5 ms·

> Were they trying something that failed last minute Seems likely. Your chip underperforms? Just block people from using benchmarking apps, and also tell the p

> Were they trying something that failed last minute Seems likely. Your chip underperforms? Just block people from using benchmarking apps, and also tell the press you never cared about speed. Problem solved.

josephcsible 3y ago
See https://www.notebookcheck.net/Google-blocked-Pixel-8-Pixel-8-Pro-reviewers-from-using-popular-benchmarks-to-test-the-Tensor-G3-chip-new-owners-too.759260.0.html https://www.notebookcheck.net/Google-blocked-Pixel-8-Pixel-8... for details about "block people from using benchmarking apps".
- AlexandrB 3y ago
  Wtf? How is this not an abuse of market power?
  - canucker2016 3y ago
    the notebookcheck.net article states: "In a highly unusual move, it has been revealed that Google has blocked reviewers of the Pixel 8 and Pixel 8 Pro from installing popular benchmarks including Geekbench and 3D Mark." there's an embedded URL linking to a YouTube video, which shows that the Google Play store won't allow the user to install Geekbench or 3dMark on the pre-released Pixel 8 review devices. see https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bk4ZUmKqRm0&t=330 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bk4ZUmKqRm0&t=330
    - charcircuit 3y ago
      Those app are notorious for leaking performance. At least with geekbench you have to buy a license to even have the choice to not upload results.
  - fidotron 3y ago
    It's rife across the whole benchmarking industry. Lies, damn lies, and benchmarks. The massive problem, which has particularly afflicted Qualcomm and Intel in the past, is the difference between peak and sustained performance being absolutely huge, since running at peak would trigger thermal conditions necessitating dynamic down clocking to below normal speeds, which would then persist for a surprisingly long time before normal performance resumes. Certain groups would detect known benchmarking code and alter the acceptable thermal parameters for the execution of the benchmark tests. (i.e. allow the device to become unusually hot). As others have mentioned this has all the hallmarks of an execution failure, either by Google, Samsung, both, or some unknown third party. Google have a cultural problem of believing way too much in theoretical untested potential solutions instead of aiming for the boring known to work but only 95% as theoretically good, only to find when building it reality is different enough to more than nullify the advantages. It has bitten them in this area before, and it more than likely will again.
    - hypercube33 3y ago
      Now that you mention it...I have only seen one review about workstations that benchmarked machines for 24 hours to make sure they didn't thermally saturate and throttle and I'm wondering why that isn't more of a metric for non mobile stuff. Heck even mobile workstations may be put under heavy load for durations and this would show if their cooling keeps up or falls short
    - fomine3 3y ago
      Apple too. iPhone is known for state of the art SoC and moderate heat design, that causes unstable peak performance for heavy gaming or benchmark.
      - fidotron 3y ago
        No, Apple is not the same for this. Their devices do not suffer from anything like the same downtime after running at peak - but they can do nothing to stop developers draining the battery, and that's what is going on. If they were to do that developers would have a giant hissy fit about it. I have worked with prototypes from other manufacturers that had to be recalled after burning people. I have also found bugs in SoCs that their manufacturers were lying to OEMs about, and had to explain to different OEMs what was going on, after they had shipped millions of units. The simple truth is modern developers are irresponsible and so the manufacturers get to play everyone off against each other to spread as much self serving nonsense as possible.
intelVISA 3y ago
they can't keep getting away with this (Copy)(2)
numpad0 3y ago
saw some phone geeks suspecting last minute addition for thermal dispersion under LCD as well as frequency limiter to manage heat. not sure where the suspicion came from but sounds plausible

josephcsible 3y ago

See https://www.notebookcheck.net/Google-blocked-Pixel-8-Pixel-8-Pro-reviewers-from-using-popular-benchmarks-to-test-the-Tensor-G3-chip-new-owners-too.759260.0.html https://www.notebookcheck.net/Google-blocked-Pixel-8-Pixel-8... for details about "block people from using benchmarking apps".

AlexandrB 3y ago
Wtf? How is this not an abuse of market power?
- canucker2016 3y ago
  the notebookcheck.net article states: "In a highly unusual move, it has been revealed that Google has blocked reviewers of the Pixel 8 and Pixel 8 Pro from installing popular benchmarks including Geekbench and 3D Mark." there's an embedded URL linking to a YouTube video, which shows that the Google Play store won't allow the user to install Geekbench or 3dMark on the pre-released Pixel 8 review devices. see https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bk4ZUmKqRm0&t=330 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bk4ZUmKqRm0&t=330
  - charcircuit 3y ago
    Those app are notorious for leaking performance. At least with geekbench you have to buy a license to even have the choice to not upload results.
- fidotron 3y ago
  It's rife across the whole benchmarking industry. Lies, damn lies, and benchmarks. The massive problem, which has particularly afflicted Qualcomm and Intel in the past, is the difference between peak and sustained performance being absolutely huge, since running at peak would trigger thermal conditions necessitating dynamic down clocking to below normal speeds, which would then persist for a surprisingly long time before normal performance resumes. Certain groups would detect known benchmarking code and alter the acceptable thermal parameters for the execution of the benchmark tests. (i.e. allow the device to become unusually hot). As others have mentioned this has all the hallmarks of an execution failure, either by Google, Samsung, both, or some unknown third party. Google have a cultural problem of believing way too much in theoretical untested potential solutions instead of aiming for the boring known to work but only 95% as theoretically good, only to find when building it reality is different enough to more than nullify the advantages. It has bitten them in this area before, and it more than likely will again.
  - hypercube33 3y ago
    Now that you mention it...I have only seen one review about workstations that benchmarked machines for 24 hours to make sure they didn't thermally saturate and throttle and I'm wondering why that isn't more of a metric for non mobile stuff. Heck even mobile workstations may be put under heavy load for durations and this would show if their cooling keeps up or falls short
  - fomine3 3y ago
    Apple too. iPhone is known for state of the art SoC and moderate heat design, that causes unstable peak performance for heavy gaming or benchmark.
    - fidotron 3y ago
      No, Apple is not the same for this. Their devices do not suffer from anything like the same downtime after running at peak - but they can do nothing to stop developers draining the battery, and that's what is going on. If they were to do that developers would have a giant hissy fit about it. I have worked with prototypes from other manufacturers that had to be recalled after burning people. I have also found bugs in SoCs that their manufacturers were lying to OEMs about, and had to explain to different OEMs what was going on, after they had shipped millions of units. The simple truth is modern developers are irresponsible and so the manufacturers get to play everyone off against each other to spread as much self serving nonsense as possible.

intelVISA 3y ago

they can't keep getting away with this (Copy)(2)

numpad0 3y ago

saw some phone geeks suspecting last minute addition for thermal dispersion under LCD as well as frequency limiter to manage heat. not sure where the suspicion came from but sounds plausible