Intel 9th Gen Paid Benchmarks Take Advantage of NDA Periods

[mr moose]

2 minutes ago, Trixanity said:

However in the big picture I was referring to the same happening in scenarios being more equal or sometimes even favoring AMD. Branding is very powerful. Same goes for track records, purchasing habits and many other areas.

Ahh yes, I see this happen in reality frequently. Many times I hear people looking at laptops tell the salesperson "I was told to only get Intel".  And to be honest, when the generally naive computer seller/buyer walks into a store of prebuilt computers and for the last decade the only CPU's worth getting was the Intel brand, it's of no surprise that they would think AMD is either new (less trusted in the eyes of a consumer) or not as good (if they were good there would be more of them).   Not being competitive puts you at a disadvantage, it doesn't matter how good AMD have been over the last year, they will have to be good for a few more years yet in the domestic market before the general plebs start recommending them.  

 

Also, I am a tight arse, I look for the bare minimum I need and buy the cheapest I can find.  Believe it or not this still lands me with a few Intel based products.

[Trixanity]

Just now, mr moose said:

Ahh yes, I see this happen in reality frequently. Many times I hear people looking at laptops tell the salesperson "I was told to only get Intel".  And to be honest, when the generally naive computer seller/buyer walks into a store of prebuilt computers and for the last decade the only CPU's worth getting was the Intel brand, it's of no surprise that they would think AMD is either new (less trusted in the eyes of a consumer) or not as good (if they were good there would be more of them).   Not being competitive puts you at a disadvantage, it doesn't matter how good AMD have been over the last year, they will have to be good for a few more years yet in the domestic market before the general plebs start recommending them.  

 

Also, I am a tight arse, I look for the bare minimum I need and buy the cheapest I can find.  Believe it or not this still lands me with a few Intel based products.

Of course. Intel isn't by definition bad and there are many scenarios where they're better. Some where they're price competitive. A lot where AMD doesn't exist either at all or in any meaningful capacity.

 

This is especially true for mobile.

 

However the DIY market and by extension the communities (who should know better) still fall victim to the same ideas.

[mr moose]

1 minute ago, Trixanity said:

 

However the DIY market and by extension the communities (who should know better) still fall victim to the same ideas.

I think there are a handful of fanboys who would buy for the brand only (or at best the current internet narrative of whatever is trending), but I would wager that most of us would buy based on price and performance.   About the only thing beyond price/performance that we consider is stability (known issues with cooling or crashing), outside of that I think generally the cheapest or the best is how people buy in their respective price brackets.

[Carclis]

23 minutes ago, Stefan Payne said:

Think you must not, know you must

Well I know that the 8700k is faster than the 2700x under the gaming conditions the paper was focused on. I don't think it's too much of a stretch to assume that the 9900k will at least be on par with the 8700k, especially given the price.

25 minutes ago, Stefan Payne said:

No, because they can, and there is no supply or there might be some slight issues with the i9-9900K. Seen that in the past that the prices were insanely high because of low yields

That's more or less what I said and I'm sure Intel's current 14nm shortage doesn't help.

[yian88]

1 hour ago, PacketMan said:

Remember when you could buy the i5 4690K instead of the i5 6600K just to save around 30 euros, just to be "outdated" within a year because AMD launches a competent CPU and Intel, FINALLY, launched a NEW CPU instead some shitty re-styled (re-named) CPU?

Intel is evil. And people know, but don't give a **** about it. Remember the security breaches a year ago? Intel made patches for it, patches that did worse than better, and customers complained a lot. Then Intel just said "meh, we got your money, we don't care anymore, no more patches for y'all". Intel is evil, Intel fucks us every single year with bad customer service, bad practices and misinformation.

I totally agree with you.

Sadly they do hire good engineers so they do release good products(if you dont take cost into account) but the market practices they have are against competition, innovation and consumers(most important). There are so many things wrong with the way intel does business. I remember when i had bought my first intel 4570 and B series mobo ifelt conflicted switched from AMD unlocked bios/cpu, that 4570 was like a golden chip it could run 3.6ghz 1.00Volt except i couldnt OC it i could have easily got 4.5ghz 1.25-1.3v but nope the difference in price at that time to go Z board + K cpu was like 150euro for me, totally BS. Not to mention the useless iGPU i never used that took 1/3 of the die space instead of extra cores or cache. 

 

I feel so happy now with R5 2600 unlocked without paying extra reaching 4.1-4.2ghz and  has SMT for free, ty AMD, they might have 0-10% less FPS in games but its worth the trade, in 2020 i will upgrade to Zen3(or zen2+) Ryzen 4700/4700x 8c/16T on 7nm+ without hassle or needing new RAM/Mobo, hopefully they dont switch to DDR5 by then, since they will support AM4 to 2020 that means DDR4 until 2021+ AM5 comes out, DDR5 is useless for the foreseeable future on desktop, since it increases frequency at the massive increase of latency (e.g. ddr5 4400mhz at 42CL is crap) so benefit is almost 0, it has no density increase, and prices will probably be higher than DDR4, so that means its pointless, hopefully they delay DDR5 for as much as possible, 2022/2023.

[asus killer]

people go crazy about nothing. This is Intel buying a study, of course they weren't gonna tweak the ryzen or care to. This is marketing.

[Carclis]

2 minutes ago, asus killer said:

people go crazy about nothing. This is Intel buying a study, of course they weren't gonna tweak the ryzen or care to. This is marketing.

They can buy all the studies they want, it really doesn't bother me. The issue is that the comparisons being made do not showcase performance comparisons in any meaningful way. The testing conditions are unrealistic ie 9900k + 1080ti at 1080p with only medium settings. Furthermore the Intel systems used the 3200Mhz XMP profile of the memory whilst the AMD systems didn't because...reasons? Might I also add that the Ryzen system was tested using the stock cooler with the Intel one using a Noctua U14s.

What conclusions were they trying to draw by intentionally handicapping the competing system in ways the consumers never would?

[asus killer]

Just now, Carclis said:

They can buy all the studies they want, it really doesn't bother me. The issue is that the comparisons being made do not showcase performance comparisons in any meaningful way. The testing conditions are unrealistic ie 9900k + 1080ti at 1080p with only medium settings. Furthermore the Intel systems used the 3200Mhz XMP profile of the memory whilst the AMD systems didn't because...reasons? Might I also add that the Ryzen system was tested using the stock cooler with the Intel one using a Noctua U14s.

What conclusions were they trying to draw by intentionally handicapping the competing system in ways the consumers never would?

if you get worked out about this you will get a heart attack when you know how most companies trick you every single day. I worked for a gigantic multinational company that puts advertisements on tv with specialists on the field defending the product, i knew them all, they were just company employees, most had the degrees but didn't even practiced and had back office duties. Of course they don't disclaim that.

They disclaimed with was commissioned by Intel, from there it's just marketing.

[Carclis]

1 minute ago, asus killer said:

if you get worked out about this you will get a heart attack when you know how most companies trick you every single day.

Good for them. Generally speaking this market is free of that. The nearest thing we tend to get is cherry picked results ie Intel beating Ryzen in Starcraft 2 (utilises only one CPU core). Or even Ryzen demonstrations which almost always showed how AMD compared to Intel in rendering performance.

4 minutes ago, asus killer said:

Of course they don't disclaim that.

They disclaimed with was commissioned by Intel, from there it's just marketing.

Well they actually had a clear description of their methodology and all disclaimers which showed their exact steps which is why we know how illogical their methodology is. Quite the paradox when you look at the phrase right at the top of their report; A Principled Technologies report: Hands-on testing. Real-world results.

[bowrilla]

21 minutes ago, asus killer said:

people go crazy about nothing. This is Intel buying a study, of course they weren't gonna tweak the ryzen or care to. This is marketing.

No, you're missing the point here. Intel put basically every single magazine and blog under an NDA in order for them to get samples ahead of the oficial release so they can test it and benchmark it and have everything ready when the chips finally come out. At the same time they're offering preorders. Nothing bad here. But if you pay a company to make rigged benchmarks and those get published during NDA you're a) screwing all magazines and tech blogs over that are bound by the NDA and b) you're screwing customers over that think "great, some early benchmarks are out and the gain is massive" when it is a paid marketing stunt. People go nuts over sponsored youtube videos that did not explicitly make it clear who sponsored it but this is ok? How? This is a very shady attempt to get people to pre order it under false promises. No, the 9900k won't be 50% faster than a 2700X. I Intel was confident enough about that chip and its performance they wouldn't rely on this shitty tactics. But Intel pooped their pants. AMD got them on the wrong foot. Intel hasn't made a big leap in generations, they can't get their 10nm process running, their 14nm process capacities are maxed out to a point that they're now forced to outsource chipset production on an older 22nm node, they had to invest billions into their 10nm process and AMD's monthly shares skyrocket to the point of domination. Last month AMD had a share of ~80% of all sold CPUs. 

[The Benjamins]

29 minutes ago, asus killer said:

people go crazy about nothing. This is Intel buying a study, of course they weren't gonna tweak the ryzen or care to. This is marketing.

This is not marketing, they paid a 3rd party review site to write a article about a test done pay a paid group of test that hinder competitor results to make it LOOK like a standard 3rd party review.

 

It is not obvious that the article is paid for, which is the deceiving part.

[asus killer]

11 minutes ago, The Benjamins said:

This is not marketing, they paid a 3rd party review site to write a article about a test done pay a paid group of test that hinder competitor results to make it LOOK like a standard 3rd party review.

 

It is not obvious that the article is paid for, which is the deceiving part.

come on, the first paragraph of the study (apart from the title) is "A study commissioned by Intel Corporation". 

Edit: Also i didn't get the part of the paid review site? what are you talking about? 

 

15 minutes ago, Carclis said:

Well they actually had a clear description of their methodology and all disclaimers which showed their exact steps which is why we know how illogical their methodology is. Quite the paradox when you look at the phrase right at the top of their report; A Principled Technologies report: Hands-on testing. Real-world results.

the company bought a study for their product, it was never meant to be impartial or logical in the way you say it. If they wanted impartial and logic they would have one for free from Jesus tech were we would test everything and then even some extra.

 

[Exotath]

http://www.principledtechnologies.com/

 

They pretty clearly say they are a marketing firm. Benchmarking/testing is basically a presentation tool for them. 

[The Benjamins]

2 minutes ago, asus killer said:

come on, the first paragraph of the study (apart from the title) is "A study commissioned by Intel Corporation"

 

 

I am waking up, so i change my stance.

 

Principled Technologies should be ashamed by their report it does not accurately represent "Hands-on testing. Real-world results."

 

 

[Carclis]

5 minutes ago, asus killer said:

the company bought a study for their product, it was never meant to be impartial or logical in the way you say it. If they wanted impartial and logic they would have one for free from Jesus tech were we would test everything and then even some extra.

But the whole purpose of a commissioned benchmark is to have something that presents a use case for your product where it makes sense. It doesn't have to look at every aspect, just what the product does best. In this case the sponsored review might as well have been done by Intel itself. To be honest I wouldn't have as much of an issue with it if that was the case. My problem (and I suspect many others here) is that they are only using a third party as a false pretence and intentionally doing it whilst simultaneously abusing their NDA powers. As has already been demonstrated here this has lead to other tech journalists improperly reporting on the 9th generation Intel performance without replicating the testing methodology disclaimers that the original report included. I wouldn't be surprised if the next site that reported it omitted the fact that it was a sponsored review.

[JoostinOnline]

3 hours ago, yian88 said:

Thats why you should buy AMD for now unless your business/life depends on it, if its just for desktop/gaming buy AMD, its like voting with your wallet.

Intel has been doing these bad practices since forever, i know you would say "but i buy whats best  bang for $ at the moment" which is not intel but those 5 extra FPS in gaming gets you to buy intel, yeah and then AMD makes no profits, cant compete, intel gets monopoly again, uses bad practices, sandbags performance and you get no better cpu's for 5 years+, locked down CPU's and motherboards that leave you with no upgrade path, also 1rd of the die area of  silicon on these chips is useless iGPU, which you pay for.

I was surprised when i bought my Ryzen 2600 12 thread CPu its like a stock i7 8700 in performance for 1/3 of the cost, yes 1/3 because of low stocks all intel prices skyrocketed so now its the best time for AMD.

No fanboism just if you care at all about future hardware and prices (and if you are reading this article you should care) you should help AMD be competitive when they have good products, like Ryzen.

It's funny you feel that way, because AMD was guilty of very similar tactics in their Ryzen release. In benchmarks they refused to do apples to apples comparisons. They were seemingly giving Intel "advantages" in the benchmarks, such as more RAM. Once people got their pre-orders they realized it was to cover up that Ryzen couldn't handle high RAM capacities. It was eventually fixed (along with their other problems), and a lot of people seem to have forgotten.

 

The point isn't that "Intel/AMD is evil!", but rather that corporations generally act in their own self interest, and glorifying one doesn't really check out if they've been around more than a few years.

[Misanthrope]

4 hours ago, Spotty said:

This is why you always wait for independent reviews.

But do you want to live any more days of your live without 8/16 for your gaming rig!? Oh wait, Ryzen has done that for over a year now it doesn't works here anymore.

 

What bothers me is that while some reviewers have some semblance of integrity, guys like Linus will probably talk shit about intel for doing this while still accepting their sponsored video money and just try to keep it to stupid contests, optane, etc. But make no mistake: many of the same guys telling you intel are assholes for this still take their money and promote their stuff and why would you assume intel doesn't cheats on those areas as well?

 

Everybody cheats and as long as there's paid content that appears as full videos they cannot be trusted, not even the "independent reviews" even since without guys like Hardware Unboxed or Gamers Nexus kicking up dust for everybody they probably wouldn't fucking care.

[asus killer]

25 minutes ago, Carclis said:

 In this case the sponsored review might as well have been done by Intel itself. 

its not a sponsored review, there is a difference, its a study or a benchmark.

I imagine there would be some legal issues with Intel doing the test themselves using a Ryzen, that's why they "commissioned"  it

[Carclis]

45 minutes ago, asus killer said:

its not a sponsored review, there is a difference, its a study or a benchmark.

I imagine there would be some legal issues with Intel doing the test themselves using a Ryzen, that's why they "commissioned"  it

Alright, it's not a review. But I don't see how Intel would get into legal trouble for benchmarking a Ryzen CPU when AMD has been testing Intel parts and including the results in their own advertising.

[yian88]

21 minutes ago, JoostinOnline said:

It's funny you feel that way, because AMD was guilty of very similar tactics in their Ryzen release. In benchmarks they refused to do apples to apples comparisons. They were seemingly giving Intel "advantages" in the benchmarks, such as more RAM. Once people got their pre-orders they realized it was to cover up that Ryzen couldn't handle high RAM capacities. It was eventually fixed (along with their other problems), and a lot of people seem to have forgotten.

 

The point isn't that "Intel/AMD is evil!", but rather that corporations generally act in their own self interest, and glorifying one doesn't really check out if they've been around more than a few years.

Yes AMD isnt a saint, and i think i made my point clear that im not glorifying AMD or any company, just simply "Vote with your waller" as a consumer and buy from AMD aswell when they have good products, especially since they need the cash to compete further on, if you are going to keep buying intel for 5% more fps while they do these practices regularly then it means you dont care, if you get screwed over by intel next time you upgrade thank yourself.

Sadly this is the state of the desktop CPU market, only 2 companies and AMD did poorly until recently, i see no reason to support intel by  buying their products at this time. Last time i bought intel left a really sour taste in my mouth, and nothing has changed since then (4000 series cpus), so i wont recommend intel or put up with their shit, unless AMD fucks up again with really poor products, then it will be a really shitty situation, having only 2 cpu companies and both being bad is not something anyone desires.

Intel has a long list of wrongdoings, while AMD has one or two slip-ups here and there, cant be perfect.

[Valentyn]

2 hours ago, Carclis said:

They can buy all the studies they want, it really doesn't bother me. The issue is that the comparisons being made do not showcase performance comparisons in any meaningful way. The testing conditions are unrealistic ie 9900k + 1080ti at 1080p with only medium settings. Furthermore the Intel systems used the 3200Mhz XMP profile of the memory whilst the AMD systems didn't because...reasons? Might I also add that the Ryzen system was tested using the stock cooler with the Intel one using a Noctua U14s.

What conclusions were they trying to draw by intentionally handicapping the competing system in ways the consumers never would?

 

They list they enabled Game Mode in Ryzen master for all AMD cpus'. Which disabled half of the CPU cores. It's a feature for Epyc; but they had it enabled on the 2700X also.

Which means it was running as 4c/8t with hobbled memory.

[thorhammerz]

2 hours ago, JoostinOnline said:

The point isn't that "Intel/AMD is evil!", but rather that corporations generally act in their own self interest, and glorifying one doesn't really check out if they've been around more than a few years.

Corporations have no friends, only interests .

 

Applies to any organization, regardless of whether they are government or corporate, since they're (still, for now) all run by humans.

[asus killer]

this is not ok but this is normal.

[Suika]

5 hours ago, Trixanity said:

In other words people are still going to be paying $589 for the Intel product instead of paying $329 for the AMD product in order to get those percentages and the brand.

Fixed in bold.

 

Intel's listed pricing was 1k bulk purchases, not MSRP. Kind of misleading for those who don't know any better.

[jagdtigger]

2 hours ago, Misanthrope said:

guys like Linus will probably talk shit about intel for doing this while still accepting their sponsored video money

That is integrity. While they do accept money from them they dont feel like it that it should change their opinion. Like when i accept my monthly wage from my employer(a company, not important which) but that wont stop me from telling my opinion about the products we make be it negative or positive.