durquavian
Gawd
- Joined
- Dec 13, 2014
- Messages
- 757
There was nothing wrong with the article. It was bold and to the point which is the [H] way of writing reviews.
The same type of articles have been written for other vendors including NVidia and you guys didn't have a problem then. So why now?
Is it because [H] has disturbed the established order by writing against a company that you guys love so much?
I wasn't comparing to any other article of theirs. I was commenting on the merits of this sole article. If you want I can go and take parts of the article and reword them so you can better understand.
Also for those talking about the 4Gb, at no point in the entirety of the article was the 4Gb HBM shown to be an issue. Commenting/alluding to one game used 5Gb on a 6Gb product is not conclusive to 4Gb being an issue. Maybe it is, maybe it isn't. But to comment that it is at 1440p but then at 4K it doesn't seem to be an issue or not nearly as great of one over whatever was afflicting the 980Ti, was premature. Scientifically this is what one might call a set-back to the 4Gb hypothesis and therefore requires a more indepth look. Funniest part is that they were harsh about AMDs comments on cards for certain resolutions, but in the end it looked as though AMD was correct. At 1440p the Fury didn't look too impressive against its competition. But at 4K it was a contender.
At any rate, for now it is just an ok performer with some tantalizing features: HBM, watercooling at stock, small form factor... . I am interested to see with just a little passing time if it gets better or this is truly its performance level.