Why did AMD quit BAPCo board: Poor Bulldozer performance on SYSmark 2012 or Intel bias?

Why did AMD quit BAPCo board: Poor Bulldozer performance on SYSmark 2012 or Intel bias?

Summary: The latest dust-up in the AMD-versus-Intel never-ending conflict concerns BAPCo, a consortium of tech companies that releases a set of benchmarks, including, most importantly, SYSmark. This week, AMD quit the BAPCo board, and speculation over why has run rampant ever since.

SHARE:

The latest dust-up in the AMD-versus-Intel never-ending conflict concerns BAPCo, a consortium of tech companies that releases a set of benchmarks, including, most importantly, SYSmark. This week, AMD quit the BAPCo board, and speculation over why has run rampant ever since.

Officially, AMD claims that the latest version of SYSmark, the just-released SYSmark 2012, fails to keep up with current computing trends and ignores the increasing role the GPU plays in computing tasks. Since AMD is trying to differentiate itself from Intel by boosting the GPU in its new chip designs, SYSmark's reliance on just the CPU, in AMD's opinion, doesn't reflect everyday computing performance.

That's the official word. But conspiracy theorists think there's more to the story than just that. Most sensationally, Bright Side of News has run a piece with startling claims from "unnamed sources," most notably that AMD decided to pull out of BAPCo because its forthcoming Bulldozer chips delivered underwhelming performance on SYSmark 2012, and that the company has spent resources toward surreptitiously undermining BAPCo through negative PR campaigns. According to the piece, AMD's paranoia about SYSmark is related to the benchmark's role in securing government contracts and the chip company's fear that it won't win new contracts with poor SYSmark 2012 results.

AMD supporters not only question the veracity of that report, but also point out that Nvidia and Via have recently quit the BAPCo board as well. That, fanboys argue, is proof that this isn't just a case of sour grapes for AMD, but a sign that chip companies are tired of Intel's dominance of the BAPCo benchmark-creation process. Those companies also have a stake in the GPU game, where Intel has a performance disadvantage. BAPCo detractors point to allegations that Intel has been able to write the code for BAPCo benchmarks in the past and requires BAPCo to use its code compiler as proof that AMD and other chip makers will never get a fair shake on SYSmark.

For its part, BAPCo claims that AMD voted in favor of more than 80 percent of SYSmark 2012's development milestones, and that BAPCo unanimously accepted all of AMD's proposals.

So is AMD being a "big baby" for quitting BAPCo, or has Intel's purported influence over SYSmark just reached the breaking point for other semiconductor companies? Either way, there will now be even more scrutiny over which benchmarks reviewers use to measure new processors, like AMD's Bulldozers, and what those results are. Obviously, AMD needs its Llano and Bulldozer chips to test as competitively as possible to blunt Intel's sales advantage with its Sandy Bridge processors. But what "competitively" means and how it's measured will now draw more attention than ever.

Topics: Hardware, CXO, Enterprise Software, Intel, Legal, Processors, IT Employment

Kick off your day with ZDNet's daily email newsletter. It's the freshest tech news and opinion, served hot. Get it.

Talkback

18 comments
Log in or register to join the discussion
  • Well, since AMD's competitor NVidia and Via also quit, the answer to your

    ... question is obvious. And, some of projected specifications for the SYSmark 2012 test are indeed utterly ridiculous (1024x768 resolution for one of the tests, anyone?). These 20% of features that AMD (and NVidia, Via) did not vote for are totally enough to make the test half useless. <br><br>Basically, BAPCo nearly cut out input of OpenCL, GPGPU type of performance, which is very convenient for Intel since its graphic co-processors within its chips are usually much weaker than these within AMD's chips. NVidia and VIA also affected by this typical Intel's behaviour of pushing its primary buyers (which are other participants in BAPCo) <b>to vote the way Intel needs it</b>.
    DDERSSS
    • RE: Why did AMD quit BAPCo board: Poor Bulldozer performance on SYSmark 2012 or Intel bias?

      @DeRSSS wouldn't surprise me in the least. Intel strong arms everyone. They have been for the longest time. Although atleast their chips these days are fast, they still can't play a fair game.
      Jimster480
  • Anyone with half of brain can see through this

    slander campaign. Amd and Nvidia hardly agrees on anything and then you have not Amd and Nvidia, but Via also leaving a the same time . 2 might be a conspiracy but 3 is way beyond that. the fact that 3 competitors left for one reason or another is reason enough for anyone to know that this isn't a Poor bulldozer issue. Amd took the low end with bobcat, the mid end is llano's for the taking easily and if bulldozer pulls off well some people are going to be losing a lot of market share. and this time it would be worst than the athlon days for Intel.
    saneblane
  • RE: Why did AMD quit BAPCo board: Poor Bulldozer performance on SYSmark 2012 or Intel bias?

    Interesting
    MoeFugger
  • RE: Why did AMD quit BAPCo board: Poor Bulldozer performance on SYSmark 2012 or Intel bias?

    If you think about it, Intel makes the chipset and the Drivers for it... I see no reason why this Claim couldn't be true...

    As for AMD's claims, their APU's are kicking the Atom's Ass (If it had one that is).
    slickjim
    • RE: Why did AMD quit BAPCo board: Poor Bulldozer performance on SYSmark 2012 or Intel bias?

      @Peter Perry
      well, let's hope for the best for amd. it will be good for us consumers...
      kc63092@...
  • INTEL BRIBED RETAILERS, BRIBED MANUFACTURERS, MESSED WITH X86 COMPILERS...

    The recent antitrust litigation in NY revealed a bunch of subpoenaed evidence from Intel that would make a mafia boss blush.

    In the NY AG's official complaint, Intel was discovered to have bribed and threatened Dell to the tune of 6-BILLION dollars not to use AMD products.

    Europe's antitrust authority discovered that Intel was bribing MediaMarkt not to sell AMD products in retail.

    IBM and HP apparently were threatened and bribed in exchange for some degree of exclusivity plus dropping plans for AMD products.

    Now we can add SYSmark (I mean "IntelMARK") to Intel's disgustingly dirty laundry.

    Wow, maybe Intel's CEO should consider a mafia boss position somewhere?
    RichardEich
  • RE: Why did AMD quit BAPCo board: Poor Bulldozer performance on SYSmark 2012 or Intel bias?

    Everything will be known when bulldozer is launched.Lets wait and see.
    @mgcguy probably you are right on the target.Here in India only dell and recently lenovo has amd product and their ratio is around 20:1 (intel : amd). This situation sucks.
    Sboo12
  • RE: Why did AMD quit BAPCo board: Poor Bulldozer performance on SYSmark 2012 or Intel bias?

    GPU has become very important. For example my friend and I purchased laptops around the same time. His has a more powerful Intel C2D and mine a dual core Celeron. His computer uses an intel GPU and mine Nvidia. He's out in the market for a new laptop because it won't play well HD on his 42 inch LCD TV. Yet mine still doing HD just fine. I have to think there is some truth to AMD's claim since two of it's competitors have left more or less at the same time? Not to mention following similar path where the GPU is more important to overall performance.
    rdiablo
  • RE: Why did AMD quit BAPCo board: Poor Bulldozer performance on SYSmark 2012 or Intel bias?

    I find it a bit interesting that games is the only main thing that enthusiasts like to compare chips with. what about browsers, graphics like movie making or photo editing, PDF readers, everyday things like that. Games is not the whole point!
    brettze
    • RE: Why did AMD quit BAPCo board: Poor Bulldozer performance on SYSmark 2012 or Intel bias?

      @brettze many things get compared. Not only games. It's just that gsmea are the most demanding pieces of software. So performance in them means performance in other places.
      Jimster480
  • RE: Why did AMD quit BAPCo board: Poor Bulldozer performance on SYSmark 2012 or Intel bias?

    which chip can defrag, check disk , scan for anti virus, etc the fastest?
    Or moving files between hard drives and back up drives or
    brettze
    • RE: Why did AMD quit BAPCo board: Poor Bulldozer performance on SYSmark 2012 or Intel bias?

      @brettze those are all hard drive relates benchmarks and have very little to do with the CPU.
      Jimster480
  • RE: Why did AMD quit BAPCo board: Poor Bulldozer performance on SYSmark 2012 or Intel bias?

    It is not all about gaming, I completely disagree. GPU's become more and more important in video playback, movie making and even browsing due to increased flash based content on the web and video playback. Even the new windows vista windows 7 desktop visuals are GPU based, not to mention apple and mobile devices. It is the reason AMD started making chips such as Llano that have more GPU than CPU power. The GPU is much better equipped for calculating a lot of applications then is the CPU. It therefore is completely unfair to have a benchmark tool that is mainly CPU based, whilst a GPU could do a lot of the work much faster.
    SalvadorOliano
  • RE: Why did AMD quit BAPCo board: Poor Bulldozer performance on SYSmark 2012 or Intel bias?

    It's this type of stuff that keeps my buying AMD products over Intel. Performance is one thing, a fanged bully is another. Both are my choices for AMD.
    dinosorensen@...
    • RE: Why did AMD quit BAPCo board: Poor Bulldozer performance on SYSmark 2012 or Intel bias?

      @dinosorensen@... Intel may be a big bully. And I have always been buying AMD. But ivy bridge is on the horizon. And it doesnt look good for anyone but Intel.
      Jimster480
    • RE: Why did AMD quit BAPCo board: Poor Bulldozer performance on SYSmark 2012 or Intel bias?

      @dinosorensen@... AMD's are cheaper, more efficient and well suited for gaming & OC'ing. Intel's just for show. @<a href="http://www.essay-service.org/term-paper">term paper</a>
      distactobot
  • RE: Why did AMD quit BAPCo board: Poor Bulldozer performance on SYSmark 2012 or Intel bias?

    If this can not perform for everyday computation how can the user maximize it? It is indeed less points to the SYSmark 2012. Any products has its advantages and disadvantages that???s why there is <a href="http://www.personalinjurycompensation.ca">personal injury compensation</a>, <a href="http://www.personal-injury-insurance.com">personal injury insurance</a> and of course <a href="http://www.personal-injury-attorneys.ca">personal injury attorneys</a>.
    ronnie036