And of course, you miss the entire point of this exercise, intentionally or otherwise. You seem to be quite unaware, that the sole reason you took his post as trolling, was because of your very own position of bias. Can't cast the bias card when you live by it as well. Doesn't work. And as evidence of this bias, is the glaring absence of any bias accusation from you toward MrK6's post which Tviceman quoted. Dude I mean c'mon. Don't you think anybody picks up on these things?
Nope, I didn't miss anything contrary to what you think. I think both you, and him, missed what I was saying entirely. Your argument is so fallacious.
Can't cast the bias card when you live by it as well.
You're kidding, right? I don't live by my biases. I am completely aware of them, unlike you assume. Although I can't fault you for this mistake as most people are controlled by their biases.
Regardless that doesn't mean a person can't make observations as I have done, and it alone isn't enough to invalidate anything.
And as evidence of this bias, is the glaring absence of any bias accusation from you toward MrK6's post which Tviceman quoted.
That isn't evidence at all. I wasn't concerning myself with MrK's statement, only with tviceman's statement, which is quite frankly technically more offensive.
I'm sad you failed to pick up on the extremely obvious and heavy sarcasm I was laying out in my attempt to make a very valid point: previous gen x2 cards have traditionally outperformed high end next gen parts. Given that the gtx580 isn't even truly a next gen part since it's a tweaked GF100 on the same node as the current "last gen", I figured the shocking news that AMD's current best gpu working in a pair can outperform Nvidia's current best GPU working alone by 10% is, in fact, NOT shocking.
So, actually, I further illustrate my previous point (that I was originally joking about): the hd5870, AMD's best single GPU, cannot beat Nvidia's previous x2 part that was made on an inferior manufacturing process. It's funny how easily this is ignored or how people attempt to invalidate this piece of fact. And given that I see you decided to not read my first post in this thread, which may (or may not, given your ability to read into context clues) have given you my unbiased take on the situation.
Nope I picked up on it (sarcasm) indeed. Acknowledge the entirety of my post. I kept it brief and succinct for a purpose. Coincidently, my point is the conclusion of my post: "And your "example" doesn't accomplish anything constructive." This meaning the (your) post is bait, plain and simple, concerning or not concerning your intentions.
And I chuckle yet again. I did read your first post, but I wasn't addressing it at all. My aim was simply at the post you had just made, hence why it's the only one I quoted.
Now should I go ahead and question your ability to read into context clues, too? Or do you have a better argument than unwarranted personal insults? If I recall correctly, that should be an infraction.
