Jump to content

That's not how graphs work, Linus

xFluing
Message added by Crunchy Dragon

Keep this civil. This thread is being monitored.

Whoever did this needs to be fired STAT, is his editor an Intel shill or something what happened here, why do the Ryzen 3 results have smaller bars than the Intel ones, even though the numbers are the exact same? This isn't just a fluke, it's in all of the graphs in the video, see for yourself: 

 

image.png.cc4bc6bca5b56e6001778847305102b1.png

AMD Ryzen 5 5600 | MSI B450 Tomahawk | Corsair LPX 16GB 3000MHz CL16 | XFX RX 6700 XT QICK 319 | Corsair TX 550M 80+ Gold PSU

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

The '97th percentile' bars are also lower on the AMD side. Weird..

"We're all in this together, might as well be friends" Tom, Toonami.

 

mini eLiXiVy: my open source 65% mechanical PCB, a build log, PCB anatomy and discussing open source licenses: https://linustechtips.com/topic/1366493-elixivy-a-65-mechanical-keyboard-build-log-pcb-anatomy-and-how-i-open-sourced-this-project/

 

mini_cardboard: a 4% keyboard build log and how keyboards workhttps://linustechtips.com/topic/1328547-mini_cardboard-a-4-keyboard-build-log-and-how-keyboards-work/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

This was covered somewhere already. Reason given was along the line that the lengths are correct, but the numbers are rounded for presentation.

Main system: i9-7980XE, Asus X299 TUF mark 2, Noctua D15, Corsair Vengeance Pro 3200 3x 16GB 2R, RTX 3070, NZXT E850, GameMax Abyss, Samsung 980 Pro 2TB, Acer Predator XB241YU 24" 1440p 144Hz G-Sync + HP LP2475w 24" 1200p 60Hz wide gamut
Gaming laptop: Lenovo Legion 5, 5800H, RTX 3070, Kingston DDR4 3200C22 2x16GB 2Rx8, Kingston Fury Renegade 1TB + Crucial P1 1TB SSD, 165 Hz IPS 1080p G-Sync Compatible

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, porina said:

This was covered somewhere already. Reason given was along the line that the lengths are correct, but the numbers are rounded for presentation.

Thought it might be, but why not just give the non-rounded numbers, otherwise it can cause uproars, like this had already done.

This still doesn't absolve them of this goof, either round the numbers and have both bars the same length, or DON'T round the numbers in order to keep bars at different lengths.

AMD Ryzen 5 5600 | MSI B450 Tomahawk | Corsair LPX 16GB 3000MHz CL16 | XFX RX 6700 XT QICK 319 | Corsair TX 550M 80+ Gold PSU

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, xFluing said:

either round the numbers and have both bars the same length

Then what's the point? If the readings are different then the bars should have different lengths; if the two had the same length then people would assume that they perform equally.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Shimejii said:

Im going to assume the numbers are suposed to be 19 and 14, but if its the same then this editor needs a sit down to review the video before release. This is just lazy and bad.

Look at the bar lengths. Each vertical marker seems to be 2. That puts the 1300X at 12.x and 16.x, and the 8700k at 13.x and 17.x. Both rounded to 13 and 17. So complain about them boosting the Ryzen numbers.

1 minute ago, xFluing said:

Thought it might be, but why not just give the non-rounded numbers, otherwise it can cause uproars, like this had already done.

The takeaway point was that there was no practical difference. 

Main system: i9-7980XE, Asus X299 TUF mark 2, Noctua D15, Corsair Vengeance Pro 3200 3x 16GB 2R, RTX 3070, NZXT E850, GameMax Abyss, Samsung 980 Pro 2TB, Acer Predator XB241YU 24" 1440p 144Hz G-Sync + HP LP2475w 24" 1200p 60Hz wide gamut
Gaming laptop: Lenovo Legion 5, 5800H, RTX 3070, Kingston DDR4 3200C22 2x16GB 2Rx8, Kingston Fury Renegade 1TB + Crucial P1 1TB SSD, 165 Hz IPS 1080p G-Sync Compatible

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just now, porina said:

Look at the bar lengths. Each vertical marker seems to be 2. That puts the 1300X at 12.x and 16.x, and the 8700k at 13.x and 17.x. Both rounded to 13 and 17. So complain about them boosting the Ryzen numbers.

The takeaway point was that there was no practical difference. 

Then why make the takeaway point seem like some rigged graph, again, either have them of variable length without rounded numbers, or without any number altogether, or have them at the same length if rounded, it's not about the point they're making, it's about the implications of such a small error, this is how misinformation gets spread, through small errors everyone copies.

AMD Ryzen 5 5600 | MSI B450 Tomahawk | Corsair LPX 16GB 3000MHz CL16 | XFX RX 6700 XT QICK 319 | Corsair TX 550M 80+ Gold PSU

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, porina said:

Look at the bar lengths. Each vertical marker seems to be 2. That puts the 1300X at 12.x and 16.x, and the 8700k at 13.x and 17.x. Both rounded to 13 and 17. So complain about them boosting the Ryzen numbers.

This seems right. Yes, the graphs do seem a bit off but make sense. A half of a frame per second is not a big deal, but the difference becomes more pronounced as the FPS goes up.

 CPU: I9-7900X RAM: 64GB (16X4) DDR4-2933 GPU: RTX 3080 MOBO: ASUS X299 Deluxe PSU: Corsair RM850 SSD: ADATA XPG SX8200 PRO 1TB HDD: Seagate Barracuda 2TB Case: Corsair iCUE 465X Cooler: Corsair 280 AIO

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, lewdicrous said:

Then what's the point? If the readings are different then the bars should have different lengths; if the two had the same length then people would assume that they perform equally.

I guess the point is, if you are going to show the difference you should show the actual difference.   The point of a graph is to visual convey comparative numbers, in this case the comparative seems larger on the graph than the actual number. (not that it actually is but you get the point yer?)

 

1 hour ago, porina said:

 

The takeaway point was that there was no practical difference. 

So why show a difference at all then?

Grammar and spelling is not indicative of intelligence/knowledge.  Not having the same opinion does not always mean lack of understanding.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, mr moose said:

So why show a difference at all then?

No practical difference is not no difference.

 

Feels like I'm back in photography forums. They tend to degenerate into nit picking over minute details and totally miss out the bigger picture.

Main system: i9-7980XE, Asus X299 TUF mark 2, Noctua D15, Corsair Vengeance Pro 3200 3x 16GB 2R, RTX 3070, NZXT E850, GameMax Abyss, Samsung 980 Pro 2TB, Acer Predator XB241YU 24" 1440p 144Hz G-Sync + HP LP2475w 24" 1200p 60Hz wide gamut
Gaming laptop: Lenovo Legion 5, 5800H, RTX 3070, Kingston DDR4 3200C22 2x16GB 2Rx8, Kingston Fury Renegade 1TB + Crucial P1 1TB SSD, 165 Hz IPS 1080p G-Sync Compatible

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, porina said:

No practical difference is not no difference.

 

Feels like I'm back in photography forums. They tend to degenerate into nit picking over minute details and totally miss out the bigger picture.

I never said that was the case, I maintain if the difference is of no real importance then why show it at all?  

 

Also the bigger picture is only bigger in your opinion, for others the bigger picture is underpinned with accurate finer details.

 

EDIT: I mean if the difference is enough too report on then it should be qualified  yes?  Not just a graph that is hard for some people to interpret.

Grammar and spelling is not indicative of intelligence/knowledge.  Not having the same opinion does not always mean lack of understanding.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm going to go on a limb and suggest that these are rounded numbers.

 

I would have preferred going to the tenth decimal, if not the hundredth, as the single digits don't suggest much difference. 

Cor Caeruleus Reborn v6

Spoiler

CPU: Intel - Core i7-8700K

CPU Cooler: be quiet! - PURE ROCK 
Thermal Compound: Arctic Silver - 5 High-Density Polysynthetic Silver 3.5g Thermal Paste 
Motherboard: ASRock Z370 Extreme4
Memory: G.Skill TridentZ RGB 2x8GB 3200/14
Storage: Samsung - 850 EVO-Series 500GB 2.5" Solid State Drive 
Storage: Samsung - 960 EVO 500GB M.2-2280 Solid State Drive
Storage: Western Digital - Blue 2TB 3.5" 5400RPM Internal Hard Drive
Storage: Western Digital - BLACK SERIES 3TB 3.5" 7200RPM Internal Hard Drive
Video Card: EVGA - 970 SSC ACX (1080 is in RMA)
Case: Fractal Design - Define R5 w/Window (Black) ATX Mid Tower Case
Power Supply: EVGA - SuperNOVA P2 750W with CableMod blue/black Pro Series
Optical Drive: LG - WH16NS40 Blu-Ray/DVD/CD Writer 
Operating System: Microsoft - Windows 10 Pro OEM 64-bit and Linux Mint Serena
Keyboard: Logitech - G910 Orion Spectrum RGB Wired Gaming Keyboard
Mouse: Logitech - G502 Wired Optical Mouse
Headphones: Logitech - G430 7.1 Channel  Headset
Speakers: Logitech - Z506 155W 5.1ch Speakers

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, porina said:

Feels like I'm back in photography forums. They tend to degenerate into nit picking over minute details and totally miss out the bigger picture.

Heh, don't bother with audio forums. They tend to just be degenerate as a whole. ;)

Main rig on profile

VAULT - File Server

Spoiler

Intel Core i5 11400 w/ Shadow Rock LP, 2x16GB SP GAMING 3200MHz CL16, ASUS PRIME Z590-A, 2x LSI 9211-8i, Fractal Define 7, 256GB Team MP33, 3x 6TB WD Red Pro (general storage), 3x 1TB Seagate Barracuda (dumping ground), 3x 8TB WD White-Label (Plex) (all 3 arrays in their respective Windows Parity storage spaces), Corsair RM750x, Windows 11 Education

Sleeper HP Pavilion A6137C

Spoiler

Intel Core i7 6700K @ 4.4GHz, 4x8GB G.SKILL Ares 1800MHz CL10, ASUS Z170M-E D3, 128GB Team MP33, 1TB Seagate Barracuda, 320GB Samsung Spinpoint (for video capture), MSI GTX 970 100ME, EVGA 650G1, Windows 10 Pro

Mac Mini (Late 2020)

Spoiler

Apple M1, 8GB RAM, 256GB, macOS Sonoma

Consoles: Softmodded 1.4 Xbox w/ 500GB HDD, Xbox 360 Elite 120GB Falcon, XB1X w/2TB MX500, Xbox Series X, PS1 1001, PS2 Slim 70000 w/ FreeMcBoot, PS4 Pro 7015B 1TB (retired), PS5 Digital, Nintendo Switch OLED, Nintendo Wii RVL-001 (black)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

When I want accurate and detailed I watch GN, when I want entertainment I watch LTT.  Its weird and kinda not good but this falls under meh for me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, porina said:

This was covered somewhere already. Reason given was along the line that the lengths are correct, but the numbers are rounded for presentation.

I was going to say it looks like just an honest mistake (OP's complaint looks bad but there's others where AMD is ahead due to misalignment so clearly no bias there*), but a mistake nonetheless, although this could very well explain it.  Hadn't thought of that.  Personally I would advise them to add an extra decimal point in cases like this for clarity, even if it's not a significant difference and may well even be within the margin of error.

 

*

Spoiler

Capture.PNG.52bbd2234204da9918d98b30ee57c320.PNG

 

Solve your own audio issues  |  First Steps with RPi 3  |  Humidity & Condensation  |  Sleep & Hibernation  |  Overclocking RAM  |  Making Backups  |  Displays  |  4K / 8K / 16K / etc.  |  Do I need 80+ Platinum?

If you can read this you're using the wrong theme.  You can change it at the bottom.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

I suspect they've run the tests multiple times and the printed numbers are just rounded. The bar lengths are accurate but the numbers aren't. If they're going to do that, maybe the charts should be clear that the benchmarks are averaging 2 or 3 (or more) test runs. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

Editors deserve death by snu snu.

Some people might say "nitpicking on details", but details are important.

Ex-EX build: Liquidfy C+... R.I.P.

Ex-build:

Meshify C – sold

Ryzen 5 1600x @4.0 GHz/1.4V – sold

Gigabyte X370 Aorus Gaming K7 – sold

Corsair Vengeance LPX 2x8 GB @3200 Mhz – sold

Alpenfoehn Brocken 3 Black Edition – it's somewhere

Sapphire Vega 56 Pulse – ded

Intel SSD 660p 1TB – sold

be Quiet! Straight Power 11 750w – sold

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have a different problem with that graph. That is the most ugliest background ever for it! And there's no justification!

 

Same applies to the thumbnail. Though to be honest, all latest thumbnails from LTT are $hit. As if designed by an 8 year old.

 

Take a look at how HardwareCanucks does it, LTT.

 

/rant

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, tmcclelland455 said:

Heh, don't bother with audio forums. They tend to just be degenerate as a whole. ;)

That's why I don't participate in ours any more, I have experience, I have an official education and I have worked in the field, so I went back once a few weeks ago only to have some little twerp with no clues try to educate me.  Not going back again, they can enjoy their vacuum chamber of diminishing returns. 

 

However I have to say when it comes to benchmarks like this, we do actually get numbers, and if they are different then they should be presented, if they aren't different enough then there is no need for a graph yes?

Grammar and spelling is not indicative of intelligence/knowledge.  Not having the same opinion does not always mean lack of understanding.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

Untitled-5.png.9353270e17be8d7ad76bfc8df5eea964.png

 

If the bars are the correct sizes then here are the "derounded" numbers:

 

one px = 100/56px = 1.79% of a fps

The Core I7 8700K scored a 17 + 26px meaning it got a score of (26px * 0.0179) + 17 = 17.46 fps - when rounding this would still be 17 but just barely.

The Ryzen 3 1300X then scored a 16 + (47.5px▲ * 0.0179) = 16.85 fps

 

▲NOTE: I know pixels can't really be half but the last pixel of the ryzen bar is of about 50% opacity, I took this to mean .5 of a pixel

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, xFluing said:

Whoever did this needs to be fired STAT, is his editor an Intel shill or something what happened here, why do the Ryzen 3 results have smaller bars than the Intel ones, even though the numbers are the exact same? This isn't just a fluke, it's in all of the graphs in the video, see for yourself: 

 

image.png.cc4bc6bca5b56e6001778847305102b1.png

It's like saying i am professional in video making but not comman senses

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×