Maybe because it's a month old preview?Originally posted by: SSChevy2001
...
1) I mean why the heck would you use a outdated 8.12 driver when ATi asked to use the 8.561.3 drivers?
...
Relax there big guy, this was just the preview as others have noted. They did put restrictions on what games and how many could be benched in this preview, along with non-disclosure of aspects like heat/power/noise/overclocking. This isn't significantly different than the restrictions ATI imposed on their 4870X2 preview, where they restricted reviewers to 5 titles as well. Ultimately it accomplishes the same thing, limits their exposure to potential driver issues and influences which titles are tested.Originally posted by: VulcanX
HONESTLY HOW IS THIS OK? They making ATI look like a pile of scrap in the meantime they using strictly Nvidia : The way its meant to be played games, sum1 plz tell me how much Nvidia paid for this to get done? And why not throw sum 3dmark etc at it, that is a true test, not putting games the GFX cars is designed on!
My bad I didn't expect the OP to link to the old review. Still the rest applies just fine.Originally posted by: Janooo
Maybe because it's a month old preview?Originally posted by: SSChevy2001
...
1) I mean why the heck would you use a outdated 8.12 driver when ATi asked to use the 8.561.3 drivers?
...![]()
Originally posted by: Insomniator
People still go to tomshardware?
No, it really isn?t. It?s a synthetic benchmark with no relevance to actual games. Someone else made the point about the 2900 XT getting better 3DMark scores than the G80, yet we all know that didn?t apply to actual games. In that respect 3DMark?s scores were deceptive.Originally posted by: VulcanX
But 3dmark is a true test of a GFX cards colours,
If that happens that still reflects reality with those particular titles. I?d vastly prefer having a TWIMBTP title benchmarked than 3Dmark because said title is a real game, and thus accurately portrays what will happen when you play it, unlike 3DMark which is synthetic and does not translate to gaming performance.which i think is extremely important, bcoz if a game is designed for a certain manufacturer and is proven to run well with Nvidia lets say, then of course Nvidia will outperform the competition, after all the games are designed solely for them,
It might not be biased but it?s also irrelevant to gaming performance. If card A gets 12000 points and card B gets 15000 points, can you infer card B will be 25% faster than card A in actual gaming?3dmark is not biased and with that kept in mind do they run games as benchmarks in most OC events?
Originally posted by: Deinonych
Originally posted by: Insomniator
People still go to tomshardware?
This. :thumbsup:
Originally posted by: mindless1
Here's how it works:
They publish crap, you read it, you link to it, so we go see it. Advertising dollars roll in, the articles had the intended effect.
Originally posted by: VulcanX
http://www.tomshardware.com/re...e-gtx-295,2107-10.html
I dont understand how they can EVEN PUBLISH summin so strictly biased its not even funny!
We?ve presented the results from six games. Five of them were mandated by Nvidia as a sample of the most-anticipated titles for the 2008 holiday season. Four of those five are part of Nvidia?s The Way It?s Meant to Be Played program. Two are already staples of our own benchmark suite. And we picked one game, Crysis, to add to the mix. This is still engineering-sample hardware and, according to Nvidia, the final fan speeds haven?t yet been set. What makes something like this okay? All of the titles chosen are, in fact, popular games and we can understand the frustration of seeing the same three-year old apps tested over and over again simply because they?re recognized performance metrics. Even still, we want to stay transparent to our readers. In fact, it was a breath of fresh air to see some new software instead of the same Supreme Commander savegame or the World in Conflict fly-through.
HONESTLY HOW IS THIS OK? They making ATI look like a pile of scrap in the meantime they using strictly Nvidia : The way its meant to be played games, sum1 plz tell me how much Nvidia paid for this to get done? And why not throw sum 3dmark etc at it, that is a true test, not putting games the GFX cars is designed on!
Originally posted by: ayabe
Originally posted by: Ocguy31
What is all this faux-outrage about?
Pretty sure it's this, "Thats bcoz ur prob a Nvidia fanboy"
Or in plain english, this faux outrage isn't about a damn thing except adolescent foot stomping.