why does anandtech insist on not using AA in oblivion.

[ViRGE]

Originally posted by: josh6079

You're not going to get a billion+1 setups tested in such a time intensive game.

Not with Anandtech we're not, which is the point of this thread.

How ever "difficult" it may be for Anandtech's team to run, they are either inept in their time management or disregard realistic (and fully capable) settings. Other review sites have found ways to both review Oblivion realistically and provide other titles while doing so.

It's not the lack of hardware, it's not the lengthy process of benchmarking - if that lengthy at all - and it's not a crunched time frame as they have reviewed said game time and time again incorrectly, even with more titles in the mix. Anandtech simply is inept when it comes to benchmarking Oblivion realistically with today's hardware.

I suspect we're just going to have to agree to disagree here, but 3 things:

1) How on earth is HDR+AA a realistic setting in terms of playability? Just with HDR it kills everything below the 8-series. You're not going to be playing Oblivion at 1600x1200 at max settings and a smooth framerate on most cards if you're turning that stuff on.

2) How is benchmarking with a feature only a handful of cards can use realistic? Until the rest of the 8-series cards come out the 7-series are perfectly viable products; all HDR+AA tells us is how the 7-series can't run it, it doesn't show how their performance differs.

3) Who else runs as many cards as AT with as many games as AT and manages to get in Oblivion with and without HDR+AA? All the other review sites I've seen either do only 1 mode, or are forced to throw out the 7-series(see point #2).

HDR+AA isn't and won't be a reasonable test as long as the 7-series is viable.

 

[TheRyuu]

1.) HDR+AA is a good setting in terms of playability. If the card performs well in HDR+AA tests then it must run good in regular tests too. Plus what about people who want to run HDR+AA, it's a good test for them eh?

2.) The entire X1900 series and X1800 series can do HDR+AA as well as the 8800 series. More then a "handful of cards" if you ask me. And what about people who want to buy a G80 card or X1900 card. They'll want to see those benchmarks.

3.) Being forced to throw out the 7 series shows a good point, that the 7 series is incapable of running it is in itself a good point (IMO).

HDR+AA is something to consider when you buy a video card. Obviously if your getting a 7 series card then HDR+AA is out the window. But for those who want it, the test is good.

 

[josh6079]

How on earth is HDR+AA a realistic setting in terms of playability?

Because Anandtech is an enthusiast hardware review site, and most enthusiast-level cards can accomplish that setting with playable frames depending on the resolution - especially with the addition of the GeForce 8 series.

Just with HDR it kills everything below the 8-series.

Your argument is that if something doesn't get good frames it shouldn't be benched?

Anandtech shouldn't have wasted time benching R6: Vegas then, because performance is worse with it across the board than Oblivion's results.

You're not going to be playing Oblivion at 1600x1200 at max settings and a smooth framerate on most cards if you're turning that stuff on.

I have. Granted, it was a borderline playability, but the fact remains it was playable.

Even on a "G80 Round up" test - one that *should* have only included the G80's - they omitted valid settigns that could have been ran on 90% of the cards in question - Click

How is benchmarking with a feature only a handful of cards can use realistic?

There are more cards on benchmarks today that can do HDR+AA then ones that can't. Specifically, with the Anandtech article in question six out of eight cards could perform HDR+AA. As wizboy stated, "more than a handful".

Until the rest of the 8-series cards come out the 7-series are perfectly viable products...

Who was arguing that? Of course their viable. What's your point?

...all HDR+AA tells us is how the 7-series can't run it...

No. That is only what *you* see out of such tests.

For those who may be upgrading from an X1900 series or a 7 series, they already know what cards are capable of said feature. What their interested is the performance, in which case they have to go elsewhere to find that useful information.

...it doesn't show how their performance differs.

We know, that's the problem. It doesn't show much of anything. All that it currently shows is frame rates from HDR+AA-capable GPU's catered to a GeForce 7 feature-set.

If HDR+AA doesn't matter to enthusiasts, why have other review sites taken the time to bench it? Click

Who else runs as many cards as AT with as many games as AT and manages to get in Oblivion with and without HDR+AA?

Xbit

All the other review sites I've seen either do only 1 mode, or are forced to throw out the 7-series(see point #2).

The above link had two separate sections for Oblivion. A novel idea for a review site...

HDR+AA isn't and won't be a reasonable test as long as the 7-series is viable.

So Xbit was unreasonable in their testing? They made the effort to show both benches bound by two different feature-sets and it was "unreasonable"?

 

[Munky]

Originally posted by: ViRGE

Originally posted by: Elderly Newt
i think you cant have AA and HDR on at the same time?

Not on a 7-series card. And since they're still viable cards until the rest of the 8-series is introduced, AT is going to use the lowest common denominator in settings so they can test a wide variety of cards.

Well, there's a bright idea. I dont remember - did they also refuse to test SM3 games when only the 6-series could do it? Will they not run any DX10 benches because the 7-series and the x1k cards are still viable options but cant do DX10? My opinion of AT reviews just went down another notch...

 

[ViRGE]

Originally posted by: josh6079
Stuff & More Stuff

As I said before, I think we're just going to have to agree to disagree. I believe it's more important to keep the ability to include the 7-series in the comparison, while you want to test a more limited selection of cards with additional features. I'm not going to say it's the right choice, but you do have a valid point and it's clear we're not going to get anywhere trying to convince each other.

I would like to note however that I wouldn't consider that Xbit article a valid comparison to an AT article. Xbit never does launch-day articles as far as I can tell(the closest is the first 8800 article, which didn't include any games) while AT does. What you're asking for from my interpretation is for AT launch-day articles to test HDR+AA like "other review sites"; however as I've stated they're going to have to drop something to do that in order to still make it for a launch-day article, and I haven't seen anyone else who does launch-day articles that does significantly more testing than AT does. If you want AT to do additional articles later with more tests like Xbit did(a good month after the launch) then that's a very reasonable request, but that's not the same as making changes to what they test on launch-day.

 

[ViRGE]

Originally posted by: munky

Originally posted by: ViRGE

Originally posted by: Elderly Newt
i think you cant have AA and HDR on at the same time?

Not on a 7-series card. And since they're still viable cards until the rest of the 8-series is introduced, AT is going to use the lowest common denominator in settings so they can test a wide variety of cards.

Well, there's a bright idea. I dont remember - did they also refuse to test SM3 games when only the 6-series could do it? Will they not run any DX10 benches because the 7-series and the x1k cards are still viable options but cant do DX10? My opinion of AT reviews just went down another notch...

Munky, as far as I can remember there weren't any big-title games out using SM3 when the 7-series launched, let alone the 6-series. The first thing I can think of would be Splinter Cell 3 around the time of the X1-series launch, and AT turned SM3 off on those tests so they could include the X-series. So yes, I'd say they refused to test SM3 games when not every card could do it.

As for DX10, it's anyones' guess what AT will do. The first DX10 game won't be until what, this summer?

 

[josh6079]

I believe it's more important to keep the ability to include the 7-series in the comparison, while you want to test a more limited selection of cards with additional features.

What do you think my comment, "The above link had two separate sections for Oblivion. A novel idea for a review site... " was implying? They should include 2 different sections for the Oblivion benches so as to keep the 7 series in the mix and show realistic settings on 6/8 cards tested.

Xbit never does launch-day articles as far as I can tell(the closest is the first 8800 article, which didn't include any games) while AT does.

You never mentioned that they had to be launch-day articles. But that's fine, we can back peddle if you'd like.

TechReport bothered to take the time to show both numbers and on a launch day.

However, the article in question with this thread's OP isn't a launch article to begin with. Anandtech isn't just leaving out this bench in it's launch articles but every article. Considering they test more cards that are capable of this feature than not now, I don't think it's too much to ask to show some "viable" settings with them for that game.

What you're asking for from my interpretation is for AT launch-day articles to test HDR+AA like "other review sites"...they're going to have to drop something to do that in order to still make it for a launch-day article...I haven't seen anyone else who does launch-day articles that does significantly more testing than AT does...that's not the same as making changes to what they test on launch-day.

It doesn't even have to be a launch day article. I'd just like for them to see it in any article they do. This thread isn't even based on the launch article, that factor was only introduced by you in an attempt to justify Anandtech's incompetence.

 

[Ackmed]

Originally posted by: ViRGE

Originally posted by: josh6079

You're not going to get a billion+1 setups tested in such a time intensive game.

Not with Anandtech we're not, which is the point of this thread.

How ever "difficult" it may be for Anandtech's team to run, they are either inept in their time management or disregard realistic (and fully capable) settings. Other review sites have found ways to both review Oblivion realistically and provide other titles while doing so.

It's not the lack of hardware, it's not the lengthy process of benchmarking - if that lengthy at all - and it's not a crunched time frame as they have reviewed said game time and time again incorrectly, even with more titles in the mix. Anandtech simply is inept when it comes to benchmarking Oblivion realistically with today's hardware.

I suspect we're just going to have to agree to disagree here, but 3 things:

1) How on earth is HDR+AA a realistic setting in terms of playability? Just with HDR it kills everything below the 8-series. You're not going to be playing Oblivion at 1600x1200 at max settings and a smooth framerate on most cards if you're turning that stuff on.

2) How is benchmarking with a feature only a handful of cards can use realistic? Until the rest of the 8-series cards come out the 7-series are perfectly viable products; all HDR+AA tells us is how the 7-series can't run it, it doesn't show how their performance differs.

3) Who else runs as many cards as AT with as many games as AT and manages to get in Oblivion with and without HDR+AA? All the other review sites I've seen either do only 1 mode, or are forced to throw out the 7-series(see point #2).

HDR+AA isn't and won't be a reasonable test as long as the 7-series is viable.

1. HDR+AA is very playable. Yes, even at 1600x1200. You do not need 60fps to get playable frames in Oblivion, imo. Its not a FPS, its a slow paced RPG. Even so, they dont test AA at all. With or without HDR. And thats just dumb to me. ANd obviously many others. They test most other games with AA.

2. Again, this isnt about HDR+AA, vs. HDR. Its about them not testing AA period.

3. A lot of reviews test more games than AT. And a lot test with AA in Oblivion, even with HDR+AA. There is simply no excuse to not test with AA, or even with HDR+AA in Oblivion. The only reasons I can think of, are what josh and I have said. They're too lazy, or too ignorant.

 

[WinnieThePujols]

Are you positive you can have HDR + AA in Oblivion? I know you think you're tricking the system into doing it, but I read that when AA is enabled, it automatically overrides your settings and changes "HDR" into "Bloom" lighting...

So you may think you are doing it, but are you sure it's actually working? Reason I ask is because I've heard that it is physically impossible (based on the architecture of the nVidia cards) to do that...

 

[Munky]

Originally posted by: WinnieThePujols
Are you positive you can have HDR + AA in Oblivion? I know you think you're tricking the system into doing it, but I read that when AA is enabled, it automatically overrides your settings and changes "HDR" into "Bloom" lighting...

So you may think you are doing it, but are you sure it's actually working? Reason I ask is because I've heard that it is physically impossible (based on the architecture of the nVidia cards) to do that...

You can't enable HDR + AA from within the game. You have to select HDR in the game, and then force AA through the video card drivers. It works, I tried it myself, but only on the Ati x1k cards and the Nvidia 8-series. The 7-series can't do it because they lack the required hardware.

 

[Matt2]

AT's video card reviews are garbage as far as I am concerned.

In fact, if it wasnt for this forum, I might never even visit this site.

 

[Zebo]

Originally posted by: ViRGE

Originally posted by: Dainas

Originally posted by: ViRGE

Originally posted by: Elderly Newt
i think you cant have AA and HDR on at the same time?

Not on a 7-series card. And since they're still viable cards until the rest of the 8-series is introduced, AT is going to use the lowest common denominator in settings so they can test a wide variety of cards.

Then why not have a separate list for cards that CAN do it? Is the X1950pro, X1950XTX, 8800GTS 320mb and 640mb along with the 8800GTX not enough to make an interesting graph?

Sure, what test would you like to get rid of to make room for it? Oblivion is a time-intensive game to test.

This is why I like xbit labs so much even though they can't speak english worth a damn. XBIT, releases reviews so late on HW compared to other sites because they test the crap out of everything.

Anandtech is becoming "wham bam thank you mam" like those sites who just run synthetics like 3dmarks and call it a "review" just to have it out day NDA is opened up. They even promise to explore things further in later reviews but never do. Probably too busy pimping vendors cards they get.

In other words they don't have to cut anything but endless stream of vendors cards and take their time with the reviews they do do.

 

[Wreckage]

Originally posted by: wizboy11
This is why I like Techreport's reviews of video cards.
http://www.techreport.com/

I agree, they are one of the best review sites now. The list of good sites is getting smaller and smaller.

 

[Munky]

Originally posted by: Matt2
AT's video card reviews are garbage as far as I am concerned.

In fact, if it wasnt for this forum, I might never even visit this site.

LOL, same here.