Should AT include OC'd Cards in Reviews?

[AtenRa]

From day one, AIBs released Factory Overclocked GTX460 768 and 1G variants and customers were able to purchase one of them for three months now (Official release of GTX460 11th of July 2010).

Those Factory OC GTX460s are directly competitive products against AMDs 5800 and 6800 series and it’s only natural to include them in a review.

So, if both default and Factory OC variants of the GTX460 or other cards are included in the Review its ok by me, customers should know all available alternatives.

 

[3DVagabond]

The answers should simply be Yes or no. The additional commentary "More Information is Good" "It reeks of Bias" prejudices the responses. It's obvious which response the OP was going for. Even with that 1/3 of those responding don't think it should have happened.

 

[betasub]

So is this EVGA FTW being portrayed as representative of all those other factory-overclocked GTX460 1GB versions? Or is it a short-run, super-clocked card that represents the best of the GTX460 bunch?

 

[Lonyo]

So is this EVGA FTW being portrayed as representative of all those other factory-overclocked GTX460 1GB versions? Or is it a short-run, super-clocked card that represents the best of the GTX460 bunch?

It pretty much represents "best case" factory overclock. Most cards fall between the stock clock and the EVGA version.

 

[3DVagabond]

So is this EVGA FTW being portrayed as representative of all those other factory-overclocked GTX460 1GB versions? Or is it a short-run, super-clocked card that represents the best of the GTX460 bunch?

It's the card that nVidia wanted the new AMD cards to be compared to. 11th hour price cuts and cards supplied specifically for this review. I'm afraid AT played it exactly the way nVidia wanted them to.

 

[AtenRa]

It's the card that nVidia wanted the new AMD cards to be compared to. 11th hour price cuts and cards supplied specifically for this review. I'm afraid AT played it exactly the way nVidia wanted them to.

Before EVGA release the GTX 460 FTW (850MHz core, 4000MHz memory), PointOfView released the GTX460 1G TGT Beast Edition (855MHz core, 4000MHz memory).

http://www.evga.com/products/moreInf...s%20Family&sw=

http://www.pointofview-online.com/showroom.php?shop_mode=product_detail&product_id=189

MSI have released ther GTX460 HAWX and TALON (810MHz core 3900MHz memory) before 6800 series

http://www.msi.com/index.php?func=proddesc&maincat_no=130&cat2_no=738&prod_no=2152

ZOTACs GTX460 AMP was released three months ago with 810MHz core 3600MHz memory.

http://www.zotacusa.com/zotac-geforce-gtx-460-1-gb-256-bit-675mhz-3600mhz-zt-40402-10p-367.html


Those are not all the Factory OC GTX460 cards you could find and as I have said before, those cards were selling before AMDs HD6800 series was released.

Don’t you want to know how those Factory OC products compete against AMDs 6800 series at the same price point?

 

[3DVagabond]

Before EVGA release the GTX 460 FTW (850MHz core, 4000MHz memory), PointOfView released the GTX460 1G TGT Beast Edition (855MHz core, 4000MHz memory).

http://www.evga.com/products/moreInf...s%20Family&sw=

http://www.pointofview-online.com/showroom.php?shop_mode=product_detail&product_id=189

MSI have released ther GTX460 HAWX and TALON (810MHz core 3900MHz memory) before 6800 series

http://www.msi.com/index.php?func=proddesc&maincat_no=130&cat2_no=738&prod_no=2152

ZOTACs GTX460 AMP was released three months ago with 810MHz core 3600MHz memory.

http://www.zotacusa.com/zotac-geforce-gtx-460-1-gb-256-bit-675mhz-3600mhz-zt-40402-10p-367.html


Those are not all the Factory OC GTX460 cards you could find and as I have said before, those cards were selling before AMDs HD6800 series was released.

Don’t you want to know how those Factory OC products compete against AMDs 6800 series at the same price point?

Were you responding to my post? You quoted me, but your post had nothing to do with what I said. But, to answer your question, no, I don't want to know how O/C products compare to reference ones.

If it were a review for a reference 470 do you think it would be OK for AMD to drop the retail of the 5850 the day of the 470 launch and send an overclocked 5850 to AT to use in the review? It doesn't pass the smell test for me.

 

[Lonyo]

Were you responding to my post? You quoted me, but your post had nothing to do with what I said. But, to answer your question, no, I don't want to know how O/C products compare to reference ones.

If it were a review for a reference 470 do you think it would be OK for AMD to drop the retail of the 5850 the day of the 470 launch and send an overclocked 5850 to AT to use in the review? It doesn't pass the smell test for me.

But that's not what happened. Ever since launch there have been overclocked GTX460s.
MOST of the GTX460s on the market are overclocked.
Using a factory card isn't particularly representative of the real state of the GTX460 market. Most models available are factory overclocked. Fact. There's nothing fishy about including overclocked cards at all.

Comparing it to other cards is stupid, because there are pretty much no card models for which the market is the same as the GTX460.

The *ONLY* issue which should be brought up is the specific model used, which is one of the highest clocked GTX460s. In some ways that might misrepresent the performance of the majority of GTX460s, but like I said, it gives a top level vs the stock clocked card which gives a baseline of the lowest level.

 

[Troll Trolling]

Of course they should include it. It is a product, doesn't matter if it is OC'd or not; it matters if it is priced right.
It is not everyone that OC's, therefore, for those buying a factory-overclocked GPU is a win/win situation.
But I think AT should emphasis more about its unsure availability. (They just wrote a phrase saying that in the power consumption's page)

 

[3DVagabond]

But that's not what happened. Ever since launch there have been overclocked GTX460s.
MOST of the GTX460s on the market are overclocked.
Using a factory card isn't particularly representative of the real state of the GTX460 market. Most models available are factory overclocked. Fact. There's nothing fishy about including overclocked cards at all.

Comparing it to other cards is stupid, because there are pretty much no card models for which the market is the same as the GTX460.

The *ONLY* issue which should be brought up is the specific model used, which is one of the highest clocked GTX460s. In some ways that might misrepresent the performance of the majority of GTX460s, but like I said, it gives a top level vs the stock clocked card which gives a baseline of the lowest level.

It's exactly what happened. On the day of the 6000 launch nVidia dropped the price of the 460 and then sent the fastest one they could find to sites specifically with the intention to be used in comparison to the 6000. If that's good to you, that's fine. It stinks to me.

 

[betasub]

Still looking for a vendor in my locality with the EVGA FTW in the review. But I did find MSI & ZOTAC offerings with 810MHz cores, and even a waterblock-fitted ZOTAC GTX460 1GB (perhaps this should've been included if AT wants to show off overclocking potential ).

 

[krumme]

We can argue back and forth. And there is advantages and disadvantages for this single review.

What stands as a fact is the wider consequences if this becomes new practice:

1. Nvidia and AMD will make further pressure to the review sites on launch day to use:
A. special oc cards
B. Specific games
C. Specific methology

2. If they succed, it will blur the decisions for the consumers - its the purpose of the actions of the marketing department. They will select the wrong cards for their needs.

3. NV and AMD will dedicate more ressources at marketing instead of engineering, to make all this happen.

4. The end results will be slower cards for all.

5. A second effect will be an eroding of the PC platform for gaming.

What Anand have to do in my oppinion is:

1. Have separate articles for oc vs non oc cards. Prefareble keep apples to apple comparisons here.

2. Publicly state the testing methology for the cards separate from the testing, keep to it as long as possible, and never ever change methology at launch times. Do it before, so testing history is intact.

3. Change to a more modern methology showing real framerates in the game, min. max. average, over a time period that stresses the card. Giving advice like Hardocp, how the card supports different settings.

4. Validity of the site is vital. Anandtech should publish information from AMD, Nvidia and Intel publicly, and the answer to it. Then the readers can decide from themselves. Its naive to think anandtech can separate politics from benchmark methology. If someone have something to hide, it should be know publicly. I have no doubt Anand have the power to introduce such politics.

Anand should take the lead. Tell the companies who is in charge, and let us know.

As a sidenote: what would have happened if years back, anand had told NV to take all their agressive marketing a put it up their xxx? - instead what happens is this mess. What anand does have big effect on the companies, their strategy, and the future development. Its a responsibility Anand should take more care about today. Anand is not a small reviewer anymore, its a significant player.

 

[krumme]

Regarding the poll, the quality of the formulation of the options, is simply not worthy of this thread and this community. Its pathetic in its bias. And what is the purpose of it anyway, lets have the arguments and the discussion instead. Pull it.

 

[Skurge]

I don't mind them reviewing Overclocked cards. AT already had a roundup if overclocked GTX460s, so there was no excuse to include it in a product launch.

 

[faxon]

no offense, but the poll sucks on options. i think it should be on a case by case basis. if there is a logical merit (in this case i think there is, there's tons of OC 460s, but the prices are higher, and the 460 OCs like a mother, putting it in a different class from most GPU OCs), then i think they should, but if it clearly reeks of one company or the other trying to load benches to make the other look bad, or there's something else in the works in terms of foul play, then i think the writers and editors should pow wow and decide whats best, like they always have. they need to go about it in a clear manner though, and make sure they list the price difference and different in specs vs stock. also, there should be testing done to verify that all factory overclock models are more or less the same as well. if there is large variance in vcore/power draw for example thats a huge thing to simply leave out, as some users buy based on that metric as well as raw performance. supply is also an issue, if the card is a limited run card i dont think it should be included, but if the card is easily available at retail then its worth a shot. they need to include perf/$ numbers though if they're going to, to figure out if the overclocked card is even worth the price they're charging over the stock version. in this case, it's definitely merited, especially since EVGA for example isnt even selling a stock 675mhz 460 anymore. with the latest bios their stock model is like 715/725 core or something (i forget which), and thats across the board for their "reference design", selling in the same price bracket as every other stock 460.

 

[Lonyo]

It's exactly what happened. On the day of the 6000 launch nVidia dropped the price of the 460 and then sent the fastest one they could find to sites specifically with the intention to be used in comparison to the 6000. If that's good to you, that's fine. It stinks to me.

Actually it is good.
There are many GTX460's. The slowest is the stock at reference clocks. The fastest is the one they sent to AT. All others fall pretty much between those two.

So you can easily tell what sort of performance pretty much any GTX460 will have by extrapolating between the fastest and slowest available cards. While it's obviously marketing from NV trying to promote their product, it also helps inform consumers, or at least ones who understand the products, because they get an idea of the two extremes of GTX460s.

While it may be disagreeable that NV sent in cards and tried to 'persuade' review sites to use them, at the end of the day it provides a valuable performance metric which is relevant to the cards in question (GTX460 and HD68xx) simply because there are so many GTX460s at various clocks, that just including a stock clocked one says nothing about 80% of the cards on the market.
By including both a high and low clocked one, you then become informed about where the other 80% will fall.

You may disagree with the NV element, but at the end of the day, it's pretty much essential to include the information in a review which seeks to inform consumers of what the options are, and allow them to make the best possible decisions based on useful evidence. It's damned good to me as a consumer, even if it's dodgy in many ways from a marketing/business practice standpoint.

 

[Lliam M]

Both companies would try to gain advantage it is your job to resist. You did initially resist then chose in my opinion wrongly to include the OC card in a review which generally compares like with like. These are not scientific experiments and your site is a very honourable one although I think you made a mistake including this card. I purchased both the AMD and the OC Nvidia card for some of my machines both are good midrange cards.
So nice for me to see you reviewing 2 of my cards together although I would still say you choose poorly. There is no way this was motivated by anything but a judgement call by Anandtech and the strange brand loyalty some readers have does at least make me laugh at times. Laughter is nice but technical reviews are what I love this site for and why I used to love Tom’s.
The end of the day if a card is in the same price region of another card and the advantage is worth mentioning then the review was correct. The problem is that you have changed the way you review products and have drifted from a scientific approach to a purely value for dollar one. Not a bad thing but it has changed the course of your review’s validity to some readers. Although Nvidia clinging to a partners OC card rather than developing new product is rather sad as is a refresh of a badly laid out AMD GPU.
I will still keep faith in your site although I will expect you to take this approach to all your future reviews of product from either company or it would seem to be an unfair approach.
Thank you for all the reviews I have read over the last 10/12 years Anand Lal Shimpi. I have no interest in AMD as it is called now or Nvidia I have purchased 100’s of products by both its all about performance, compatibility and price so I am happy if both companies are strong keeps them competitive. P.s if anyone wants to correct my English feel free J

 

[Dribble]

The only people who could think this is unfair are fanboys of whoever's camp looks worse due to the o/c card from the other camp being included.

For the rest of us, we're not stupid, we can see it's o/c and make judgements appropriately. Obviously it's good to include them in a review because it provides more information on the range of performance of that type of card. I'd obviously want a stock card and a highly over-clocked one then I can interpolate what I'd get at various o/c.

Really this is debate is just an extension of the fanboy fanaticism that infects this forum. Just ignore them, review as many cards and as many variants as possible, and let us use our brains to work out what the numbers mean.

 

[biostud]

just test each card with stock setting + max oc, then you know the factory overclocked cards will land between these results in performance.

 

[crislevin]

In the end, what AT did is out there for people to see, a benchmark of a newly launch product filled with competitor's OC products? yeah right, thats gotta help users and AT's credibility.

Defends all you want, there are lines you can't cross. You guys standing in the NV camp and find various excuses for this, the truth is this gonna confuse users and this is biased in favor of NV. all you guys can say here, is to blame the readers.

This is just plain ridiculous, anand actually wrote a post to defend this? its just sank to a new low.

Im done here. anadtech is now removed from my list as a credible source.

 

[Voo]

You guys standing in the NV camp and find various excuses for this, the truth is this gonna confuse users and this is biased in favor of NV. all you guys can say here, is to blame the readers.

So you're claiming that an informed reader who reads the whole review may confuse the OCed 460 with the normal one? If so then tell me how, because I don't see how that'd be possible after all the disclaimers in the text and the notation in the graph.

If you're worried about some idiot with no idea about GPUs (otherwise he'd know what OC means) who doesn't read the text (otherwise he'd get the explanation) getting the wrong idea.. hell why should we care? That's not the audience to whom AT should cater anyways.
If going after the lowest denominator means the usual audience of AT loses interesting information (i.e. how a OCed 460 fares compared to the other cards; which also enables one to approximate the performance of it between the tested values), I'm not interested in it.

If you can show me only one example where an average reader who read the whole review got the wrong idea, then you'd have a point. But otherwise?

 

[Arkadrel]

Anandtech this smells of nvidia favortisme...

I mean you wrote 460 (oc), thats it? you think people will notice this? avg. joe will look at it and walk away with 460 is almost as fast as the 6870 (which is totally wrong).

A few chips hand picked by nvidia, sent to EVGA can do this, hardly all.

Also did you mention that the 460 EVGA uses like 50 watts more than the 6870 BECAUSE its heavily overclocked? or that it ll have a shorter life than the avg 460?

you should have 460@core/shaders/mem on every benchmark where you use the EVGA 460.


you screwed up, caved in to nVidias demands, in order to make AMDs launch look bad/confuse people/help nvidia sales. Thats what it looks like to me.

 

[Arkadrel]

Case in point, you can buy an EVGA GTX460 FTW edition, which runs faster than an HD6870, and produces less noise at load, and at $239 ($229 with rebate) which is similarly priced than an HD6870. Therefore, it's a direct competitor to a stock HD6870 on price.

From the reviews Ive read thats simply not true.
The EVGA 460 doesnt beat the 6870, in benches.
The EVGA uses 50watts or so more than the 6870.

Also AnandTech, didnt clearly enough lable it a super overclocked (highest on the market) version of a 460.

" EVGA 460 (oc) " label? really? with a overclocked card like this the right way to CLEARLY show its a really high overclock would be to show the card as EVGA 460@Core/shaders/mem.

It almost looks like Anandtech is trying to confuse the people that simply glance at a bench in a certain game and just look at the fps of 460 and the 6870. They *MIGHT* not notice it is a heavly overclocked card.


also is it fair to use a overclocked card vs a stock? when there are overclocked 6870 soon comeing out? why couldnt he have waited a week or two and then shown 2 overclocked cards against one another?


so in short Anandtech is showing HEAVLY nvidia favortisme.

 

[Idontcare]

its funny that the tiniest of irrelevant minutiae is made into a question of ETHICS and blown out of proportion...

Anandtech was very fair in analyzing this with their disclaimer and in depth explanation of what and why. But its not like it is a big deal anyways.

That was my take on it too. Folks are acting like AT is clubbing baby seals or something scandalous like that has happened. Much ado about nothing.

 

[darckhart]

i'm not seeing this "apples to apples" comparison that people are complaining should have been done, and i'm also not seeing this "caved into nv demands."

the architectures are inherently different, therefore the main point is, what performance can i get for a certain price point? this means WHAT CAN I ACTUALLY BUY AT NEWEGG OR (INSERT YOUR FAVORITE PLACE TO SHOP)? like someone else said, i count 4 that are offered at 675 MHz. FOUR. If I had 240$ to spend and I had my heart set on a gtx460, which model would I buy?