• 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.

Sorry if this has been asked before...

G

Ganondorf27

Junior Member
On the DOOM 3 benchmark test, what results were actually posted? Was that the minimum frame rate throughout the test, the average frame rate, the number they got on the benchmark results screen, or what? Edit: I am, of course, referring to the test run by anandtech on the 8 GPUs, including the FX 5900 Ultra.
 
I'm guessing it was the average frame rate since that's typically the standard when reporting video benchmark scores.
 
My Deep Thought is to take the numbers with a shaker of salt, especially when comparing nvidia to ATI cards, since the Doom preview was sponsored by nvidia and the 5900's results don't match its (much worse) performance in almost every other game benchmark. Especially when the reviewer uses a custom timedemo instead of a standard one that nividia has apparently "optimized" its drivers for.

<-- happy Geforce3 owner
 
Oh, I'm not even considering upgrading. It should be perfectly playable with the rig I have now by the time it comes out. I was simply wondering, because it didn't actually say.


<----- happy Radeon 9800 owner. 🙂
 
I believe some reviews before included both average frame rate and minimum frame rate when they were comparing CPUs. Since the article you're asking about doesn't specifically say anything about minimum frame rate, it's safe to say that the average is what is reported.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top