That old chestnut again? Intel compares their current gen hardware against older NVIDIA kit

Subject: General Tech | August 17, 2016 - 12:41 PM |
Tagged: nvidia, Intel, HPC, Xeon Phi, maxwell, pascal, dirty pool

There is a spat going on between Intel and NVIDIA over the slide below, as you can read about over at Ars Technica.  It seems that Intel have reached into the industries bag of dirty tricks and polished off an old standby, testing new hardware and software against older products from their competitors.  In this case it was high performance computing products which were tested, Intel's new Xeon Phi against NVIDIA's Maxwell, tested on an older version of the Caffe AlexNet benchmark.

NVIDIA points out that not only would they have done better than Intel if an up to date version of the benchmarking software was used, but that the comparison should have been against their current architecture, Pascal.  This is not quite as bad as putting undocumented flags into compilers to reduce the performance of competitors chips or predatory discount programs but it shows that the computer industry continues to have only a passing acquaintance with fair play and honest competition.

View Full Size

"At this juncture I should point out that juicing benchmarks is, rather sadly, par for the course. Whenever a chip maker provides its own performance figures, they are almost always tailored to the strength of a specific chip—or alternatively, structured in such a way as to exacerbate the weakness of a competitor's product."

Here is some more Tech News from around the web:

Tech Talk

Source: Ars Technica

Video News

August 17, 2016 | 01:34 PM - Posted by Anonymously Anonymous (not verified)

I like the part where a company that does shady things gets mad at another company for pulling one on them.

August 17, 2016 | 01:42 PM - Posted by Anonymous (not verified)

So, it is fine if Nvidia gimps their games with gameworks for everyone else, but this isn't fair?
This 'dirty trick' belongs in Nvidia's bag.
Reminds of of the 3.5GB/.5GB RAM gimping... but, they cry about Intel. LOL.

August 17, 2016 | 02:06 PM - Posted by Jeremy Hellstrom

Huh, are you reading what I wrote or just your own mental reconstruction of the post?

August 17, 2016 | 02:18 PM - Posted by Anonymous (not verified)

Nvidia does not get away with Gimping their Pro accelerator SKUs of any compute like Nvidia does with their consumer Kit. The HPC/Server/Workstation market is on a whole different level compared to the consumer/Gaming markets with the HPC/Server/Workstation market having their own PHD systems analysts and programmers, and also the benchmarking software is very good with folks that Know how things work! So no benchmarking tricks can get by those pros!

So no such large group(Gaming mostly) of relatively uneducated folks can ever be found in the professional HPC/Workstation/Server markets where million+ dollar deals are common and even specialized consultants(PHDs) are hired to assure compliance on multi-million dollar Hardware/software purchases. And it’s right that Intel is mostly comparing its Xeon Phi SKUs to some 28nm older Nvidia SKUs because Intel’s marketing does not want to show the Xeon Phi any further behind than it already is relative to the GPUs from Both Nvidia and AMD at 28nm, let alone how far Intel is behind the GPU makers at 14nm with their newer GPU SKUs.

August 17, 2016 | 04:04 PM - Posted by JohnGR

Intel playing with benchmarks to show that they are superior. Who would have thought that....

August 17, 2016 | 09:31 PM - Posted by drbaltazar (not verified)

Ya I read this. And Nvidia didn't look too happy!I wonder if this is why nvidia went nuclear on the laptop nvidia planning to beat the xeon phi with a laptop .if I didn't know better I would say yes. Just to shut Intel up . Go nvidia go

Post new comment

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
  • Allowed HTML tags: <a> <em> <strong> <cite> <code> <ul> <ol> <li> <dl> <dt> <dd> <blockquote><p><br>
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.

More information about formatting options

This question is for testing whether you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.