Spot the difference

L

leathered

n00b
Joined
Oct 28, 2005
Messages
27
http://www.sharkyextreme.com/hardware/cpu/article.php/3261_3565416__3
http://www.sharkyextreme.com/hardware/cpu/article.php/3261_3565416__4

Instructions:

1: Open above links in separate tabs/windows.
2: Scroll both pages down to the CPU graph.
3: Rapidly click between both tabs/windows while hysterically laughing/crying/shaking fist.
4: Nominate PC Mark for the 'fucked benchmark of the year' award.
5: Nominate the reviewer's comment "it is a bit strange that even the Pentium D can take it to the Athlon 64 X2 processors" for understatement of the year.
 
They probably both are. My point is that something must be seriously wrong if a CPU that consistantly wins ~90% of real world benches across all review sites can lose so badly in a canned one like this. Even more striking is the inexplicable difference between '04 and '05 when the basic architecture of CPUs hasn't changed.

Now if we can have no confidence in PC Mark, how can anyone feel comfortable with Futuremark's random number generator that is 3D Mark?

I'll make no secret that I despise synthetic benchmarks. A lot of hardware sites have sprung up over recent years that base their entire reviews on them and I think it's partly down to lazyness, it's far easier to load up a 'point and click' benchmark and publish the results without even beginning to discuss how the program calculated those numbers.
 
And this is why no one gives a sh*t about synthetic benchmarks. Except 3DMark05. That game is straight p00nage. :rolleyes: :rolleyes:
 
Just goes to show how benchmarks can be written to the strength of whatever they want it to be, then brag that its better when its no different.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top