OK, we've at least established that you think you're happy. On to the next question: why do you enjoy deliberate attempts to make others unhappy (this 'payback' of which you speak)? Does this make you feel superior? More self-confident?
Capt Caveman
Lifer
- Jan 30, 2005
- 34,543
- 651
- 126
I just treat ATi supporters on forums the same way they have treated nvidia supporters. Like I've said before what's good for the goose is good for the gander (even if the gander doesn't see it that way).
This is not a big deal at all. If ATi had cheated, they would have done it at all resolutions to show superiority. But a resolution od 25x16? Too odd a res to cheat with. Obviously a bug. /thread
The troll in me says: Anyone wanna see Gstanfor and OChungry go at it? *grabs chips-beer-takes a seat*
The troll in me says: Anyone wanna see Gstanfor and OChungry go at it? *grabs chips-beer-takes a seat*
Gstanfor, my friend, that philosophy does you more harm than it does the "ATI supporters." They (whoever 'they' are) have made you mad by being rude and now it is your mission to be deliberately rude back to them (and a bunch of other people in the process)? As a philosophy, that just doesn't make sense, at least from the perspective of someone who wants to be healthy and happy.
It truly is a shame that you feel that you (and other "nvidia supporters," again, whoever they are) have been ill-treated by ATI supporters on these forums, but becoming a willing participant in this destructive cycle of disrespect does neither yourself nor the final goal (courtesy between the camps) any favors. In fact, you're just fanning the flames that burned you in the hopes that they will burn others (an indiscriminate approach at best, and deliberately callous at worst).
So, to sum up: while the 'fighting fire with fire' approach may feel good, it doesn't do anyone any good at all in the long run, least of all you. You won't be able to get 'payback' on the people that hurt your in any meaningful fashion whatsoever. All you will be able to do (and judging from your posts and the responses they've garnered, I'd say you are doing) is make both yourself and the people around you angry and unhappy.
You were wronged. You can't make those responsible pay for it. In fact, it was only irrational people saying irrational things designed to make you angry. Ignoring these irrational people is by far the best thing to do.
This is meant in honest to goodness concern. I've seen people destroyed by their inability to let go of the slights (and perceived slights) they received from others. The opinions of the people on forums like these just aren't important enough to take time out of our day to get worked up about it. Disagree? Sure. Point out flaws on occasion? Absolutely. Make it your mission to get 'payback'? No, just move on my friend, just move on.
It truly is a shame that you feel that you (and other "nvidia supporters," again, whoever they are) have been ill-treated by ATI supporters on these forums, but becoming a willing participant in this destructive cycle of disrespect does neither yourself nor the final goal (courtesy between the camps) any favors. In fact, you're just fanning the flames that burned you in the hopes that they will burn others (an indiscriminate approach at best, and deliberately callous at worst).
So, to sum up: while the 'fighting fire with fire' approach may feel good, it doesn't do anyone any good at all in the long run, least of all you. You won't be able to get 'payback' on the people that hurt your in any meaningful fashion whatsoever. All you will be able to do (and judging from your posts and the responses they've garnered, I'd say you are doing) is make both yourself and the people around you angry and unhappy.
You were wronged. You can't make those responsible pay for it. In fact, it was only irrational people saying irrational things designed to make you angry. Ignoring these irrational people is by far the best thing to do.
This is meant in honest to goodness concern. I've seen people destroyed by their inability to let go of the slights (and perceived slights) they received from others. The opinions of the people on forums like these just aren't important enough to take time out of our day to get worked up about it. Disagree? Sure. Point out flaws on occasion? Absolutely. Make it your mission to get 'payback'? No, just move on my friend, just move on.
) and even I know this is just a bug, or possible driver/card issue.
Captante
Lifer
- Oct 20, 2003
- 30,338
- 10,858
- 136
Anyone looking at the issue that spawned this thread objectively would be able to see that its obviously a bug of some kind & further choosing which video card brand you prefer based on anything other then performance & stability is just stupid.
ATI & Nvidia both have their good & bad points & it would be refreshing to not see any more of this type of shameless trolling on the video forums ... if you have a valid point, make it without spinning the facts to suit your opinion & then move on.
ATI & Nvidia both have their good & bad points & it would be refreshing to not see any more of this type of shameless trolling on the video forums ... if you have a valid point, make it without spinning the facts to suit your opinion & then move on.
I really don't see the need for it either. It's kind of nice when overclocking though. It keeps it so I don't have to restart the whole machine when my video card hangs. I remember when I had a volt modded 7800gt that I always hated having to reboot the whole system when I overclocked too much. Hardly a marketable feature, but I was just wanting to point out that I myself have never had a problem with it. Do you overclock much Gstanfor? If you don't you probably wouldn't benifit from a feature like VPU Recover.
A couple of times I've overclocked cards (my GF4 & GF-FX 5900XT both overclocked very nicely), but mostly I run stock standard.
I puchase the performance I'm after - I don't buy one level down and hope to make the difference up, any overclocking capacity is just a pleasant bonus that I may not even use.
I puchase the performance I'm after - I don't buy one level down and hope to make the difference up, any overclocking capacity is just a pleasant bonus that I may not even use.
Gstanfor, even if this was intended to be some sort of cheat, look at what it would be doing:
Showing that an X1950XTX CF setup would score lower minimum, average, and maximum frames than a single X1950XTX. How would that help ATi pimp their dual-GPU solution?
Also, from that bench alone, there are more problems than just the 2x/4xAA being the same thing for single cards.
For instance, why does a single X1950XTX score the same fps with 2xAA as an X1950XTX CF setup does? If they are both using 2xAA and both are at 2560x1600, wouldn't there be more of a difference between single and CF?
Then, lest take into account the min,avg, and max frame rates for the single vs. CF scores for 2xAA:
Single--28, 62, 42.1
CrossFire--28, 62, 42.3?
Why are the average frames different if the min. and max. ones were the same for both sets? (28+62) / 2= 45, not 42.1 or 42.3.
From what we have to look at, there are several things wrong besides 4xAA equaling 2xAA for single cards.
[*]Why does the single card perform as well as it's CF counterparts when under the same exact settings?
[*]Why do the averages change even though the frames determining those averages don't?
Showing that an X1950XTX CF setup would score lower minimum, average, and maximum frames than a single X1950XTX. How would that help ATi pimp their dual-GPU solution?
Also, from that bench alone, there are more problems than just the 2x/4xAA being the same thing for single cards.
For instance, why does a single X1950XTX score the same fps with 2xAA as an X1950XTX CF setup does? If they are both using 2xAA and both are at 2560x1600, wouldn't there be more of a difference between single and CF?
Then, lest take into account the min,avg, and max frame rates for the single vs. CF scores for 2xAA:
Single--28, 62, 42.1
CrossFire--28, 62, 42.3?
Why are the average frames different if the min. and max. ones were the same for both sets? (28+62) / 2= 45, not 42.1 or 42.3.
From what we have to look at, there are several things wrong besides 4xAA equaling 2xAA for single cards.
[*]Why does the single card perform as well as it's CF counterparts when under the same exact settings?
[*]Why do the averages change even though the frames determining those averages don't?
Ya I have tried both methods. With my 7800gt I tried to push it to about GTX levels it did pretty good at that but it wasn't stable all the time. (or course the game I was playing at the time was BF2 so who knows if it was the game or the card being quarky). I went the other way when I got this x1950xtx. It doesn't have near the overclock head room my gt had. I think it is just some of the apps don't do so well with controlling the volts and clocks for the GDDR4. The core on the ATI card does fine with overclocking.
Both ways have been fine for me though I do find it a bit easier to buy the performance you need rather than hoping you get the performance you need. It is fun however to tweak yourself an extra $200 worth of performance out of a lower end part.
Just curious what card do you have right now?
EDIT: Oops just saw your system rig link
The averages change because the cards produced more numbers than just the min and max numbers. And those were factored into the average number given.
Did it say that somewhere in the review? If it did I must not have caught it.
The fact remains that when both setups are at 2xAA, CF and single alike, they perform almost exactly the same. CF with only 2xAA would be getting more than that.
Even Anandtech scored a great amount more than that at 2048x1536 with 4xAA. His maximum score of 61 fps was roughly 40 frames less than a resolution close to that with twice as much AA.
BFG10K
Lifer
- Aug 14, 2000
- 22,709
- 3,000
- 126
The fact that it's only limited to a specific resolution (and one hardly benchmarked at that) leads me to believe it's more likely to be a bug than a cheat.
IIRC in the past there were a couple of games that nVidia had problems with at 2560x1600 which have since been fixed.
IIRC in the past there were a couple of games that nVidia had problems with at 2560x1600 which have since been fixed.
WOW!!!! Thanks for making me aware of this APPALLING bit of cheatery by ATI. I'm so unbelievably shocked and outraged that my head nearly fell of.
I'm off to the toilets to masturbate while thinking about the GOD nvidia and their heaven sent cards.
(you muppet)
I'm off to the toilets to masturbate while thinking about the GOD nvidia and their heaven sent cards.
(you muppet)
You edited it and still didn't get it right. There is no x9150. I do like this version better though. It sounds more professional.
Gstanfor:
I ask once again for the person who asked earlier....
Have you ever owned an ATi card? And if so, what happened to it that made you so bitter against the company?
I ask once again for the person who asked earlier....
Have you ever owned an ATi card? And if so, what happened to it that made you so bitter against the company?
Keysplayr
Elite Member
- Jan 16, 2003
- 21,211
- 50
- 91
Guys. The OP knows this isn't a cheat. That is not what this thread was created for. It was created to attempt to annoy others. No other reason. There will be more threads like this from the OP, and it would be very cool if nobody posted in them.
I used to get into countless wars in this forum, but somewhere along the line, I "grew up" and felt it was a very large waste of time. Don't try to corner the OP with logic, (Josh) because he is not interested in reality. Both camps make fine cards. It may take the OP a long time to realise this. One day, he will feel embarrassed about the way he acted and will have no choice but to grow up.
I used to get into countless wars in this forum, but somewhere along the line, I "grew up" and felt it was a very large waste of time. Don't try to corner the OP with logic, (Josh) because he is not interested in reality. Both camps make fine cards. It may take the OP a long time to realise this. One day, he will feel embarrassed about the way he acted and will have no choice but to grow up.
I am curious about this too. Some people can point to the FX series for their disdain towards Nvidia. I have a friend that hates to use Nvidia because of their rotten luck with the FX series. Did you, Gstanfor, once upon a time have such an incounter with ATI cards? If so what model did you use that did not meet your expectations?
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 24K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 20K
-
-
-
Facebook
Twitter