ATI bottles Spider launch with canned benchmarks
DAAMIT IS SHIPPING several of its favourite hardware journalists out to an event this week to test it's upcoming 'Spider' platform. However, in a bid to keep initial testing within its own comfort zone, ATI will be providing all the system rigs and benchmark scripts - and preventing hardware journalists from bringing any of their own kit.
"As you know, the goal of this event is to allow you to put the Spider platform through its paces to see for yourself the benefits that we’ve been talking about over the last few weeks," ATI's invitation to the hardware boys goes.
"Since time is short... we have pulled together the most appropriate benchmarks that allow you to fully test the overall performance of the platform. All benchmarks will be provided to you on site so you will not need to bring anything with you."
Which, we suppose, is very kind of ATI - why make hardware journalists actually do a job when you can provide the canned benchmarks for them?
The tests that DAAMIT has authorised journalists to use are:
PCMark – Vantage
SYSMark’07 – Preview
Windows-Send2CompressedFolder – Vista32-Ultimate
WinRAR (rar-best) – 3.7
iTunes (wav2aac) – 7.4.3
MovieMaker (jpg, EuroVacation) - Vista32-Ultimate
Nero-8 Recode (avi/mpg2, portableAVC) – 8.1.1.0
Nero-8 Recode + Showtime (avi/mpg2, portableAVC) – 8.1.1.0
POV-Ray RTR – 3.7-beta22
3dMark’06 (CPU) – 1.1.0
3dMark’06 (hardware + software) – 1.1.0
Call-of-Juarez (DX-10)
None of which, we're pretty sure, are on the benchmark list of any of the top-tier enthusiast sites. I mean, 3DMark, seriously?
These settings and restricted benchmarks should ensure that every website comes back with the same scores and results, which we're sure ATI has run a million times over to obtain their own results for. We're absolutely sure that journalists at the event will be able to "see for themselves" the benefits of Spider... through red-tinted goggles.
ATI very generously goes on to mention that, "You will be able to test anything you like... in your own labs, when we send you the parts post-launch".
So the message is this - use our numbers for the big initial publicity drive, and you can get your own when we've finished launching and marketing this thing and everyone's stopped paying attention.
Restrictions and limitations like this are a throwback to a bygone era when hardware launches were mere PR exercises and hardware enthusiast websites were delighted just to be bought a plane ticket. Any website worth reading will be getting in independent hardware for launch and shunning ATI's spin-fest if they have any regard for their readers whatsoever.
No doubt ATI will spin this event as a "preview", an "initial look" that it is generously providing at this hardware, pointing out that no-one "has" to come. But the bottom line is this - spinners are scared of what independent benchmark results will show, and are bottling a proper launch. Bad form, chaps. µ
Share this:
ShareBusiness Intelligence Software
Customer Relationship Management (CRM)
Enterprise Accounting Software
Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP)
Enterprise Systems Management
What else is new, Whiney?

Where were your stories or at least comments blasting Intel's own canned benchmark sessions in Munich (Core 2 Duo) last May and their beloved "paper benchmarking" on every IDF (Core 2 Duo, Kentsfield, Skulltrail)?

If you go and criticize one side, where is your comment that AMD is nothing but a pathetic follower of a wrong policy?

AMD has done nothing else but copy Intel where Intel should not be copied.

Personally, I don't give a flying fanny about the release of the product until it comes into our offices, but yes, we are in Warsaw - pissed off because you are not?

Anonymous Journalist from EMEA region
When was the last time I saw a benchie that DIDN'T use 3DMark. What planet are you from. Those benching tools look fine. Yep, its annoying that they are telling people what to use, but who cares. There'll be a zillion numbers out 2 weeks later.

Whats worse, is that the entire world will be swayed by bizarro numbers, charts, graphs and conclusions, that all disagree and point in different directions. AMD sold plenty of 2900XT systems, and those gamers still seem to be alive, not catching any terminal illness. And depending on whose website tested what combination of hardware and driver, the results are all quite different.

Honestly is anyone really surprised by this? Seriously in pretty much every independent test over the last hardware generation ATI got stomped by Nvidia per price range plus some where even the lower price nvidia cards stomped ATI's top of the line and we all know that AMD is hurting in the processor race since the release of the Intel Core processor series both on performance and cost. Not to mention the fact that ATI crossfire has always been a joke, hell I've seen benchmarks where it actually decreased overall performance when using 2 HD2900XT.
Really - The nerve of them... I mean, they make the hardware/software, spend the zillions of bucks on all that stuff - don't they have a right to launch it however they want?

I'm not picking sides here, but they have a right to pull as much wool over someone's eyes as they want. It's not like they are putting the wool there - it's already growing on the consumers brow. 

Why are you hitting ATI with a stick? For not shearing wool? That's good business :)
Dear Mr Ferret,

I agree with your point, and indignation, at journalists having to wait until after product release to publish any of their findings outside of the staged event.

However, I do feel you have allowed this indignation to colour the events. The benchmarks they have selected are, at least in my techy/enthusiast eyes, fairly comprehensive. And they cover the main target segments (gonna shoot myself for writing and thinking like a marketeer after pressing submit) for spider, including gaming, rendering and encoding.

At least the article fulfills the Inq's quota of at least one anti-NDA article per seven days... Which is, of course, entirely in line with the premise of being a site of integrity, refusing to give up both rights to free speech and journalistic freedom.

Thanks for a consistently good read.
Message is understood. Sorry to hear that you were not invited to DAAMIT show.
i think the more appropriate question is who doesn't use 3dmark?
Free holiday cant be bad, just check for implants when you get home.

Mr Ferret, Mr Wiley W Ferret.

"Anonymous Journalist"?
Why the anonymous? you didn't say anything that broke any NDA (as if anybody that signs such could be called a journalist in the first place).
So why the 'anonymous', and why the 'journalist'?
Afraid you don't get your cheque from intel this month?

But of course your point is valid.
On the other hand, the inq people are pretty individualistic in some respects and you must take that into account, some like one company, some another, some hate one, some another, hence the inconsistency often.
"Where were your stories or at least comments blasting Intel's own canned benchmark sessions in Munich (Core 2 Duo) last May and their beloved "paper benchmarking" on every IDF (Core 2 Duo, Kentsfield, Skulltrail)?" 

Are you serious??? Those 'canned' Intel runs you refer to were preview information, giving out more data on an UNRELEASED product than AMD has on any pre-launch Barelona/Phenom whoopla...

Intel did not produce 'controlled' benchmarking runs on LAUNCH day, no... all they did was send complete press kits to all major journalist, and were kind enough to lift NDAs a week or two prior to launch. 

Nope... this is not the same, not even the same ballpark. AMD is controlling the release of info just like the '2 review sites' for Barcelona when it launched. http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20070910-barcelonas-out-and-the-reviews-are-out.html

Yeah, right... in fact, that was the excitement of any 'launch', a complete review of 3rd party independent tests to remove any bias and get to the 'truth'. We will not get this on Monday.
"Where were your stories or at least comments blasting Intel's own canned benchmark sessions in Munich (Core 2 Duo) last May and their beloved "paper benchmarking" on every IDF (Core 2 Duo, Kentsfield, Skulltrail)? "

Ummm:
1) They were not RELEASING at this time, it was an early preview! The chips were not launched until July! 
2) Intel shipped samples to review sites PRIOR to launch (I know it's a crazy concept) - also no NDA required and reviewers were able to run whatever they wanted PRIOR to launch.
3) The early reviews Intel did provide were a bit better than Nero re-code and a single DX10 game 

Too many AMD apologists - this is lame, even for AMD. It's like a bad movie that studios don't want reviewed prior to release - they'll just let you see a very controlled trailer. In my experience those tend to be the really good movies, right?!?

BTW - what's the point of actually being in Warsaw? The event is so controlled it might as well be a video conference - AMD can just stream the selective benchmarks and have 'network' problems for the benchmarks that don;t turn out the way they like.
So there's no way to slip in a USB stick with some quick custom benchmarking script on it? I guess their preview systems must either not have USB ports or be very carefully designed not to respond to unauthorised programs.