went on the offensive against BAPCo yesterday
when the chip maker not only announced that it was quitting the consortium and wouldn't be endorsing BAPCo's SYSmark 2012, but also by laying out all the reasons why it feels the benchmark is flawed. It didn't stop there. AMD also said that BAPCo threatened to ban the chip maker from the consortium if it didn't shut its pie hole. Heavy stuff. BAPCo, your response?
"Advanced Micro Devices (AMD) was, until recently, a long standing member of BAPCo. We welcomed AMD’s full participation in the two year development cycle of SYSmark 2012, AMD’s leadership role in creating the development process that BAPCo uses today and in providing expert resources for developing the workload contents," BAPCo said in a statement. "Each member in BAPCo gets one vote on any proposals made by member companies. AMD voted in support of over 80% of the SYSmark 2012 development milestones, and were supported by BAPCo in 100% of the SYSmark 2012 proposals they put forward to the consortium."
So according to BAPCo, AMD has little to whine about given that it had an equal vote just like all the other members, and further approved the majority of SYSmark 2012's development milestones. But it's that other 20 percent that so vexes AMD, which as we covered yesterday has to do with BAPCo's disregard for GPU performance.
What it all boils down to is a he-said-she-said affair, and BAPCo "notes for the record that, contrary to the false assertion by AMD, BAPCo never threatened AMD with expulsion from the consortium, despite previous violations of its obligations to BAPCo under the consortium member agreement."
And that, folks, is the other side of the coin.