• Some users have recently had their accounts hijacked. It seems that the now defunct EVGA forums might have compromised your password there and seems many are using the same PW here. We would suggest you UPDATE YOUR PASSWORD and TURN ON 2FA for your account here to further secure it. None of the compromised accounts had 2FA turned on.
    Once you have enabled 2FA, your account will be updated soon to show a badge, letting other members know that you use 2FA to protect your account. This should be beneficial for everyone that uses FSFT.

INQ's track record on G80

K

Kliter

Limp Gawd
Joined
May 22, 2006
Messages
159
I found this on Anand Boards and thought it was hillarious :D

It's a chronicle of professional journalism from the very credable INQ :p
Enjoy!


Originally posted by Geeforcer, B3D member:

I thought that now with most of G80 specs out on the table, I'd take a look at Inq's coverage of the chip, just for fun.

http://www.theinq.net/default.aspx?article=32385

Quote:
All we could confirm at this time is that the chip will be DirectX 10 compliant of course but it won't have the full implementation of Shader Model 4.0. It won't do the unified Shader but it will be Vista ready. Most of the chips out today are Vista ready at least the high end ones. This chip has every chance to end up faster than ATI's upcoming R580+ fall refresh chip but this one will get R600 beast to compete with. It is still too early for clocks and final specs but we will start digging this one. µ
Click to expand...

http://www.theinq.net/default.aspx?article=32769

Quote:
AS we understand it, if a Nvidia DX10 chip ends up with 32 pixel-Shaders, the same chip will have 16 Shaders that will be able to process geometry instancing or the vertex information.
... The Nvidian chippery is limited to 32 pixel and 16 vertex and geometry lines per clock, which might be a wining ratio but it is still too early to say. We don’t know who will win the next generation hardware game and
Click to expand...



http://www.theinquirer.net/default.aspx?article=32856
Quote:
IT TURNS that the fancy Nvidia G80 chip taped out, and in working silicon stage it will have 32 pixel Shaders and, as predicted, have 16 vertex and geometry Shaders. Nvidia wants to stick with a two to one ratio and assumes that the games of tomorrow will need twice as many pixels than they will need vertices and geometry information.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Click to expand...



http://www.theinquirer.net/default.aspx?article=33739
Quote:
We reported that G80 is a 90 nanometre chip with GDDR 4 support and that it is diss-unified marchitecture
Click to expand...

http://www.theinquirer.net/default.aspx?article=34319
Quote:
So, it is going to be late, that is not the ugly bit, board partners are telling us that it very well might have an external PSU to power the beast.
Click to expand...



http://www.theinquirer.net/default.aspx?article=34359
Quote:
What they will talk about is the odd part. First is the arrangement of the chip, physically we are hearing that it is 2 * 2 cm, or about a 400mm die. Ouch. One of the reasons it is so big is the whole dual core rumor that has been floating around. G80 is not going to be a converged shader unit like the ATI R500/XBox360 or R600, it will do things the 'old' way.
Some people are saying that it will have 96 pipes, split as 48 DX9 pipes and 48 DX10. While this may sound like a huge number, we are told if this is the case, it is unlikely that you can use both at the same time. Think a 48 or 48 architecture. That said, I kind of doubt this rumor, it makes little sense. In any case, NV is heavily downplaying the DX10 performance, instead shouting about DX9 to anyone who will listen. If the G80 is more or less two 7900s like we hear, it should do pretty well at DX9, but how it stacks up to R600 in DX9 is not known. R600 should annihilate it in DX10 benches though. We hear G80 has about 1/3 of it's die dedicated to DX10 functionality.
Click to expand...


http://www.theinquirer.net/default.aspx?article=34964
Quote:
This confirms Nvidia's theory that you don’t need unified shaders, at least for the time being. If the Vole doesn’t care about it, why should Nvidia? The big green company decided to do the different approach as its Vertex, Pixel and Geometry Shaders will still be divided in at last two separate function parts and we believe that this will give some additional speed in DirectX 9 games. That is how Nvidia plans to make its G80 chip and Microsoft doesn’t object. Nvidia will be first to launch a DirectX 10 part with ATI to follow roughly two months after Nvidia introduces its G80 baby. µ
Click to expand...

lol
 
Because, regardless of what you say, you KNOW each [H]ardcore users has an insatiable LUST for hardware rumours.

NO. Stop. Dont deny it. You KNOW you do.
 
Well it wasn't actually that bad on some other aspects of the G80. But it was wrong alot of the time :D
 
Arcygenical said:
Because, regardless of what you say, you KNOW each [H]ardcore users has an insatiable LUST for hardware rumours.

NO. Stop. Dont deny it. You KNOW you do.
Click to expand...

QFT!

I love speculation :D
 
R600 should annihilate it in DX10 benches though. We hear G80 has about 1/3 of it's die dedicated to DX10 functionality.
Click to expand...

This person has no clue what he's talking about.
 
That's just mostly Faud, and a little from Charlie.

Faud is full of shit. I read every one of his articles with a grin. But he makes the site fun to read :D

Charlie gets it right more often, but the problem is he believes Faud's bullshit, so sometimes he gets sidetracked.

You think Faud screwed up G80? He completely called it wrong on ATI's R520, claiming the high-end part would feature 24 or 32 pipes. Boy did he have to eat humble pie when he found out that the high-clocked R520 only had 16 pipes.

Eveyone besides Faud is worth reading on the Inq. I personally think Faud's sources are on to him, and they are playing games with him...using him to funnel misinformation, because everyone believes him.
 
defaultluser said:
That's just mostly Faud, and a little from Charlie.

Faud is full of shit. I read every one of his articles with a grin. But he makes the site fun to read :D

Charlie gets it right more often, but the problem is he believes Faud's bullshit, so sometimes he gets sidetracked.

You think Faud screwed up G80? He completely called it wrong on ATI's R520, claiming the high-end part would feature 24 or 32 pipes. Boy did he have to eat humble pie when he found out that the high-clocked R520 only had 16 pipes.

Eveyone besides Faud is worth reading on the Inq. I personally think Faud's sources are on to him, and they are playing games with him...using him to funnel misinformation, because everyone believes him.
Click to expand...

Yea, it's kinda funny, too, how the mood in many tech boards have shifted very negatively towards theINQ. It's almost as if you mention them, you immediatly get pummeled by attacks. I think that's how it should be, though, because obviously Fuad displays an incompetenance not worth reading. But it is good for the occasional chuckle. :D
 
Kliter said:
Yea, it's kinda funny, too, how the mood in many tech boards have shifted very negatively towards theINQ. It's almost as if you mention them, you immediatly get pummeled by attacks. I think that's how it should be, though, because obviously Fuad displays an incompetenance not worth reading. But it is good for the occasional chuckle. :D
Click to expand...

Still though, any other writer, I believe. The Inq is right about quite a few things, usually more than they're wrong. They were even good at reporting on video cards before Faud came along.

Its just Faud that's dragged them down lately.
 
Faud...fraud...lol...I still love DAAMIT and other funnies. :D
 
Usually when there is no other source of information or rumour, the INQ is all we got. Whether the info. is accurate or not doesn't really matter that much since we will only know after several reputable reviews are done. But it is always fun to speculate especially when we are really desperate for any kind of news to give us our fix! A rumour is just a rumour and should not be taken as gospel! Having a rumour is better than nothing at all! Now we eagerly await more rumours on the R600.
 
mike686 said:
So damn true!
Click to expand...

So if I made a website a month before the G80 came out a posted that the 8800GTX had 999999 unified shaders and had the potential to implode and suck everything within 5 miles of it into a small black hole before blasting the debris into space, that would be better than nothing?
 
Jodiuh said:
Faud...fraud...lol...I still love DAAMIT and other funnies. :D
Click to expand...

Funnies like DAAMIT are the only reason i keep reading... though Frauds editorials are just as funny as anything the enquirer prints.
 
defaultluser said:
Still though, any other writer, I believe. The Inq is right about quite a few things, usually more than they're wrong. They were even good at reporting on video cards before Faud came along.

Its just Faud that's dragged them down lately.
Click to expand...
The Inq could do a lot to rehabilitate themselves if they would:

1. Lose the tone of arrogant certainty in everything they write.

2. Print corrections when something they've stated with certainty turns out to be flat-out wrong.

H
 
J-M-E said:
So if I made a website a month before the G80 came out a posted that the 8800GTX had 999999 unified shaders and had the potential to implode and suck everything within 5 miles of it into a small black hole before blasting the debris into space, that would be better than nothing?
Click to expand...

I think the requirement that the rumor not be retarded was implied.


The INQ gets so much shit. All the shit talkers that know so much with their industry contacts and vast technical know-how should get together and make their own ultimate super-news site.
It's like Fox News, Air America, or People. Just check it out if you want, if you don't, shut up. Don't be a fucktard and make it out like they claim to be the Washington Post. All in all, its just rumors and shit to amuse.
 
Cbone said:
It's like Fox News, Air America, or People. Just check it out if you want, if you don't, shut up. Don't be a fucktard and make it out like they claim to be the Washington Post. All in all, its just rumors and shit to amuse.
Click to expand...
So, from your perspective it's all in fun and constitutes a "News and Rumor Site with Attitude"

Why is it so wrong, then, to comment that their attitude and accountability suck?
 
What's worse: people who complain about INQ or people who complain about the afformentioned?

BTW, I think the article that best illustrated what they are all about is not the one the list, but the one where Charly sited (what turned out to be accurte specs) off VR zone and Faud came along and said that he thinks the specs are off base. So, not only do the print way-off rumors, but they crap over the correct info somone else scooped.
 
Hurin said:
So, from your perspective it's all in fun and constitutes a "News and Rumor Site with Attitude"

Why is it so wrong, then, to comment that their attitude and accountability suck?
Click to expand...

It isn't "so wrong", it's just annoying that people rag on them so much. The heat they get is like they are that asshole that scratched your car and then took off or something (I hate that fucker!) :mad: Every thread that slightly references them gets filled with people talking shit. Like I said, they never claimed to be a professional news source or the webpage of record. Why are they held to a high standard when they should be held to a much, much lower one since they are a rumor site? How many other rumor and anonymous off-the-record-source newssources make a big deal about it when they are wrong? All they have is gossip cred. If they were trying to put out the actual factuals, they would need to sign NDAs which means no putting out the actual factuals. I'm sure they could talk to hardware guys really in the know that could break down all of the technology for them, but then they couldn't tell anyone about it.


That is sad. Look how much I typed and I don't give half a shit about the inquirer. I just don't like seeing people get disproportionate amounts of shit.
 
Usually, theINQ's reporting have as much legitimacy as some average joe making a prediction on some unknown boards, yet the difference is theINQ somehow gets more credability simply because it's posted "as news" on a big, flashy website.

theINQ can say what they want to all day long, and I could careless. All I'm doing is providing a general review of their track record thus far, and allow people to come to their own conclusions that theINQ really is an incompetant, FUD website, just like I've already realized (and many others, as well).
 
Arcygenical said:
Because, regardless of what you say, you KNOW each [H]ardcore users has an insatiable LUST for hardware rumours.

NO. Stop. Dont deny it. You KNOW you do.
Click to expand...

Exactly. Lies or not, its still feeding my lust and obsession for hardware news. And as they get closer to launch, it becomes more and more credible.

And dont act like its only hardforum! Google any of their article titles, and you'll find its on all the major forums. Anandtech, OCforums, etc..
 
Hurin said:
2. Print corrections when something they've stated with certainty turns out to be flat-out wrong.
Click to expand...

certainly they did make a correction after putting up that "DX9,L is DX10 on XP" nonsense. Possibly after receiving an overwhelming amount of irate emails.
 
I think that at least half of it were just Fuad's guesses.

It'd be nice if you could just make a few guesses that everybody around the world reads for fun, and start rumors among millions of people!

Maybe it's because there were a lot of pressure on the Inq to offer some articles so he had to go ahead and make guesses when he could not get anything from the tight-lipped Nvidia engineers. At least it kept the Inquirer popular and alive.
 
Charlie is just as bad ..especially given his PS3 slide fiasco where Charlie concludes the PS3's video is broken.

Slashdot cut him up over that ...and given charlie's emails to me --it was well deserved :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top