R520 Benchies at HA

[xtknight]

I just think he's blowing stuff way out of proportion. The users that had their AMD chipsets working great didn't bother to post. I had problems with VIA and Athlon XP, but hardly since then. I have the A8N-SLI Deluxe mobo, which is pretty much the only mobo that ever had problems with nForce4 as far as I've heard. Even then, I hardly have issues with it besides the rare situation when the DiamondMax 10 set of hard drives don't work with it. I was just in a bit of a bad mood earlier. I can't say the benchmark results are false, but there's nothing preventing him from skewing them then posting them. Same with every site I guess. If they're right, more power to him.

 

[nitromullet]

Well, there is his reputation... it probably isn't easy to get sponsors for a website like that if you make yourself the laughing stock of the internet by blatantly making up benchmarks.

I said this earlier in the thread, but I wish that he would make public the scripts, settings, and custom Doom3 benchmark that he uses so we can see what he's working off of.

 

[rise]

Originally posted by: xtknight
I just think he's blowing stuff way out of proportion. The users that had their AMD chipsets working great didn't bother to post. I had problems with VIA and Athlon XP, but hardly since then. I have the A8N-SLI Deluxe mobo, which is pretty much the only mobo that ever had problems with nForce4 as far as I've heard. Even then, I hardly have issues with it besides the rare situation when the DiamondMax 10 set of hard drives don't work with it. I was just in a bit of a bad mood earlier. I can't say the benchmark results are false, but there's nothing preventing him from skewing them then posting them. Same with every site I guess. If they're right, more power to him.

i won't go off topic any more than to say that if you think the nf4 isn't quirky you're not paying attention. your examples show he may be a bit sensationalistic in the headlines he chooses but his points are valid.

 

[flexy]

>>>
its basically just an overclocked X850XT w/ tweaks [...]
>>>

wasn't the POINT of R520 that, after MANY refreshes and just " 'new' tweaked cards", we FINALLY get a new architecture from ATI - a revolution like the 9700 was ? That's ALL R520 is/was about - whole new architecture, some FRESH stuff instead of the 10th refresh of a refresh with minor tweaks.

And now people say the R520 "is basically just a overclocked X850XT".....gimme a break. Or do you refer to the rumor that those benchies were done with a overclocked X850 ?

Those numbers (actually) make it loook that this statement is true that the (allegedly) revolutionary R520 is AGAIN just a refresh with "minor tweaks"...anyway as said somewhere before - SOMETHING cannot be right with those numbers except ATI (or the benchmarkers, or the article writers) can come up with a LOGICAL explanation why a NEW card is SLOWER than a old card in some benchmarks.

 

[apoppin]

Originally posted by: nitromullet
Well, there is his reputation... it probably isn't easy to get sponsors for a website like that if you make yourself the laughing stock of the internet by blatantly making up benchmarks.

I said this earlier in the thread, but I wish that he would make public the scripts, settings, and custom Doom3 benchmark that he uses so we can see what he's working off of.

nope. he has a way out - just blame that "unnamed partner" . . . after all it isn't "his" benchmarks.

 

[CaiNaM]

Originally posted by: flexy
>>>
its basically just an overclocked X850XT w/ tweaks [...]
>>>

wasn't the POINT of R520 that, after MANY refreshes and just " 'new' tweaked cards", we FINALLY get a new architecture from ATI - a revolution like the 9700 was ? That's ALL R520 is/was about - whole new architecture, some FRESH stuff instead of the 10th refresh of a refresh with minor tweaks.

And now people say the R520 "is basically just a overclocked X850XT".....gimme a break. Or do you refer to the rumor that those benchies were done with a overclocked X850 ?

Those numbers (actually) make it loook that this statement is true that the (allegedly) revolutionary R520 is AGAIN just a refresh with "minor tweaks"...anyway as said somewhere before - SOMETHING cannot be right with those numbers except ATI (or the benchmarkers, or the article writers) can come up with a LOGICAL explanation why a NEW card is SLOWER than a old card in some benchmarks.

it's still basically r3xx architecture running higher clock speeds with some tweaks (memory, etc.). there is nothing "revolutionary" about it; it's evolutionary. that in itself makes it neither bad or good; we'll just have to see how it all pans out.

 

[ronnn]

Originally posted by: xtknight

Originally posted by: nitromullet

http://www.hardwareanalysis.com/content/article/1787/

Why don't you read the article before calling him a douche?

I don't trust the numbers until other sites do it and come out with the same results. There is another article he did I'm trying to find at the moment, but it was pretty stupid. It wasn't the P4 one.

Edit: I also don't see the article the 7800GTX is ****ing fast article you referred to, maybe you could post a link?

http://www.hardwareanalysis.com/content/columns/article/1804/

pwned

 

[KeepItRed]

Originally posted by: Rollo

Originally posted by: KeepItRed
Lol what if Sander made those benchies himself in Photoshop or something. Then made it sound real like ATI is commenting on it.

LOL what if he didn't and they are what he says they are?

lol He sounds nothing but a troubled young man, look at the facts:

1) He wanted insider info on the R520, ATI declined.
2) Sent an e-mail to some dude over at B3D saying "Not invited? Let's see if we can drop ATI's stock."
3) Made benchmarks right after that.

Looks like hes pissed cause he didn't get in.

 

[xtknight]

Originally posted by: rise4310
i won't go off topic any more than to say that if you think the nf4 isn't quirky you're not paying attention. your examples show he may be a bit sensationalistic in the headlines he chooses but his points are valid.

I own an nForce 4 SLI mobo. I wouldn't know about these issues why?

I see you do too. So what issues have you had? Just a couple of people having issues and making a big stir about it doesn't mean anything. How do they know it's the nForce at fault? I want to see some real evidence.

 

[nRollo]

Originally posted by: KeepItRed

Originally posted by: Rollo

Originally posted by: KeepItRed
Lol what if Sander made those benchies himself in Photoshop or something. Then made it sound real like ATI is commenting on it.

LOL what if he didn't and they are what he says they are?

lol He sounds nothing but a troubled young man, look at the facts:

1) He wanted insider info on the R520, ATI declined.
2) Sent an e-mail to some dude over at B3D saying "Not invited? Let's see if we can drop ATI's stock."
3) Made benchmarks right after that.

Looks like hes pissed cause he didn't get in.

B3d and DriverHeaven aren't what I'd call "impartial" in regard to ATI. They're both deep in ATIs pocket, to be more specific.

There's nothing wrong with that, it's good they have strong vendor relations to get us info, but I would take their spin on an issue like this with some skepticism.

"Oh look! We have emails that discredit this guy!"

 

[Corporate Thug]

Originally posted by: Rollo

Originally posted by: KeepItRed

Originally posted by: Rollo

Originally posted by: KeepItRed
Lol what if Sander made those benchies himself in Photoshop or something. Then made it sound real like ATI is commenting on it.

LOL what if he didn't and they are what he says they are?

lol He sounds nothing but a troubled young man, look at the facts:

1) He wanted insider info on the R520, ATI declined.
2) Sent an e-mail to some dude over at B3D saying "Not invited? Let's see if we can drop ATI's stock."
3) Made benchmarks right after that.

Looks like hes pissed cause he didn't get in.

B3d and DriverHeaven aren't what I'd call "impartial" in regard to ATI. They're both deep in ATIs pocket, to be more specific.

There's nothing wrong with that, it's good they have strong vendor relations to get us info, but I would take their spin on an issue like this with some skepticism.

"Oh look! We have emails that discredit this guy!"

in his post, he openly admitted that there is some beef between he and ati, i think that in itself discredits him

 

[ZobarStyl]

What happened to actually objectively talking about what the benches mean if they are correct? Why did the fanboys have to instantly turn this into a smear campaign rather than even discuss them in slightest?

Here's a thought: assume these benches are truly representative of R520 performance. No amount of character assassination attempts on Sander Sassen or complaining about the sources of said information is going to make R520 any faster. If this truly is what we're getting, what then, fanboys? What's the next plan of defense for R520?

I'm not particularly partial to either company, but I'm seriously saddened to see that a thread I hoped to get decent discussion out of instead degenerated so quickly into fanboy silliness. For god's sake, it's a corporation. At the end of the day, they all just want your money: there's nothing inherently more special or honorable about either company.

 

[nRollo]

Another thing to consider is that it may be fairly dangerous for Sassen to post those benches if they aren't real.

I'd think ATI would have some cause for a lawsuit for loss of sales if he posted inaccurate info?

 

[sandorski]

Originally posted by: ZobarStyl
What happened to actually objectively talking about what the benches mean if they are correct? Why did the fanboys have to instantly turn this into a smear campaign rather than even discuss them in slightest?

Here's a thought: assume these benches are truly representative of R520 performance. No amount of character assassination attempts on Sander Sassen or complaining about the sources of said information is going to make R520 any faster. If this truly is what we're getting, what then, fanboys? What's the next plan of defense for R520?

I'm not particularly partial to either company, but I'm seriously saddened to see that a thread I hoped to get decent discussion out of instead degenerated so quickly into fanboy silliness. For god's sake, it's a corporation. At the end of the day, they all just want your money: there's nothing inherently more special or honorable about either company.

The rather questionable circumstances around these "benchmarks" preclude acceptance of them. Even the very author who posted them(Sasser) can't verify them, why should anyone take them seriously?

As for a "What if?" kind of discussion, well that would make sense. Unfortunetly these kinds of things divert from that kind of discussion rather quickly.

 

[Elfear]

Originally posted by: Acanthus

Originally posted by: Elfear

Originally posted by: munky

Originally posted by: Frackal

Originally posted by: munky

Originally posted by: ddogg

Originally posted by: Therk
I am actually very suprised of how well a 16 piper does against a 24 piper. I would love to see a 24 piper R520 against a GTX

look at the difference in clockspeeds between the two cards....theres almost 200mhz between the two and the GTX is factory clocked at 1200MHz on the memory which can be bumped easily to 1300mhz. i would love to see a GTX clocked at 600/1400 against this.

LOL, I'd love to see you try clocking a gtx to 600/1400, even with a voltmod and watercooling. Not gonna happen, just like the A64 wont reach 4ghz no matter what.

Actually with a voltmod and dual slot, I doubt it would be that difficult.

My GTX reports as 515 max, 75mhz higher isn't much, and I'm only 40mhz away from 1400, stock volts, stock cooling. IIRC a guy with 615/1450 got 11k in '05

You have to look at the percentage increase. 75 mhz on a 3 ghz cpu is not much. 75 mhz on a gpu that's already pushing the limit at 515 is a pretty big jump, actually.

edit: and that's 85 actually, 515 + 85 = 600

do you have a link to the guy who got his to 615?

Here you go munky. Lots of guys on the orb are running some crazy numbers. (Hit "Show me the projects", I guess it doesn't populate the results from the link)

ViperJohn, the volt-modding guru, told me that a his air-cooled cards get anywhere between 540-600Mhz on the core and one of his watercooled cards ran at 640Mhz artifact free.

I wish one of the guys with one of these uber cards would run some gaming benchmarks. I'd like to see what kind of difference it would make over a stock GTX.

So youre suggesting that a 7800GTX, which runs 70c load easy at stock, will be safe for long term use with a volt mod and OC that would dramatically increase that sustained heat.

Sorry if I sounded like a stock card with a voltmod would run reliably. ViperJohn's cards actually have some mods to them to make them run cooler. There were a few pics on this forum of an X850XT PE that ViperJohn modded. I'll see if I can find them and show you what kind of work he does.

 

[Keysplayr]

Originally posted by: ZobarStyl
What happened to actually objectively talking about what the benches mean if they are correct? Why did the fanboys have to instantly turn this into a smear campaign rather than even discuss them in slightest?

Here's a thought: assume these benches are truly representative of R520 performance. No amount of character assassination attempts on Sander Sassen or complaining about the sources of said information is going to make R520 any faster. If this truly is what we're getting, what then, fanboys? What's the next plan of defense for R520?

I'm not particularly partial to either company, but I'm seriously saddened to see that a thread I hoped to get decent discussion out of instead degenerated so quickly into fanboy silliness. For god's sake, it's a corporation. At the end of the day, they all just want your money: there's nothing inherently more special or honorable about either company.

Well, I guess I would agree with most of this. But about the corporation thing, most of the time, folks don't look at the actual corporate mentality and what they have in mind. A quick example from another industry would be a Ford lover and a Chevy lover. Mustang vs. Camaro.. Like that. I know, it is different from computer electronics, but times are a changin. Used to be we argued about who made the fastest muscle car, and we were very proud of our cars and talked about how we bored and stroked the engine (modded) and what gear ratio's we used. Sometimes, it got nasty and arguments ensued.

Anyway, ZobarStyl, you can try to start a new thread to discuss these benchmarks as if they were legitimate. But the ATI fans will not let you keep the thread civil. You can try, and I would contribute as well as others, but I don't think you'll have much luck.

 

[emilyek]

Originally posted by: Rollo
Another thing to consider is that it may be fairly dangerous for Sassen to post those benches if they aren't real.

I'd think ATI would have some cause for a lawsuit for loss of sales if he posted inaccurate info?

Yep, probably. Think ATI would bother to sue him if they are phony, though?

Dunno, just asking.

 

[nitromullet]

Originally posted by: emilyek

Originally posted by: Rollo
Another thing to consider is that it may be fairly dangerous for Sassen to post those benches if they aren't real.

I'd think ATI would have some cause for a lawsuit for loss of sales if he posted inaccurate info?

Yep, probably. Think ATI would bother to sue him if they are phony, though?

Dunno, just asking.

Not if they're better than the real thing

 

[Corporate Thug]

Originally posted by: emilyek

Originally posted by: Rollo
Another thing to consider is that it may be fairly dangerous for Sassen to post those benches if they aren't real.

I'd think ATI would have some cause for a lawsuit for loss of sales if he posted inaccurate info?

Yep, probably. Think ATI would bother to sue him if they are phony, though?

Dunno, just asking.

doubtful, what does ATi have to gain thru a lawsuit? a few bucks?

not to mention, a large amount of time and effort will have to be used in determining jurisdiction...

 

[ronnn]

Originally posted by: ZobarStyl
What happened to actually objectively talking about what the benches mean if they are correct? Why did the fanboys have to instantly turn this into a smear campaign rather than even discuss them in slightest?

Here's a thought: assume these benches are truly representative of R520 performance. No amount of character assassination attempts on Sander Sassen or complaining about the sources of said information is going to make R520 any faster. If this truly is what we're getting, what then, fanboys? What's the next plan of defense for R520?

I'm not particularly partial to either company, but I'm seriously saddened to see that a thread I hoped to get decent discussion out of instead degenerated so quickly into fanboy silliness. For god's sake, it's a corporation. At the end of the day, they all just want your money: there's nothing inherently more special or honorable about either company.

Absolutely impossible as the nvidia fanboys were so busy insulting ati and anyone who could accept these as real and not that bad. Actually I suggested they may be real and if paired with IQ and feature advantages, could actually be good. Only response was a fanboy comment about seeing a silver lining or something. Not possible to discuss ati in a calm way on this forum.

 

[OneOfTheseDays]

all this talk is just fscking silly. it is absolutely ridiculous to accept these benchmarks as real and legitimate under any circumstances. wait until the official reviews come out before making comments.

 

[nRollo]

Originally posted by: Corporate Thug

Originally posted by: emilyek

Originally posted by: Rollo
Another thing to consider is that it may be fairly dangerous for Sassen to post those benches if they aren't real.

I'd think ATI would have some cause for a lawsuit for loss of sales if he posted inaccurate info?

Yep, probably. Think ATI would bother to sue him if they are phony, though?

Dunno, just asking.

doubtful, what does ATi have to gain thru a lawsuit? a few bucks?

not to mention, a large amount of time and effort will have to be used in determining jurisdiction...

On the contrary, I'd think what they'd gain is making an example of someone who posted information damaging to their sales in advance of the NDA expiring.

Presumably this sort of thing could happen every time new tech is developed and we never get much info before the day the companies say we can.

If they let this slide, what's to stop this from becoming a trend? I'd think if this is actionable, they almost have to pursue it.

 

[nRollo]

Originally posted by: Sudheer Anne
all this talk is just fscking silly. it is absolutely ridiculous to accept these benchmarks as real and legitimate under any circumstances. wait until the official reviews come out before making comments.

Why is it "ridiculous"? Because you say so? If you feel we should give your opinion more weight than Sassens, hopefully you have a link to the basis of your disagreement.

 

[ronnn]

Originally posted by: Rollo

If they let this slide, what's to stop this from becoming a trend? I'd think if this is actionable, they almost have to pursue it.

This is silly season. Why next they will be suing you? Than Nvidia will sue someone who says their textures shimmer. Pretty soon there will be no forums and no one to hype up their stuff.

 

[nRollo]

Originally posted by: ronnn

Originally posted by: Rollo

If they let this slide, what's to stop this from becoming a trend? I'd think if this is actionable, they almost have to pursue it.

This is silly season. Why next they will be suing you? Than Nvidia will sue someone who says their textures shimmer. Pretty soon there will be no forums and no one to hype up their stuff.

Good morning Ronnn. It's a little different to post info about cards already on the market that anyone can walk into a store and buy, isn't it? No one has violated NDA in that case have they?