3 ms·

This comment would have a lot more force with specifics that show how Anand/Intel's numbers are wrong or misleading.

by sixbrx 14y ago

polshaw 14y ago
I think the parent post is too strong, but numbers are by no means the only way of showing a bias. Whilst i believe he tries to be objective, Anand may hold a slight bias towards intel. Take the discussion of the future; he talks of the advancements of the core architecture, comparing a yet-unseen 8W TDP[1] haswell, then talking confidently of halving that at 14nm. This is in no means a certainty; i think it is fair to say this would be a best-case scenario where intel focused fully on reducing power, as well as having a very successful 14nm node. On top of this, there is no mention of price in this equation; i can't see a 'core' CPU in a nexus tablet (too expensive for the cost) or an ipad (too expensive for apple's margins) if intel want to keep their margins. I should reiterate that everyone has a bias, and if Anand's is slightly pro-intel, then it is surely propagated by the high level of access intel seem to give him (take for example the 'x86 power myth busted' article; where the atom was compared to the intel cherry-picked (outdated) tegra3), and the fact that we have a very capable intel today. As said i believe he attempts to be objective still, so i still think his journalism is some of if not the best in this area. 1. keep in mind TDP is not peak power (which is where the A15 would be close to 4W), but the sustained heat output that should be dissipated in whatever enclosure, for which there is no standard. This would put the A15 in the 1-2W range.
- sixbrx 14y ago
  That's the kind of specifics I was looking for (thanks). I agree about numbers, and one doesnt have to answer with numbers if they can be brushed aside with specifics that offer proper perspective. I'm pretty hardware-ignorant myself, so I'd be at the mercy of articles like this if it weren't for comments. It's interesting times - the stakes seem to be high because of the way that some platforms are tied to hardware architectures (which is my real interest here).
- amargulies 14y ago
  Intel already demonstrated at IDF that they have Haswell running at 8W while giving the same frame-rate as a 17w Ivy-bridge part when running the Unigine Heaven benchmark: http://www.anandtech.com/show/6262/intels-haswell-20x-lower-platform-idle-power-than-sandy-bridge-2x-gpu-performance-of-ivy-bridge http://www.anandtech.com/show/6262/intels-haswell-20x-lower-...
dman 14y ago
Four things determine the takeaway a reader will have when reading a benchmark a) What is measured b) What the product is compared against c) Which subset of features the reviewer focusses on d) The reviewers take on the design compromises specific to the particular product Unfortunately all four of those are fairly subjective things so it is hard to make a fact based case against someone who is diligent with the measurements and excels at writing. That being said I invite you to find focus on intels inability to ship working graphic drivers, lack of ability to decode 1080p video for the longest time with an integrated chipset, focus on multithreaded benchmarks early on where amd was shipping more albeit slower cores at the same price point, lack of linux support for poulsbo chipsets etc, lack of comments on intels habit of gimping processors within the same family by disabling functionality( support for ECC, support for acceleration of Virtual machines, reference - http://wiki.xensource.com/xenwiki/VTdHowTo http://wiki.xensource.com/xenwiki/VTdHowTo ).

This comment would have a lot more force with specifics that show how Anand/Intel's numbers are wrong or misleading.

by sixbrx 14y ago

This comment would have a lot more force with specifics that show how Anand/Intel's numbers are wrong or misleading.

I think the parent post is too strong, but numbers are by no means the only way of showing a bias. Whilst i believe he tries to be objective, Anand may hold a slight bias towards intel. Take the discussion of the future; he talks of the advancements of the core architecture, comparing a yet-unseen 8W TDP[1] haswell, then talking confidently of halving that at 14nm. This is in no means a certainty; i think it is fair to say this would be a best-case scenario where intel focused fully on reducing power, as well as having a very successful 14nm node. On top of this, there is no mention of price in this equation; i can't see a 'core' CPU in a nexus tablet (too expensive for the cost) or an ipad (too expensive for apple's margins) if intel want to keep their margins. I should reiterate that everyone has a bias, and if Anand's is slightly pro-intel, then it is surely propagated by the high level of access intel seem to give him (take for example the 'x86 power myth busted' article; where the atom was compared to the intel cherry-picked (outdated) tegra3), and the fact that we have a very capable intel today. As said i believe he attempts to be objective still, so i still think his journalism is some of if not the best in this area. 1. keep in mind TDP is not peak power (which is where the A15 would be close to 4W), but the sustained heat output that should be dissipated in whatever enclosure, for which there is no standard. This would put the A15 in the 1-2W range.

sixbrx 14y ago
That's the kind of specifics I was looking for (thanks). I agree about numbers, and one doesnt have to answer with numbers if they can be brushed aside with specifics that offer proper perspective. I'm pretty hardware-ignorant myself, so I'd be at the mercy of articles like this if it weren't for comments. It's interesting times - the stakes seem to be high because of the way that some platforms are tied to hardware architectures (which is my real interest here).
amargulies 14y ago
Intel already demonstrated at IDF that they have Haswell running at 8W while giving the same frame-rate as a 17w Ivy-bridge part when running the Unigine Heaven benchmark: http://www.anandtech.com/show/6262/intels-haswell-20x-lower-platform-idle-power-than-sandy-bridge-2x-gpu-performance-of-ivy-bridge http://www.anandtech.com/show/6262/intels-haswell-20x-lower-...

dman 14y ago

Four things determine the takeaway a reader will have when reading a benchmark a) What is measured b) What the product is compared against c) Which subset of features the reviewer focusses on d) The reviewers take on the design compromises specific to the particular product Unfortunately all four of those are fairly subjective things so it is hard to make a fact based case against someone who is diligent with the measurements and excels at writing. That being said I invite you to find focus on intels inability to ship working graphic drivers, lack of ability to decode 1080p video for the longest time with an integrated chipset, focus on multithreaded benchmarks early on where amd was shipping more albeit slower cores at the same price point, lack of linux support for poulsbo chipsets etc, lack of comments on intels habit of gimping processors within the same family by disabling functionality( support for ECC, support for acceleration of Virtual machines, reference - http://wiki.xensource.com/xenwiki/VTdHowTo http://wiki.xensource.com/xenwiki/VTdHowTo ).