quote: It provides Intel and AMD with a chance to truly put their processors' power prowess to the test in an unbiased benchmark
quote: T I'm saying now that we are comparing systems, comparing CPUs is not possible
quote: (and incidently we are comparing systems with a 4 month gap in hardware availability - this Intel system isn't even available yet).
quote: Again comparing AMD's only against Intel's best, Intel beats AMD just barely by using 269 watts at 100% load against 276.
quote: But then Intel gets a bonus because it does 3x the work for those watts, giving it over 3x the score. If we had a test system and swapped in one Intel CPU for another and then compared performance/watt it would be a much fairer comparison
quote: So basically the only use I see out of these numbers is helping a system administrator pick between Intel by server manufacturer X and Intel by server manufacterer Y. In this case I see the system administrator as already having decided between AMD and Intel - though it could be used to help decide this - and wanting to find the best performance per watt per server cost.
quote: This is because SPEC is not a consumer level benchmark suite
quote: Precisely, that is the intent of the benchmark
quote: we had a test system and swapped in one Intel CPU for another and then compared performance/watt it would be a much fairer comparison
quote: In terms of efficiency of the PSU as you try to argue, it does not matter.
quote: Yes, comparing system to system is the intent of the benchmark. However, the article said it was the intent of the benchmark to compare CPU to CPU, which it is not.
quote: At a lowly cost of $1,600 for the software, Intel and AMD should be eager to put this independent benchmarking suite to work.