What are you talking about?So, i don't think that is how any of that works.
Especially proving something does not work and should no work like that!
Would you agree that you are a proven Intel Shill because i perceived you as such?
Does it become proof when you write a thing X times and i perceive you as such Y times?
I hope and think not!
Proof would start with witness testimony of people being payed and doing the deed.
Or bills showing the payments.
A related issue is the location of your mentioned issues with for example Chiphell.
Every time you bring them up, it makes me think you misunderstood or misconstrued something i or others said as a Attack on you in the way you accuse those Chiphell people off.
Which appears to be wrong.
Strictly hypothetically speaking:
If I were to say that AMD makes the Best CPUs!
You might disagree.
You might ask me why i think that.
When i then Say that I don't want to be silenced and that i got silenced by bullies earlier,
how does that make me seem?
Because that is how you appear to me right now.
It doesn't get better when i would then claim that it wasn't you and that it was some other place on the web.
And it gets worse if i were to keep doing that instead of answering your god damn questions.
Now to a more real "doing my own benchmarks" part of the topic.
You are hopefully aware that Benchmarking is very hard, at least propper benchmarking!
Why is that?
Well, each Vendor does things differently.
Bioses often apply overclocks on default to make the manufracturer and the board look better.
Just because you have set it to use JEDEC or XMP settings, it does not mean that ALL the Timings, especially the weirder ones? Second, third?
are actually the same and those can have an effect.
Another obvious issue are Powerlimits and Boosts that aren't as sure to apply as one thinks.
One Example i can give of my own is with a Rome 64C ES.
It does about 6K CB20 points.
Considering a 7401P 24C Naples does more then 7K points, that is pretty bad.
So i could now scream and shout how shit Rome CPUs are.
I am not doing that.
Because it should be obvious that there are issues with my test-setup.
The CPU has a Turbo of 2Ghz and a baseclock of 1.4Ghz on all cores.
It has no issues doing both in idle and few core loads.
The moment all cores are loaded, core clock drops to 400mhz.
So one could argue that at 400mhz, 6K CB20 points are actually not bad.
Powerusage is reported at about 80W total and the last time i looked,
i noticed the core temperature on one or more cores was at 90°C and more.
The rest were fine at like 40°C.
A reasonable question from you might be if i were running it without a cooler.
I sadly did, with a TR NHu12, but that would have been a funny way to massacre the performance.
Thinking about this now, maybe its bad TIM on a chiplet.
Or a Power and temperature reporting issue.
I will have to investigate that further.
Still, there is valid criticism to be had that my specific CPU and setup isn't behaving as it should.
Using that to spout intels superiority in server hardware, would not speak well for my mental faculties and character.
It might still be my valid opinion, but not Truth or Facts.
EDIT: CB23 to 20, my mistake.
Thinking about it, 6K CB20 Points at 80W isn't that bad either, right?
Ok, naa its shit. a 5700G does that too and its a 65W part.
You're saying that, by testing at down-clocked conditions, with limitations that prevents the hardware from working correctly, your opinion will still be valid?
Yes, benchmarking is hard, but it's toughness is in it's depth, or its methology, it's analytics, not because it's hard to decide whether should we use some non-stock or non-reasonable weird settings that will do good to no one, or should we compare two things in different test conditions. Tests are hard because it needs to reflect real use cases, not because we need to concider when to cheat.
If I need to post something like a transaction record between Chiphell and AMD, I don't have any. It's not like they'll just randomly post it up on the internet anyway.Every time you bring them up, it makes me think you misunderstood or misconstrued something i or others said as a Attack on you in the way you accuse those Chiphell people off.
Which appears to be wrong.
But their behavior is absolutely the same with other payed speech controllers and commenters. 99% certain is still not 100%, but they have intentions, deeds, public effects and past records, enough for any court to deem them guilty of these actions in collusion with AMD. And why do you seem to be mad about this, without talking about any counter proof?
Perhaps even if I managed to get that very evidence to make it 100%, you opinion will still not change. Because I'm still talking negatively, and this somehow makes you think I'm not being objective.
By the way, I never said any brand is absolutely better. I have stressed application-based product selection multiple times, and I didn't even posted much of the test results to completely prove anything is better than anything yet. But what I know is that, Intel has never done such shitty things, for now.