AMD and Nvidia depart SySMark PC benchmark group

Two of the world's biggest processor chip companies have made the decision to leave the group that runs the benchmarking program SysMark. CPU and GPU processor maker AMD left the BapCo group earlier this week and later was joined by one of its big rivals in the graphics chip space Nvidia.

In a post on an AMD blog site, the company's head marketing officer Nigel Dessau gave AMD's reasons for the BapCo departure, stating, "In the past year or so AMD, with openness and transparency, has tried to explain why we believe this benchmark is misleading with respect to today’s commonplace applications." It added, "the SYSmark benchmark is not only comprised of unrepresentative workloads (workloads that ignore the importance of heterogeneous computing and, frankly, favor our competitor’s designs), but it actually generates misleading results that can lead to very poor purchasing decisions, causing governments worldwide to historically overspend somewhere in the area of approximately $8B!" Dessau claimed that BapCo threatened to kick AMD out of the group as a result of AMD's concerns for the SYSMark benchmark.

While Dessau claims that AMD tried to work with BapCo to make the current version of the SYSMark benchmarking software (released on June 7) more accurate he claims that there are still a number of issues with the benchmark. As a result, he states that AMD made the decision to leave the group and "asked that our name and logo be removed from marketing materials promoting SM2012." Nvidia has also decided to leave the BapCo group. However, according to ZDNet UK, Nvidia did not give a reason for leaving.

The BapCo consortium made its own statement earlier this week on AMD's departure, claiming, "AMD voted in support of over 80 percent of the SySmark 2012 development milestones, and were supported by BapCo in 100 percent of the SySmark 2012 proposals they put forward to the consortium." The group includes processor chip maker Intel along with a number of other tech companys including Microsoft, Dell and others.

Report a problem with article
Previous Story

LulzSec's final file dump includes Battlefield Heroes info

Next Story

Rumor: Spotify to launch in mid-July in US

12 Comments

Commenting is disabled on this article.

**[Additionally]**
BTW I forgot to mention that the AMD blog explains that the customers are over spending based of of the differnces in performance. This spending affects tax payers generally. The computing power in the CPUs are over kill for the tasks and the differences in price vs performance between Intel and AMD is crazy given they way the benchmark represnts the performance under a repeatable workload.

I don't know about you, but with my governments stating that they are having budget problems... anything that directs my attention to them making poor spending decisions is of interest to me. I'd like to hear Intel's side if they care to comment, and I'm also interested in what Nvidia has to say too.

If anyone has more information please share.

Hey guys. Don't battle over AMD vs Nvidia vs Intel. You should look into why AMD left. This article scratches the surface for mainstream consumption. "the SYSmark benchmark is not only comprised of unrepresentative workloads (workloads that ignore the importance of heterogeneous computing and, frankly, favor our competitor's designs), but it actually generates misleading results that can lead to very poor purchasing decisions..."

Check out the AMD blog before they left regarding the SysMark 2007 for more detail about the decision. It does make more since. http://blogs.amd.com/nigel-des...%80%9Csysmark-tax%E2%80%9D/

I was trying to find the tech podcast that talked about this in a little more detail... I think it is one of the last few days on Twit.tv Tech New Today... but I recall the issue is more realted to where the market is going with manufacturing and combining systems on a chip (SoC). AMD and Nvidia (on the ARM side of things) are moving foward and Intel is still dragging it's feet after the in that respect. The one on top always does because you really don't need to do too much unless the market is getting disrupted.

But the thing is AMD is stating that the benchmarks are not for the most common things the average users do. There are a number of interesting application situations tested, but not the most commonly used. Also, again the benchmark does not represnt any of the new architectural changes that all the manufacturers are working toward (dragging feet included). So it just shows that Intel is has improved performance on computing conditions that are not relevant to the mass market. That is what I got from the new segment.

So it is logical that if the general applications in computing is not represented in a benchmark, which AMD claims they have worked toward emporing with their processors) and even though they tried to work with them to test more of the conditions that show off the power of their new designs... it still did not work out. We will not really know what happened becuase of the spin PR put out so no need to speculate.

Is it not better business to avoid a tool that does not show what you can do. Leaving sends a message, rather than being in this group and staying under represented. This software is used in policy to determine of products will be purchased and it is affecting AMD's business. Leaving sends a message to customers that they don't think this benchmark is valid anymore for there harware. And even if you are an Intel fan, you have to admit although AMD is second in many sincees to Intel... they are no slouch in bring new technologies in areas that Intel sits back and waits (for whatever reason)... can you say 64bit/32bit processors... AMD got us here... and yes Intel is licensing this tech in each ofth their current processors. So the two companies are locked togather.

Nvidia leaving is anyone's guess. We know they are doing SoC designs with ARM, so maybe this was a way for them to keep an eye on the competition and gleam where the market tests are going. Now that AMD, their biggest competitor, has lost interest, the resources used in being part of the group is no longer worth it perhaps.

***To show my objectivity regarding this story and my comments, I'm currently running Intel and Nvidia on my desktop (preference at the time of purchase 3 yrs ago). I have laptops with ADM CPU and GPU, and Intel and ADM pairing (one of the last I could find), and an Intel Nvida pairing. I enjoy them all.***

"However, according to ZDNet UK, Nvidia did not give a reason for leaving."

I would think that obvious - the SysMark folks had a sweet gig, serving as a marketing tool for AMD/ATI vs. Nvidia, but with AMD gone there goes the *vs.*... I mean Nvidia can compare their different card designs on their own site just fine.

mikiem said,
"However, according to ZDNet UK, Nvidia did not give a reason for leaving."

I would think that obvious - the SysMark folks had a sweet gig, serving as a marketing tool for AMD/ATI vs. Nvidia, but with AMD gone there goes the *vs.*... I mean Nvidia can compare their different card designs on their own site just fine.


Sorry to burst your bubble, but SysMark favoured Intel.

Lol... What an ignorant.
Read about some serious accusations related to Sysmark suite first, then think & talk later.
Hint - CPUID change resulting in totally different scores (40-50% more when on Intel's CPUID).

PrEzi said,
Lol... What an ignorant.
Read about some serious accusations related to Sysmark suite first, then think & talk later.
Hint - CPUID change resulting in totally different scores (40-50% more when on Intel's CPUID).

*cough*

"AMD voted in support of over 80 percent of the SySmark 2012 development milestones, and were supported by BapCo in 100 percent of the SySmark 2012 proposals they put forward to the consortium."

So in the end they were voting on anyting without even giving a damn right? But now they're mad about it and left? So who's ignorant in this case? Me or the AMD people who ok'd sysmark 2012?

GP007 said,
"AMD voted in support of over 80 percent of the SySmark 2012 development milestones, and were supported by BapCo in 100 percent of the SySmark 2012 proposals they put forward to the consortium."

So in the end they were voting on anyting without even giving a damn right? But now they're mad about it and left? So who's ignorant in this case? Me or the AMD people who ok'd sysmark 2012?


You mean that 80% ok + 20% crap = fine? It would be wize not to do business with you.
20% crap is high for the IT industry.

QQ moar AMD. How about you just make better performing CPU/GPUs then the others and quit blaming one of the benchmark tools?

GP007 said,
QQ moar AMD. How about you just make better performing CPU/GPUs then the others and quit blaming one of the benchmark tools?

RTFA please! nVidia left too because of the same issues. Are you an Intel video fan?
BTW, AMD has the best performing video cards and their price is ok.

RealFduch said,
AMD has the best performing video cards and their price is ok.

Depends if you are viewing the high end cards, middle or low end cards.

RealFduch said,

RTFA please! nVidia left too because of the same issues. Are you an Intel video fan?
BTW, AMD has the best performing video cards and their price is ok.

Nvidia didn't give a reason for leaving my friend.

GP007 said,
QQ moar AMD. How about you just make better performing CPU/GPUs then the others and quit blaming one of the benchmark tools?

Nothing wrong with AMD's hardware. It's the tards who make this benchmark and people who believe it's results.