Dear Anand...

dug777

Lifer
Oct 13, 2004
24,778
4
0
Like Toms does sometimes (but better ;)) with all the old favourites, latest drivers, and the sideline XGI and S3 cards, and all the latest games :)

They make for very informative and interesting reading, show us how far the graphics industry has come, and let you see how old (well not that old) favourites like the GFTi4200, 9700 Pro, 9800 pro (of which there must be millions out there in use) handle the latest games (or don't)...Please? :gift:
 

YOyoYOhowsDAjello

Moderator<br>A/V & Home Theater<br>Elite member
Aug 6, 2001
31,203
45
91
I'd love that too because I wouldn't have to go over to Tom's whenever I want to find a review that includes a wider variety of cards.

I imagine the testing would take quite a bit of work though :Q
 

Amplifier

Banned
Dec 25, 2004
3,143
0
0
I agree, but only do the R520 and the G70 series because anyone who doesn't own one is an iLoser.
 

VIAN

Diamond Member
Aug 22, 2003
6,575
1
0
I don't believe they should do it with XGI and S3, so based on you thread summary, I voted no.

But I do believe that they should compare todays cards to 1 to 2 generations behind. And at REAL resolutions. It's all nice that some cards you do at 1500 lines of resolution but, that is too impersonal. I will never play at that resolution. I actually like HarcOCPs way of testing, although I hate the layout of their pages.
 

dug777

Lifer
Oct 13, 2004
24,778
4
0
Originally posted by: VIAN
I don't believe they should do it with XGI and S3, so based on you thread summary, I voted no.

But I do believe that they should compare todays cards to 1 to 2 generations behind. And at REAL resolutions. It's all nice that some cards you do at 1500 lines of resolution but, that is too impersonal. I will never play at that resolution. I actually like HarcOCPs way of testing, although I hate the layout of their pages.

i agree with you last bit, but why not include other players?

From what i've read elsewhere the low end XGI cards are perfectly adequate...seems daft to vote no when you disagreed with the smallest and least important component of my question, while agreeing with the bulk of it tho' :p
 

blckgrffn

Diamond Member
May 1, 2003
9,122
3,052
136
www.teamjuchems.com
Originally posted by: nick1985
i agree, im sick of having to go to <<shudder>> toms hardware...


Amen. I mean, can we even trust them to get that right? Some of those graphs just seem a little off based on personal experience....
 

dug777

Lifer
Oct 13, 2004
24,778
4
0
Originally posted by: blckgrffn
Originally posted by: nick1985
i agree, im sick of having to go to <<shudder>> toms hardware...


Amen. I mean, can we even trust them to get that right? Some of those graphs just seem a little off based on personal experience....

While Toms seem pretty good on the video card side, AT has an excellent reputation for doing things right and well :)

And i would really like to see those older cards comprehensively benched with the latest drivers and games, at resolution most of us play at (1024 and 1280)...
 

VIAN

Diamond Member
Aug 22, 2003
6,575
1
0
i agree with you last bit, but why not include other players?
Let me counter your question with another question. Who the hell would buy XGI or S3 for gaming? As a cheap standalone just to get video through I could understand, but for gaming, they should've just done some more research. Those chips suck and are far, at least XGI is, from being good enough to compete with ATI or NV.

I would also like some reviews on the some games as well. Just throwing that in.
 

dug777

Lifer
Oct 13, 2004
24,778
4
0
Originally posted by: biostud
Personally I would like the efforts to be put in other areas.

such as?

maybe like toms they can start reviewing random non computer related crap :p
 

Parkre

Senior member
Jul 31, 2005
616
0
0
yes, I think it would be great. Just wait for a Uli board (one that supports agp and pci-e) so that the same system is used just different vidcards. Since some of the latest games (bf2) won't run on older vidcards, 3dmarkXX could show a direct correlation (well, almost direct). I support this wholeheartly.