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

[ajaidev]

"At the AMD & HardOCP Game Experience event held in Texas, gamers were asked to participate in a blind test. The test involved gaming on two sets of gaming PCs with two PCs each, in each set is an AMD-powered PC, and an Intel-powered one. Participants weren't disclosed which PC was driven by what, as they were assembled in identical-looking cases (no window), with identical monitors and other peripherals. The first set is of budget single-monitor HD gaming, while the second set is high-end three-monitor gaming. "

http://www.techpowerup.com/159270/Ma...sors-Test.html

People i know have often pointed out that AMD systems are smoother than my SB system in similar games to which i give a long "Riteeeee". But there might be something to it i guess, i have also gamed on a FX 8120 and did not notice much difference between it and my 2600k at 1080p but i did not give it another thought.

I still think this was a big flop for AMD and no one should think differently, its the same thing that happened with R600 and ATi "Too Hot/Big/Hungry". I hope AMD shuts down the FX branding for the BD's and outs some limited PD with the same FX branding but i know its not gonna happen ....

[ice_chill]

System A (Intel Core i7-2700K) better: 40 votes
System B (AMD FX-8150) better: 73 votes
No difference: 28 votes

I don't really trust AMD marketing team after earlier news of dishonesty. They could have easily used better memory/SSD to make AMD feel faster. Also as AMD does not have onDie PCI-e controller, I don't see how it can be better for gaming.
Don't even want to mention power consumption difference.

[Manicdan]

i think they should have shown a per frame line graph for each one after the test was done to see if the differences were noticeable by the system aswell as the users.
the integrated graphics comparison was obviously going to be won by llano.

[jam2k]

Lol AMD PR is a joke, there's no doubt that Bulldozer is complete fail

[jimbo75]

Lol AMD PR is a joke, there's no doubt that Bulldozer is complete fail

I'm guessing that by struggling to get half the number of votes in a blind test, the 2600K is ultimate fail?

[highoctane]

Marketing stunt, at least they're still trying.

[Particle]

Out of 141 people twice as many people liked the AMD system and yet that's a flop for AMD?

Oh, well, then there is no pleasing you.

[jimbo75]

The difference is way too high to be a result of random chance - so assuming AMD hasn't been pulling some shens here (the possibility of which I'm not going to disregard) then it really does make you wonder about the "smoothness" factor. More of these tests should be done, in fact I believe AMD should be doing them at all these events even if it just proves that there really is no discernable difference.

[Movieman]

This is pretty much what I saw when I was at AMD back in Sept.
They had systems running games with both AMD FX8150's and Intel 2500K's.
The AMD's appeared to me to be smoother and faster.
Now both machines were at defaults on the cpu.
Nothing scientific but that was the feeling I got from what I saw.

[boxleitnerb]

This is all subjective. At this setting (Eyefinity), BF3 is rather GPU-limited, if not fully so. There probably is no difference at all in terms of fps. I trust measurements, not subjective impressions. Nice try, though. If you cannot win on a plain battlefield you make up your own rules what constitutes a win.

[-Boris-]

The smoothness differences between Phenom and Core 2 is definitely there, thanks to Phenoms superior bus. But I doubt it's that much difference between modern platforms, but I often see AMD have better scores in GPU limited benches so it seems like they have a better PCIe controller.

[Movieman]

This is all subjective. At this setting (Eyefinity), BF3 is rather GPU-limited, if not fully so. There probably is no difference at all in terms of fps. I trust measurements, not subjective impressions. Nice try, though. If you cannot win on a plain battlefield you make up your own rules what constitutes a win.

I agree with you 100%..I didn't have the chance to benchmark the game so all I could go on is "feel" and also keep in mind that I'm not a gamer.
Last game I played I think I had a 32mb ATI card in it..

[[XC] hipno650]

hmmm i am in the process of doing head to head between a 2600k/2500k a 8150 and a 1100T all at stock speeds with identical setups and my experiences has been the polar opposite and the benches also back that up.

Keep in mind my system spec is fairly high end:
- ROG mobo (Crosshair V Formula for AMD, Maximus IV Extreme for Intel)
- 8GB DDR3 1600mhz RAM
- 120GB Vertex 3
- 2x 6970 CrossfireX

Same cooler same PSU the works. One thing is for sure the Intel system boots faster by a decent chunk. All the min FPS is higher as well on the Intel system so far (i am half way through the Intel tests)

Thus I must cry BS from AMD. It just does not make much sense to me....

[EniGmA1987]

The smoothness thing was true when it was just Thuban and Sandy Bridge, but I really dont think Bulldozer is "smoother" than a SB system.

[STaRGaZeR]

ROFL, slower but smoother again.

[Miwo]

While I am an AMD fan, I think this is really bogus. The whole smoothness debate has been going on for a long time now. Smoothness and anything CPU can be scientifically benchmarked... whether it be time-lapse graphs showing min/max/avg, latencies, etc. You can claim that user A and user B feels no difference between Intel and AMD, but to say AMD is smoother is pretty ridiculous. cpu benchmarking headed the way of audio reviews....

"oh it just sounds better...."
"oh it just feels smoother..."

-_-

Perhaps an explanation is that because the 2600k is so powerful, it leads to higher variations in FPS due to increased max fps. If you take the differences, im sure AMD will seem 'smoother' in that respect because it just cant hit those max fps peaks. If framerate goes from 30 to 75, vs 30 to 100, what seems more "smooth" ? Solution: enable vsync to lock at 60 or 120fps

[crash5s]

This stuff is always hard to tell. On my older systems (phenom 940 BE vs Q9550, with 8gb DDR2) the AMD system was "smoother". But it got lower max FPS than the intel system. It just didn't fluctuate at some points in certain games.

On my newer systems (sandbridge and bulldozer) I have no clue. I don't notice either of them to have issues. It might be there, but it's certainly not as jarring as it once was.

[boxleitnerb]

While I am an AMD fan, I think this is really bogus. The whole smoothness debate has been going on for a long time now. Smoothness and anything CPU can be scientifically benchmarked... whether it be time-lapse graphs showing min/max/avg, latencies, etc. You can claim that user A and user B feels no difference between Intel and AMD, but to say AMD is smoother is pretty ridiculous. cpu benchmarking headed the way of audio reviews....

"oh it just sounds better...."
"oh it just feels smoother..."

-_-

Perhaps an explanation is that because the 2600k is so powerful, it leads to higher variations in FPS due to increased max fps. If you take the differences, im sure AMD will seem 'smoother' in that respect because it just cant hit those max fps peaks. If framerate goes from 30 to 75, vs 30 to 100, what seems more "smooth" ? Solution: enable vsync to lock at 60 or 120fps

Very very good point! Did they play with vsync at this event?

[Manicdan]

i doubt its reaching 120fps with that high resolution

but they should have tested with many more games/configurations. its too easy to make one unbalanced system to prove a point.

[SKYMTL]

I'm guessing this was all started by some baseless claims in a review (I can't remember which site) stating that their AMD test system seemed to play games better even though the framerates were about the same.

At this point in time, AMD needs all the help they can get to move these processors to gamers so I guess something is better than nothing...

[StAndrew]

Wouldnt higher FPS "tear" much more due to the 60Hz monitor refresh? I wonder if Intel's is less "smooth" because the FPS are too high...

[ChinStrap]

It’s articles like this that keep that “what if” burning in the back of my mind @ buying an 1100t.

I'm guessing this was all started by some baseless claims in a review (I can't remember which site) stating that their AMD test system seemed to play games better even though the framerates were about the same.

At this point in time, AMD needs all the help they can get to move these processors to gamers so I guess something is better than nothing...

You have benched and done a walk-through or two on both equipment sets, have an opinion?

[savantu]

So the AMD system is smoother while it has unequivocally been shown in benchmarks to produce lower min and average FPS ? Maybe they put some grease under the mouse for the FX system...

[Final8ty]

I'm guessing this was all started by some baseless claims in a review (I can't remember which site) stating that their AMD test system seemed to play games better even though the framerates were about the same.

It was Anandtech.
The test was not about smoothness at all, it was just
something they noticed.

[Nikolasz]

Im playing all major games like bf3 on q9550 and works fine with nv 9800gtx set to medium, works even better with gtx 560ti..
And so "i have crap pc" and usaly um on top 5-7 ppl on bf3 64 ppl server