By: David Kanter (dkanter.delete@this.realworldtech.com), July 15, 2013 1:57 pm
Room: Moderated Discussions
Steve (sberens.Throwaway.delete@this.gmail.com) on July 14, 2013 8:16 pm wrote:
> Wilco (Wilco.Dijkstra.delete@this.ntlworld.com) on July 12, 2013 11:59 am wrote:
> > AnTuTu apparently fixed their benchmark: http://www.eetimes.com/author.asp?section_id=36&doc_id=1318894&
> >
> > The RAM score halves on Atom but ARM scores remain the same. Apparently they
> > still use ICC, but hopefully AnTuTu will review this given this debacle.
> >
> > Wilco
> >
>
> Funny how it is only the ICC compiler from Intel that dropped code that tested the RAM.
>
> It was an Intel problem all along not AnTuTu.
>
> Intel: opps got caught cheating again so now direct flack to AnTuTu
Newsflash: That's a perfectly legal, intelligent and reasonable optimization. Get used to it.
It's 100% a benchmark problem that they have crap code lying around.
David
> Wilco (Wilco.Dijkstra.delete@this.ntlworld.com) on July 12, 2013 11:59 am wrote:
> > AnTuTu apparently fixed their benchmark: http://www.eetimes.com/author.asp?section_id=36&doc_id=1318894&
> >
> > The RAM score halves on Atom but ARM scores remain the same. Apparently they
> > still use ICC, but hopefully AnTuTu will review this given this debacle.
> >
> > Wilco
> >
>
> Funny how it is only the ICC compiler from Intel that dropped code that tested the RAM.
>
> It was an Intel problem all along not AnTuTu.
>
> Intel: opps got caught cheating again so now direct flack to AnTuTu
Newsflash: That's a perfectly legal, intelligent and reasonable optimization. Get used to it.
It's 100% a benchmark problem that they have crap code lying around.
David
