Is it me or is [H]ardOCP an ATI Fanboy site !!!!

[MechxWarrior]

Fine. HardOCP is a fanboy site for ATi because they show true performances and HOW the cards will be used.

Ill now add the great H to my blocked sites because they are right.

Oh wait...they are right, why should I hate them for it.

You dont like it, crawl back to your billion FPS with no true indication of gameplay. I just lost a massive side of respect for these forums.

 

[Acanthus]

Originally posted by: MechxWarrior
Fine. HardOCP is a fanboy site for ATi because they show true performances and HOW the cards will be used.

Ill now add the great Hocp to my blocked sites because they are right.

Oh wait...they are right, why should I hate them for it.

You dont like it, crawl back to your billion FPS with no true indication of gameplay. I just lost a massive side of respect for these forums.

Not only did i fix your post that you didnt check , how does hardocp decide that im going to play games at 1280x1024x32 2x4x on my nvidia card, and 1280x1024x32 4x2x on my radeon with cheats enabled.

 

[MDE]

The problem with their reviews is that Kyle decides what he thinks is playable, which is completely subjective. Everyone has a different level of "playable" framerates. I may say 30 FPS is enough, while someone else may say that they need 85 FPS minumum. IMO, there's no way to come up with universally accepted minimum playable framerate.

 

[Diablo6178]

Originally posted by: Shamrock
here's a scenraio for ya.

I watched TechTV's "The ScreenSavers" about a year ago, They had Kyle on as a guest. They were benchmarking the Athlon 64 (when it was just about to go public) and Leo Laporte asked Kyle Bennet a question. That question was "At what speed is the Front Side bus of the Athlon 64?" Kyle's reply, "uhh, I think it's 466Mhz" He was guessing as it was the next step closer from the Barton (having 400Mhz) Leo had to correct Kyle and say "I thought the A64's FSB was the same speed as it's core". Again Kyle " Uh...oh yeah, you're right"

DUUHHH!!! If he cant figure out the FSB of a CPU, then should he even have a video card?

OK lets put you on a show with a few hundred thousand people watching a see how you do. He was likely nervous. Not that it has ever happened to you or anyone else on the planet.

Originally posted by: videoclone
But HardOCP contradicts all other benchmarks from every other site. The majority is right and HardOCP has been judged

I will take issue with this one statement in your post. Who the Hell are you to judge anyone. Last time I checked you weren't apointed a judge in any court for any state or government(If I'm wrong please scan your Confirmation document and post it).

Kyle has taken alot of flack over the years from both sides, in my book that makes him honest. If neither is happy with what your doing then it has to be correct. Kyle is the face of HardOCP, he didn't review that card, Brent Justice did. If you disagree with how they are doing something then go to the discussion thread for the review and point it out. Stop whinning on other sites forums about it.

I like HardOCP's reviews as well as Anand's. I find them both valid and correct in their own way. I use these two as a resource for my buying decision. It has served me well in the past and I'm sure it will continue to do so.

Originally posted by: videoclone
I don?t think there's 1 single person on this forum that would take an X800Pro over a 6800Ultra if both cards were handed to them for free unless your the person who writes the HardOCP Video card reviews

Wrong. I would, and I don't write reviews for them. Why would I do such a controversial thing? Because historically ATi products have served ME well. I have owned many different cards from ATi, 3Dfx, NVidia, etc... At any one time they were all leaders. It is the competition that makes the progress happen.

Also stop sounding like such a nVidiot. You don't get your favorite companies way in one review and it's the end of the world. Cry Baby.

 

[Gamingphreek]

HARDOCP's reviews are going down the hill.

1. When they test the cards basic scientific method) you have to have a control, he has none. He just selects resolutions that are different, and the drivers aren't even the latest for Nvidia half the time.

2. He selects what AA and AF settings to use instead of Benching them at the same and going up the line.

3. I would definately take a 6800Ultra over an X800Pro. Make it an X800XT it would be tough but w/o a doubt the 6800Ultra is a bertter card than the pro. however between the X800Xt and the 6800 thats a different story and that where the contrversy starts.

4. Why doesn't Nvidia use a Low-K process, would probably help them with clockspeeds?

5. The 3dMarks are not biased there programs for christ sake!!! I think they might have a little better support for Nvidia but nonethe less its supposed to give you an idea of how god your card is.

6. As for the driver related issues, Nvidia needs time, they are working with an entirely new architecture. They cant just start spitting things out. As for the bugs being the reason why |H| doesn't use them is crap. The new drivers significantly help in far cry, and #2 they are benchmarking. There are going to be bugs. If there is a bug tell as and well worry about it, but dont use old slower drivers to make something else appear faster.

Hey i read reviews like everyone but i ALWAYS reserve judgement until the Anandtech article comes out. They have only let me down once. That is why they are so respected, |H| is very respected but whether you want to believe or see it or not they have a bias towards ATI.

-Kevin

 

[imported_obsidian]

HardOCP's reviews really have gone to crap. Their benchmarks pick and chose a few resolutions they deem as "the best." There is nothing in their review that I couldn't have got from a more thorough review (like Anandtech's). However, some things like the fps over time and min/max fps are a nice touch most other places don't have. I also like the focus on games rather than synthetic benchmarks.

 

[Genx87]

Any website that makes their name look like a clans name you will find in quake loses all respectability. Then you read the reviews and realize the name does them justice, but the reviews dont do the consumers justice.

 

[Keysplayr]

Originally posted by: Dean
Don't whine to Hardocp because they don't shine your blessid Nvidia in the most positive light. The gameplay experience they provide in their eval's are the best out there and shows what actually using the cards is like. I happen to very much like their approach. You guys are sounding like the ATI fanboys from the last couple years when Hardocp along with Nvidia declared 3dmark2k3 a useless benchmark. The ATI fanboys called Kyle and Brent Nvidia fanboys then, and now you guys call them ATI fanboys.

Its because they dont give NV their props, not because they dont worship it on a sacred altar. Just to clarify. Not a fan of exaggeration.

 

[Keysplayr]

Originally posted by: Compddd
LoL was gonna say. Everyone used to scream that Kyle and HardOCP were Nvidia hoes and now everyone is screaming they are ATI whores. Wtf?

What can we say? Thats how its working out.

 

[gsellis]

Originally posted by: Diablo6178

OK lets put you on a show with a few hundred thousand people watching a see how you do. He was likely nervous. Not that it has ever happened to you or anyone else on the planet.

I almost posted something similar. When you are under the lights, even with takes (which it sounds like they did not do), it is easy to mess things up unless it is all on the teleprompter in front of you. I know I mess up with impromptu interviews. That's why tapes are an hour long I guess

 

[Keysplayr]

Originally posted by: Shamrock
here's a scenraio for ya.

I watched TechTV's "The ScreenSavers" about a year ago, They had Kyle on as a guest. They were benchmarking the Athlon 64 (when it was just about to go public) and Leo Laporte asked Kyle Bennet a question. That question was "At what speed is the Front Side bus of the Athlon 64?" Kyle's reply, "uhh, I think it's 466Mhz" He was guessing as it was the next step closer from the Barton (having 400Mhz) Leo had to correct Kyle and say "I thought the A64's FSB was the same speed as it's core". Again Kyle " Uh...oh yeah, you're right"

DUUHHH!!! If he cant figure out the FSB of a CPU, then should he even have a video card?

My sister doesn't know the FSB of Jack Sh*t, but I think she has the right to own a video card of some sort. You dont have to "know" computers to actually own and operate one. I am not defending Kyle though, he sounds like a dufus with those comments.

 

[Keysplayr]

Originally posted by: gsellis

Originally posted by: Diablo6178

OK lets put you on a show with a few hundred thousand people watching a see how you do. He was likely nervous. Not that it has ever happened to you or anyone else on the planet.

I almost posted something similar. When you are under the lights, even with takes (which it sounds like they did not do), it is easy to mess things up unless it is all on the teleprompter in front of you. I know I mess up with impromptu interviews. That's why tapes are an hour long I guess

I cant believe you guys are even posting puke like this.

 

[gsellis]

Originally posted by: keysplayr2003
I cant believe you guys are even posting puke like this.

Just willing to cut someone some slack. Because someone messed up an on-air does not always give proof to their lack of talent.

Frankly, hardly ever read HardOCP. I do like the new format as it is different than ever other puke that just runs the stats. I can read those like the rest of us. I do like subjective from others.

BTW, if you folks have not noticed, professional reviewers need a lot of bad things before they start saying something negative as a whole. Most of the products they review are better than the previous version. And I am not so sure about the ATI bias. I think that ATI has just released more product as of late than nVidia, therefore it seems more weighted towards ATI because of the volume. I don't think I have seen anything negative about the 6800 except that it is a little late.

 

[Lonyo]

Originally posted by: Diablo6178

Originally posted by: Shamrock
here's a scenraio for ya.

I watched TechTV's "The ScreenSavers" about a year ago, They had Kyle on as a guest. They were benchmarking the Athlon 64 (when it was just about to go public) and Leo Laporte asked Kyle Bennet a question. That question was "At what speed is the Front Side bus of the Athlon 64?" Kyle's reply, "uhh, I think it's 466Mhz" He was guessing as it was the next step closer from the Barton (having 400Mhz) Leo had to correct Kyle and say "I thought the A64's FSB was the same speed as it's core". Again Kyle " Uh...oh yeah, you're right"

DUUHHH!!! If he cant figure out the FSB of a CPU, then should he even have a video card?

OK lets put you on a show with a few hundred thousand people watching a see how you do. He was likely nervous. Not that it has ever happened to you or anyone else on the planet.

Originally posted by: videoclone
But HardOCP contradicts all other benchmarks from every other site. The majority is right and HardOCP has been judged

I will take issue with this one statement in your post. Who the Hell are you to judge anyone. Last time I checked you weren't apointed a judge in any court for any state or government(If I'm wrong please scan your Confirmation document and post it).

Kyle has taken alot of flack over the years from both sides, in my book that makes him honest. If neither is happy with what your doing then it has to be correct. Kyle is the face of HardOCP, he didn't review that card, Brent Justice did. If you disagree with how they are doing something then go to the discussion thread for the review and point it out. Stop whinning on other sites forums about it.

I like HardOCP's reviews as well as Anand's. I find them both valid and correct in their own way. I use these two as a resource for my buying decision. It has served me well in the past and I'm sure it will continue to do so.

Originally posted by: videoclone
I don?t think there's 1 single person on this forum that would take an X800Pro over a 6800Ultra if both cards were handed to them for free unless your the person who writes the HardOCP Video card reviews

Wrong. I would, and I don't write reviews for them. Why would I do such a controversial thing? Because historically ATi products have served ME well. I have owned many different cards from ATi, 3Dfx, NVidia, etc... At any one time they were all leaders. It is the competition that makes the progress happen.

Also stop sounding like such a nVidiot. You don't get your favorite companies way in one review and it's the end of the world. Cry Baby.

I would too.
I think the X800Pro runs cooler and needs less power.
If I was given a choice, it would be the Pro all the way, the Ultra would basically stop my system working (on the edge at the moment with the PSU and absolutely no money).
Plus I have never had a problem with ATi.

 

[Insomniak]

HardOCP is the ATi camp. I stopped giving them any credibility a long time ago.

 

[imported_obsidian]

Originally posted by: Lonyo
I would too.
I think the X800Pro runs cooler and needs less power.
If I was given a choice, it would be the Pro all the way, the Ultra would basically stop my system working (on the edge at the moment with the PSU and absolutely no money).
Plus I have never had a problem with ATi.

The power difference is probably in the range of about 10W between the 6800 and X800...

 

[Compddd]

I don't like how loud the 6800U is either, I wish I could put a VGA Silencer 2.0 on it but it doesn't support it So it looks like X800XT with VGA Silencer 2.0 for me.

 

[Acanthus]

Originally posted by: Gamingphreek
4. Why doesn't Nvidia use a Low-K process, would probably help them with clockspeeds?

-Kevin

Low-K silicon is has a higher material cost.

 

[Keysplayr]

Originally posted by: Compddd
I don't like how loud the 6800U is either, I wish I could put a VGA Silencer 2.0 on it but it doesn't support it So it looks like X800XT with VGA Silencer 2.0 for me.

How loud is your 6800U?

 

[Gamingphreek]

But still it would allow Nvidia to ramp up the clockspeeds, and use less power, and produce less heat (if clocked at the same). Why doesn't Nvidia do this.

-Kevin

 

[MechxWarrior]

Kyle/Brent pick the HIGHEST graphic quality they can find with playable rates. They decide the playable rates by ACTUALLY playing the game, not by picking a magic number.

They DONT use synthetic benchmarks AT ALL, which is why I love them. I dont want some FAKE application telling me how good it is, I dont have a vid card to watch a loop, I have it to play farcry on. Hard showed how much more detail and everything the PRO alone can do over the nVidia, let alone the XT. THats what matters to me. Not max FPS when they dont mean a damn thing if you dont know everything thats happening.

You dont like it, fine. Go grow your e-penis on some site showing pure frames. I dont care. What matters to me is what matters to me. Hate Hard? Good. Dont cry about it.

 

[Marsumane]

Originally posted by: MechxWarrior
Kyle/Brent pick the HIGHEST graphic quality they can find with playable rates. They decide the playable rates by ACTUALLY playing the game, not by picking a magic number.

They DONT use synthetic benchmarks AT ALL, which is why I love them. I dont want some FAKE application telling me how good it is, I dont have a vid card to watch a loop, I have it to play farcry on. Hard showed how much more detail and everything the PRO alone can do over the nVidia, let alone the XT. THats what matters to me. Not max FPS when they dont mean a damn thing if you dont know everything thats happening.

You dont like it, fine. Go grow your e-penis on some site showing pure frames. I dont care. What matters to me is what matters to me. Hate Hard? Good. Dont cry about it.

The only problem with this, is that much of "what looks better" is about opinions. Personally i think a combination of both with significant proof of why they chose such opinions would be in order. Frames = longlivity and IQ = eyecandy for today.

 

[Dean]

Originally posted by: MechxWarrior
Kyle/Brent pick the HIGHEST graphic quality they can find with playable rates. They decide the playable rates by ACTUALLY playing the game, not by picking a magic number.

They DONT use synthetic benchmarks AT ALL, which is why I love them. I dont want some FAKE application telling me how good it is, I dont have a vid card to watch a loop, I have it to play farcry on. Hard showed how much more detail and everything the PRO alone can do over the nVidia, let alone the XT. THats what matters to me. Not max FPS when they dont mean a damn thing if you dont know everything thats happening.

You dont like it, fine. Go grow your e-penis on some site showing pure frames. I dont care. What matters to me is what matters to me. Hate Hard? Good. Dont cry about it.

Exactly!! The ONLY reason they are b!tchin about Hardocp is because their current reviews are not representing their Favorite IHV in a favorite light. If H's method was showing Nvidia in a favorite light all those posters above would be showing nothing but praise. I do not buy a good video card to run canned benchmarks. I buy a good video card to play games and that is what Hardocp is all about.

 

[imported_obsidian]

Originally posted by: MechxWarrior
Kyle/Brent pick the HIGHEST graphic quality they can find with playable rates. They decide the playable rates by ACTUALLY playing the game, not by picking a magic number.

I don't need someone telling me what a playable framerate is. I am able to decide that myself. But I guess if you cannot then HardOCP is your place to go.

 

[Dean]

Originally posted by: obsidian

Originally posted by: MechxWarrior
Kyle/Brent pick the HIGHEST graphic quality they can find with playable rates. They decide the playable rates by ACTUALLY playing the game, not by picking a magic number.

I don't need someone telling me what a playable framerate is. I am able to decide that myself.

Thats the thing! You do not need to agree with what they deem as playable. You can take their results and apply it towards what performance you like though and it will give you a decent idea of what settings you can play a game at with a given video card. Tell me, do you honestly believe that canned benchmarks showing an average FPS is any indicator at all of performance inside a game?

What would you feel safer with? A canned benchmark showing an AVERAGE fps of 40fps or a H benchmark showing a MINIMUM of 30 fps benching from actually playing the game using Fraps?