Very informative review. In response to the apples-to-apples comparisons, it appears that every test was A-to-A since the cards perform virtually the same. I don't believe omitting that comparison detracted from the review at all.
I understand the [H] is fed up with being ATI's pr for paper launched products, but its still important to get review info about launched cards out to the consumer (hard or paper) so that they can make future buying decisions. Lots of people have been waiting to see the R520XT performance before upgrading video cards, and those people (myself included) will be looking forward to a proper [H] review as well. Few other sites offer the same quality as you guys.
That said, the reasoning behind the card choice makes sense. ATI has alot of nice features this round and made some significant strides from their last generation of cards while keeping good performance.
I understand the [H] is fed up with being ATI's pr for paper launched products, but its still important to get review info about launched cards out to the consumer (hard or paper) so that they can make future buying decisions. Lots of people have been waiting to see the R520XT performance before upgrading video cards, and those people (myself included) will be looking forward to a proper [H] review as well. Few other sites offer the same quality as you guys.
That said, the reasoning behind the card choice makes sense. ATI has alot of nice features this round and made some significant strides from their last generation of cards while keeping good performance.