• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

So which benchmark do you trust?

That Anandtech article was based on overclocking. Nvidia's cards overclock a lot higher than ATI's cards. Also the benchmark used games that ran well on the Geforce. It's not a proper article to go by.
 
The Anandtech article in addition to overclocking results, used the Det 53.03's and Cat 4.1's while Tom's used the 52.16's and 3.9's.
 
Originally posted by: Viper96720
Plus Anand used an A64 3400 with 2x 512MB. Tom's used 3.2Ghz P4 with 256MBx4. Not a same comparison.
Click to expand...

so you're saying nvidia needs to be paired with athlon64 to kick 9700Pros ass and ATI needs a 3.2GHz P4 to kick geforcefx's ass?
rolleye.gif
 
Generally trust Anand more than Toms. That said, I still prefer to look at community experiences and consensus more than benchmarks.
 
Thread title should be which reviewer do you trust, no?

Originally posted by: Viper96720
Plus Anand used an A64 3400 with 2x 512MB. Tom's used 3.2Ghz P4 with 256MBx4. Not a same comparison.
Click to expand...

Interestingly enough, Digit-Life's latest 3Digest includes numbers for both those CPUs. Their AA+AF numbers are closer than Tom's, but Radeons still generally come out on top.
 
i trust my gameplay only.....using fraps

these review site should only be a guide anyway......they bench on monster systems like FX-51's
this chip on its own is worth more than my main rig!
 
Originally posted by: Viper96720
No can't compare results from 2 different sources using different hardware and drivers.
Click to expand...

uhh but the performance delta should be SIMILAR either way. The performance delta between the two site's results has a 200% variation. That's A LOT for both sites to be accurate at the same time.

I can't see how you can see this is normal.
 
Originally posted by: nemesismk2
The only benchmark results I trust are the ones created manually using fraps.
Click to expand...

Here Here!!!

With these lieing cheating companies I want to avoid common benchmarks they may have enhanced their drivers for....So good old fraps in the game is all I need....Play an hour or so and get a good average....


i think ppl need to stop bashing toms as IMO I think they have had some better reviews of late versus anandtech and their extremely one sided review procedure. Just be the person that actual reads the test configuration and understand what settings were used, period.....

 
For benchmark numbers I trust Anand over Tom without a doubt. Compare both of their numbers, and this goes for anything not just this particular review, to what actual end users are getting with the same setups. I don't know what Tom does, but his benches are regularly comical in how different they are from every other site.

For commentary I don't trust any of the review sites be it because of the level ot technical expertise or the fairly extreme bias on those sites that don't suffer from the former. Digit-Life is likely the best overall for vid card reviews, but mainly because they are the most detailed without bending over backwards to perform PR for one company or another.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top