a lower minimum fps too.

Typically - at least it has been this way on my past systems - if there is a less powerful system both min and max fps are lower. I've not had a weaker system give higher min but lower max fps.

[roofsniper]

Which is why i included the average fps in which the core i7 gets around 10fps more than the P2.

Are you telling me roofsniper that if a core i7 got an FPS range of 30-60 with an average of 45fps, and a P2 got an FPS range of 30-60 with an average of 45FPS that you would be able to see some sort of stuttering with the intel and some sort of smoothness with the P2?

it is a possibility but i don't think that i7 has as much of a stuttering problem as core 2 does if it has one at all. if the frames were all produced in the same amount of time it would create the smoothest possible experience because there would be no change in fps. but we know this is not the case. the idea is that if you plot the amount of time it takes for each frame to be produced on a graph then the core 2 graph would be more jagged than a phenom graph. because the phenom graph because the phenom would produce the frames at a more stable rate than the intel one does.