• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

AMD Nano Blacklist Situation

Page 6 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
iiiankiii said:
The thing is, sites like pcper, and TR are not bias in their reviews. It's pretty hard to fake data and get away with it. However, the people at some of those sites are pro-Nvidia. They are hyper-critical of AMD and very dismissive of Nvidia's fault. That's what I notice by reading those sites. Their opinions are skewed; but their reviews aren't bias. Their conclusions usually cast AMD in a negative light whenever they get a chance to; while, Nvidia is exaggeratedly praised for their strengths and dismissive of their faults.
Click to expand...
ahah bro, that is the very definition of bias.

think of it this way. race car A got great acceleration but horrible at turns. race car B is opposite. the race track is just a straight road without turns 🙂 which car do you think would win?

it is hilarious! :biggrin:
 
iiiankiii said:
The thing is, sites like pcper, and TR are not bias in their reviews. It's pretty hard to fake data and get away with it. However, the people at some of those sites are pro-Nvidia. They are hyper-critical of AMD and very dismissive of Nvidia's fault. That's what I notice by reading those sites. Their opinions are skewed; but their reviews aren't bias. Their conclusions usually cast AMD in a negative light whenever they get a chance to; while, Nvidia is exaggeratedly praised for their strengths and dismissive of their faults.
Click to expand...

Like I have said before, the thing most people look at is probably the benchmark results. How fast is this new GPU compared to what they have or the other options out there? I've always thought most people skip the review and jump right to the charts. Then it's either "wow that is great" or "man that sucks for how much it costs". Only a small percentage of buyers dig into things like architectural changes, efficiency, heat output, noise levels. Specifically noise and heat output are pretty subjective. Some people don't care and others care a great deal. Someone may find a fan at 60% too loud and another may not while both would say that 60fps is better than 45fps.

boozzer said:
ahah bro, that is the very definition of bias.

think of it this way. race car A got great acceleration but horrible at turns. race car B is opposite. the race track is just a straight road without turns 🙂 which car do you think would win?

it is hilarious! :biggrin:
Click to expand...

I think you missed his point. I believe he was saying that you can't fake the data on performance, but the subjective bits you can be extremely critical. Heat, noise, power usage. This is assuming there are no glaring driver issues to speak of. So you can browse more than one site to make an informed decision.
 
Last edited:
cmdrdredd said:
I think you missed his point. I believe he was saying that you can't fake the data on performance, but the subjective bits you can be extremely critical. Heat, noise, power usage. This is assuming there are no glaring driver issues to speak of. So you can browse more than one site to make an informed decision.
Click to expand...
I understood his point perfectly. what I was trying to said was testing methodology matters😀 how you test, what you test with would give you very different results. that is where the bias shows.

damn, thought my post was easy to understand ^_^
 
boozzer said:
why not test more games? and who determines those 5 are "top" games? you? me? the supposed objective reviewer? :awe:

edit: if their readers are 100% nv customers, there is nothing wrong with the catering/pantering. But then why all the stupid fuss about why amd refusing them samples? hahahahaa, hilarious.
Click to expand...

Tech Report uses eight games, including a Mantle game. How many more games do you think they should benchmark?
 
Phynaz said:
I'm betting you have zero proof of this statement.
Click to expand...

Some of you guys must be incapable of doing a google search?

http://techreport.com/review/23527/review-nvidia-geforce-gtx-660-graphics-card/11

Our overall performance numbers come from the geometric mean of the scores across five of the six games we tested. (We chose to exclude DiRT Showdown, since the results skewed the average pretty badly and since AMD worked very closely with the developers on the lighting path tested.)
Click to expand...

That took me all of 2 minutes to find...
 
VR Enthusiast said:
Some of you guys must be incapable of doing a google search?

http://techreport.com/review/23527/review-nvidia-geforce-gtx-660-graphics-card/11



That took me all of 2 minutes to find...
Click to expand...

Kind of hard to claim bias, if they gave a perfectly legitimate reason for why they did it, and made no attempt to hide it.

Anandtech used to use that game but removed it two years ago and replaced it with Grid Autosport. Seems obvious to me that Anandtech is anti AMD as they didn't even bother to give a reason.
 
Pariah said:
Kind of hard to claim bias, if they gave a perfectly legitimate reason for why they did it, and made no attempt to hide it.

Anandtech used to use that game but removed it two years ago and replaced it with Grid Autosport. Seems obvious to me that Anandtech is anti AMD as they didn't even bother to give a reason.
Click to expand...

Anandtech don't benchmark project cars and they only replace games at the end of a year don't they?
 
Pariah said:
Kind of hard to claim bias, if they gave a perfectly legitimate reason for why they did it, and made no attempt to hide it.
Click to expand...
Stating the reason for the bias doesn't make it unbiased. Also if they think it is a legit reason then would need to apply same to all games, which they don't. The conclusion is obvious.
 
BFG10K said:
Nope: http://wccftech.com/amd-squashes-rumors-hbm-ip-licensing-fees-memory-standard-free/

  • “AMD is not involved in collecting any royalties for HBM,” said Iain Bristow, a spokesman for AMD. “We are actively encouraging widespread adoption of all HBM associated technology on [Radeon R9] Fury products and there is no IP licensing associated."
Giving stuff away for free so competitors can take advantage of it is great for consumers. Meanwhile, AMD continues to bleed and shrink. So from a purely business standpoint, it's an extremely poor decision.
Click to expand...

Well, to be fair, they need widespread adoption of HBM that way it'll get cheaper for them to manufacture as well, which allows more supplies.
 
Phynaz said:
I'm betting you have zero proof of this statement.
Click to expand...

So, do you understand their hypocrisy now?

They remove a game that was sponsored by AMD due to claims of working closely with AMD to give them an advantage over NV... ok fine, if their stance is for neutral games...

But no, they have no problems at all including games that are sponsored by NV, working closely with NV to give them an advantage over AMD... they even praise it.
 
AnandThenMan said:
Stating the reason for the bias doesn't make it unbiased. Also if they think it is a legit reason then would need to apply same to all games, which they don't. The conclusion is obvious.
Click to expand...

I said a legitimate reason. Stop changing what I say to fit your argument. If you benchmark 5 games, and one company wins 4 by 8% and the other wins one by 35%, the average win will go to the 2nd company. Is that an accurate result? Most people would say no. Any game that significantly skews the overall picture should be removed.

On the flip side, I don't think an average difference should be posted in a review. I don't see how it would be of any use. I don't play multiple games at once, and I don't care about games I don't play. All I care about is how the card performs in the games I actually play, an average of what they tested is useless.
 
Silverforce11 said:
So, do you understand their hypocrisy now?

They remove a game that was sponsored by AMD due to claims of working closely with AMD to give them an advantage over NV... ok fine, if their stance is for neutral games...

But no, they have no problems at all including games that are sponsored by NV, working closely with NV to give them an advantage over AMD... they even praise it.
Click to expand...

You never answered if you play Dirt Showdown.
 
Pariah said:
I said a legitimate reason. Stop changing what I say to fit your argument. If you benchmark 5 games, and one company wins 4 by 8% and the other wins one by 35%, the average win will go to the 2nd company. Is that an accurate result? Most people would say no. Any game that significantly skews the overall picture should be removed.

On the flip side, I don't think an average difference should be posted in a review. I don't see how it would be of any use. I don't play multiple games at once, and I don't care about games I don't play. All I care about is how the card performs in the games I actually play, an average of what they tested is useless.
Click to expand...
welcome, cause you are now one of us 😀
 
boozzer said:
welcome, cause you are now one of us 😀
Click to expand...

If what you bolded indicated to you that AMD is run by a bunch of morons, and they should fire everyone including the CEO who isn't on the engineering team then, yes we are in agreement.

Edit: Back to the actual point, what you bolded only applies if writer feels the need to average the results. If there is no overall average given, then there is no reason to remove any games that produce atypical results.
 
Last edited:
Pariah said:
Any game that significantly skews the overall picture should be removed.
Click to expand...
Define significant. I personally don't think any game should be excluded but only if 10+ games are tested, using 5 games and 4 of those being GameWorks titles is not good review practice.
 
Pariah said:
If what you bolded indicated to you that AMD is run by a bunch of morons, and they should fire everyone including the CEO who isn't on the engineering team then, yes we are in agreement.
Click to expand...
hahahahaa, that is some amazing jump at conclusions. wow 😀
 
Pariah said:
I said a legitimate reason. Stop changing what I say to fit your argument. If you benchmark 5 games, and one company wins 4 by 8% and the other wins one by 35%, the average win will go to the 2nd company. Is that an accurate result? Most people would say no. Any game that significantly skews the overall picture should be removed.

On the flip side, I don't think an average difference should be posted in a review. I don't see how it would be of any use. I don't play multiple games at once, and I don't care about games I don't play. All I care about is how the card performs in the games I actually play, an average of what they tested is useless.
Click to expand...

Have you seen the benchmarks on Project Cars? That thing is ridiculously favoring Nvidia's arch.
 
boozzer said:
haahahaa, I can't wait for phynaz's response.
Click to expand...

I'm still looking for proof that the game was removed due to "poor Nvidia performance".

Maybe you can explain how they can be biased against AMD and still include Mantle in their benchmarks.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top