Blind CPU test: 2700k vs 8150k

[Arkaign]

Cool story bro!

That's not AMD bashing, that's just the honest truth. There are times where AMD makes sense, but gaming by and large you get an Intel chip and an AMD GPU (or Nvidia whenever they have the better deal, but it's largely been AMD with the better price/$ GPUs for a while now).

 

[LOL_Wut_Axel]

That's not AMD bashing, that's just the honest truth. There are times where AMD makes sense, but gaming by and large you get an Intel chip and an AMD GPU (or Nvidia whenever they have the better deal, but it's largely been AMD with the better price/$ GPUs for a while now).

Exactly. That's why I'm currently eying the 1.5GB Radeon HD 7950 if the price is right. For me, Intel CPUs with AMD GPUs is the way to go, though I'll keep my GTX 460 for folding purposes.

 

[Mallibu]

Your brain can't tell the difference. The brain 'memorizes' an image about 1/15th of a second, then it moves to next. So there is no way a human can 'see' 60 fps. Nothing to do with being blind, is just that our own internal computer has limits.

This is so much misinformation in so few lines,it makes me lol. The "scientific" info you're trying to say is proven wrong many times across similar discussions. Human brain can process thousands of images per second,and it certainly isn't countable by "fps" because RL ain't a panel with refresh rate. Get your fact straight before playing the "little scientist".

ps. For more info about that matter,feel free to google that stuff or open a poll if people notice difference between 60 fps vs 120 fps,because i can easily tell difference between 40 - 50 -60 -etc and i don't have alien eyes:twisted:

 

[Ferzerp]

Edit:

I'm curious about all of you who talk about who performance is completely objective and subjective difference should be ignored:

Would you be happier with a micro-stuttering dual GPU setup that makes 100 fps average, or a single faster GPU setup that offers 95 fps in the same situation?

That is not subjective. The variance in time between frames can be measured and recorded, reviewers don't bother, and it's a big hole in reviews currently.

 

[TakeNoPrisoners]

I can't believe that Bethesda won't release a patch that does what SkyBoost does. How long would it take their huge, paid team of developers to do this? Two, three days? Considering that one unpaid guy did it in his spare time in a few weeks. It's absolutely disgusting.

Skyrim beta patch.

Use it, love it, shut it.

 

[gramboh]

That is not subjective. The variance in time between frames can be measured and recorded, reviewers don't bother, and it's a big hole in reviews currently.

I've seen articles that do this analysis (variance) and I think it is important as it is a key metric in how smooth a game feels. Can't remember where I saw it, but I wish more reviews would incorporate it.

 

[biostud]

In most systems you'll probably not notice the difference between a stock i7-2600K and the A8.

But the conclusion will still be that when you look at overclocking and performance/watt, intel is a clear winner.

 

[grkM3]

intel should do the same test with 2 or 3 7970 gpus and run it at the highest res with 3 monitors and then let the people decide witch one is smoother.

 

[Ferzerp]

I've seen articles that do this analysis (variance) and I think it is important as it is a key metric in how smooth a game feels. Can't remember where I saw it, but I wish more reviews would incorporate it.

Initially, I thought just the standard deviation in difference the time before a frame and time after a frame for each frame might give us a useful value, but I am not sure how that would respond to areas where we go from 90 fps down to 45 fps due to image complexity. If it happens rapidly, it should only show for a few frames though. Without the raw data for many tests, it's hard to develop a model to effectivly quantify this in a meaningful way.

 

[sm625]

lol I cant believe that 5 people would actually vote for the intel 2105 system.

If you really think about it, those five people surely knew that the system they were voting for was an intel, and they knew why it performed worse. But they just didnt care because for them it wasnt about an honest assessment. That type of mentality is a product of our political system, which is all about rationalizing bad choices.

 

[tynopik]

Back on topic all AMD did is a *fast enough* test.

If that was the case, you would expect a more even distribution of votes.

The fact there there was a strong preference for AMD indicates something interesting was going on.

I would dearly love for someone else to replicate the test.

The results are surprising. That doesn't necessarily mean they are bogus, but it does mean it needs further study.

 

[gramboh]

If that was the case, you would expect a more even distribution of votes.

The fact there there was a strong preference for AMD indicates something interesting was going on.

I would dearly love for someone else to replicate the test.

The results are surprising. That doesn't necessarily mean they are bogus, but it does mean it needs further study.

This. I would have expected the results to be 50/50 if the game was not CPU limited (which it shouldn't be). If there is a tangible benefit to gaming on the Bulldozer/7970 platform, AMD should be able to quantify it and market based on it, even if it is "feel".