Is it just my browser or did AMD take down their fastest graphics card counter?

[BallaTheFeared]

It was there when I checked the other day...

However, ever since that fabled night of the 690 I haven't seen it. Can anyone else confirm that it's gone?

http://sites.amd.com/us/game/Pages/game-home.aspx

---

This seems to be the type of thread created just to start an argument. I think that we can all agree that the only real news would be if AMD didn't take that down.

Agreed. Let's skip the trolling for today.

-ViRGE

 

[Don Karnage]

I don't see it anywhere.

 

[lavaheadache]

just curious why a guy like you is a frequent visitor to that page.

To answer your question I noticed it too.

 

[SlowSpyder]

This seems to be the type of thread created just to start an argument. I think that we can all agree that the only real news would be if AMD didn't take that down.

 

[Meaker10]

They lost the crown, simple as, I don't even think someone even an ATI fanatic can possibly claim the 7970 is faster than the 690 lol.

 

[LOL_Wut_Axel]

This seems to be the type of thread created just to start an argument. I think that we can all agree that the only real news would be if AMD didn't take that down.

This. The GTX 690 was just launched a day ago.

 

[BallaTheFeared]

just curious why a guy like you is a frequent visitor to that page.

Before I answer, I'd like to know what you meant by "a guy like you".

 

[blastingcap]

Maybe he meant "a guy who sees fit to spend his life screenshotting AMD's page and then posting that and a shot of the gtx 690 together and wondering out loud why AMD took down that banner when the answer is obvious--as he well knows, because he posted the screenshot of the gtx 690 right next to the banner."

Or maybe not.



In before the lock, btw.

 

[BallaTheFeared]

Maybe he meant "a guy who sees fit to spend his life screenshotting AMD's page and then posting that and a shot of the gtx 690 together and wondering out loud why AMD took down that banner when the answer is obvious."

Or maybe not.



In before the lock, btw.

lol.

I never asked "why", I asked for confirmation of it being gone or not. :thumbsup:

It's ok though, I ain't mad at ya.

 

[SirPauly]

That was quite the time-line for the fastest card on the planet though from AMD -- a very long technology time.

 

[MrK6]

 

[SolMiester]

I maybe wrong, but thought after driver updates, the 590 edged it for fastest card?, don't supposed it matters now though.
I do like the industrial styling of the 690 though...it must weight a lot, probably need added support in a normal case?

 

[thilanliyan]

Hahahaha ROFL

Could do with some pics of hellspawns though beside JHH's pic.

Seriously OP, you were just "asking for confirmation"? Riiiiight. You could just clear your browser cache and found the answer yourself.

 

[BallaTheFeared]

I maybe wrong, but thought after driver updates, the 590 edged it for fastest card?, don't supposed it matters now though.
I do like the industrial styling of the 690 though...it must weight a lot, probably need added support in a normal case?

True, but AMD was using their unsupported driver results in 3DMark11 to hold the claim.

Looks like the hissy fit is in full swing :thumbsup:

 

[SolMiester]

True, but AMD was using their unsupported driver results in 3DMark11 to hold the claim.

Looks like the hissy fit is in full swing :thumbsup:

Unsupported drivers?

 

[Tempered81]

ROFL

 

[BallaTheFeared]

For a very long time AMD was able to turn off tess without 3DMark being able to detect it.

AMD used those drivers in 3DMark11 to claim the performance crown last gen.

Since those times they've updated their systeminfo to catch it from time to time.

Here is a 1295MHz 7970 scoring lower than 470 SLI, even with tess disabled. They actually caught it on his results.

http://3dmark.com/3dm11/3242687

Benchmark tessellation load modified by AMD Catalyst driver, result invalid. Check your video driver settings. (What is this?)

 

[SolMiester]

For a very long time AMD was able to turn off tess without 3DMark being able to detect it.

AMD used those drivers in 3DMark11 to claim the performance crown last gen.

Since those times they've updated their systeminfo to catch it from time to time.

Here is a 1295MHz 7970 scoring lower than 470 SLI, even with tess disabled. They actually caught it on his results.

http://3dmark.com/3dm11/3242687

LOL, no way would AMD doctor the drivers, the threat of being caught would harm their reputation.....
Go a link?

 

[Meaker10]

AMD drivers automatically set to have it enabled so don't make stuff up.

 

[BallaTheFeared]

LOL, no way would AMD doctor the drivers, the threat of being caught would harm their reputation.....
Go a link?

I'm not saying they cheated, just that they used an unofficial result to claim their performance crown last gen. The driver was supported by 3Dmark11.

AMD drivers automatically set to have it enabled so don't make stuff up.

It's automatically said to "AMD Optimized" and I never made anything up, read again.

 

[Tempered81]

Here is a 1295MHz 7970 scoring lower than 470 SLI

Originally it was "AMD fastest graphics card for 892 days" versus GTX 690 launch. Now it's 7970 OC versus GTX 470 SLI. Should just edit the original post and get straight to the point:

GTX 470 SLi slaughtering OC'ed HD7970's.

 

[BallaTheFeared]

Originally it was "AMD fastest graphics card for 892 days" versus GTX 690 launch. Now it's 7970 OC versus GTX 470 SLI. Should just edit the original post and get straight to the point:

GTX 470 SLi slaughtering OC'ed HD7970's.

I was just following the direction of the thread, using points of reference others already brought up.

It's not like this was directed towards me, I mean I got TRI SLi 470s for less than a 7970. If that's what this was really about we'd be talking about 9k vs 18k gpu scores for less money, but it's not. Try to stay focused, I know your first post was a waste, as was the second, but third times a charm!

 

[SlowSpyder]

Posting in a Balla GTX470 thread.

 

[Meaker10]

I'm not saying they cheated, just that they used an unofficial result to claim their performance crown last gen. The driver was supported by 3Dmark11.



It's automatically said to "AMD Optimized" and I never made anything up, read again.

Futuremark never supported a driver where they could not detect the tesselation level and it could be changed.

 

[VirtualLarry]

I'm not saying they cheated, just that they used an unofficial result to claim their performance crown last gen. The driver was supported by 3Dmark11.

It's automatically said to "AMD Optimized" and I never made anything up, read again.

I thought that AMD added the hooks in CCC to adjust the Tess performance, but that they never actually implemented anything in the driver yet to do so.

Thus, there was no reduction in Tesselation yet.