ATI Benchmark Commentary

[spam]

Here is a good read that helps to define benchmarking standards more or less. -Do you agree?Ati Commentary

 

[Genx87]

Commentary?

Looks more like marketing material from ATI.

I guess what comment can you make?

 

[Pete]

The benches sure look markety, but what's wrong with the rest of it?

 

[spam]

Actually I thought it looked a lot like Anandtech's new benchmarking techniques. Which I think are in the right direction. The subjective image of IQ could be addressed by having blind side by side comparisons of images. If you had ten people look at the pictures and vote for highest IQ you would develop a greater objectivity. The problem is some people may recognize ATi or NV w/o any other cues.

 

[jiffylube1024]

I think this is an excellent summary with some great information. Definately a big step in the right direction.

I'm talking about the text before ATI's benchmarks. Obviously the benchmarks in there are going to have some sort of spin on there, and they definately do: 1280X1024 with 4xAA and 8xAF is a rather unrealistic setting for most games for either of those cards (9600P or 5600U).

The statistical data and text is very objective and well-researched.

Let's not pan ATI, Genx87 just because it's from that company. How about you read the text and figure out for yourself which parts are legitamate and which part have some marketing spin on them instead of instantly discrediting them for any arbitrary reason.

 

[Genx87]

I take it you are probably the same kind of person who would believe shader day was legit lol

 

[Pete]

Oh, I don't think Gen's reason is completely arbitrary. Baseless, maybe.

There was some discussion at B3D about this.

Edit: Gen, did you think the Doom 3 benchmarks were "legit?"

 

[jiffylube1024]

Originally posted by: Genx87
I take it you are probably the same kind of person who would believe shader day was legit lol

Did you even read the .pdf, or did you just see the acronym "ATI" and think to yourself "biased", as usual?