Beyond3D Forums Close & Delete Benchmarking Discussion.

[Coldtronius]

Those are a bit pricey, and honestly, how many people have those right now? That's a niche of a niche of a niche.

Nice LCD for sure, but only the elite of elite are going to be able to afford one, I don't think we'll see many at LAN parties either

Credit cards are a beautiful thing.

 

[Brent_Justice]

Be happy we are including 1920x1200, the complexity of evaluations just got more involved for me, basically I do 4:3 game testing and am now doubling that by adding 16:10 testing. The neat thing is that those that want a sort of apples to apples kind of testing will be able to see that with the widescreen testing since we will keep the resolution a constant there, use the native rez of the LCD, only in-game settings/aa/af will change. I think this will really add to the depth of our evaluations.

 

[$BangforThe$]

Ya I understood your first post Rollo . I agreed with it for the most part .Other than the connecting the dots statement. I for one Rollo have nothing against AEG members what so ever.

But let me make it perfectly clear that I stand against THE old AEG formate. (befor they were known members)

Fact is it helped me to understand your post which is a good thing. Enough on that subject.

I thought Kyle was brillant in starting this thread . It was interesting and produced a lot of hits.

I am a little disappointed in the fact that API has been brought into the post and some facts of how it works on the present gpu's were mentioned. But I would like that to expand a little bit. Because G80 and R600(R620) working in DX10 on vista brings a new API and how it interfaces with GPU'S as this will again change how reviews are done.
So Rollo give me your take on what Dx10 will mean to the hardcore hardware Guru's.

I know this may be a sensitive issue for you considering were your loyalties lye. As I for one in noway believe that G80 is a unified ARCH. If you can expand upon this issue.

 

[eggrock]

I highly value your reviews. This is the only webpage and forum that I visit multiple times per day. With that said, with your new review style, I find myself reading only the Conclusion, I skip right to the end to see what exactly your opinions are. The really intersting thing is I even find myself doing this for all of your system evalutaitons, and I have never bought a pre-built nor ever plan to buy one. Strange, that I do this, I find them interesting.

I'm in absolute agreement. The bottom line for me is pretty much always in the conclusion; and that is "Card A outperforms Card B" with an idea of how much the performance difference really is. If it's just a little I can look by price; if it's a huge amount then there are no other comparisons to consider.

I did like the "best bang for the buck" articles (mostly forum posts) I used to see all the time, when the 9800XT was king of the hill.

PS - I think a little friction between review sites is healthy as long as it's in a competitive and not personal nature.

 

[SnipingWaste]

This is exactly why I sugjested that Kyle start a DX10 Vista thread . Although all the facts aren't known . Vista's API will run the show on the DX10 cards . Optimsing a card running in DX10 mode will have zero affects. Another poster replied that Open gl will run on vista which is true but not in DX10 interface it will run the same as the present ati. nv cards will.

Vista API DX10 will change how the Game is played . MS says THE WAY GAMES ARE MEANT TO BE PLAYED.

There is no DX10. Its WGF 1.0 and WGF 2.0. In WGF theres D3D10.

 

[DejaWiz]

There is no DX10. Its WGF 1.0 and WGF 2.0. In WGF theres D3D10.

Well, yes and no.

WGF 1.0 is D3D 9L (Longhorn) and WGF 2.0 (formerly DX10) is D3D 10.

 

[$BangforThe$]

I'm in absolute agreement. The bottom line for me is pretty much always in the conclusion; and that is "Card A outperforms Card B" with an idea of how much the performance difference really is. If it's just a little I can look by price; if it's a huge amount then there are no other comparisons to consider.

I did like the "best bang for the buck" articles (mostly forum posts) I used to see all the time, when the 9800XT was king of the hill.

PS - I think a little friction between review sites is healthy as long as it's in a competitive and not personal nature.

No I really don't like friction between the hardware sites. Each site has away of doing things and its up to the readers to evaluate the differant site's methods. Kyle has his way of doing things and it suite's me fine. Dave has his way of doing things and it suites me fine also .

I really thought Dave showed what kind of quality person he is by stopping in and posting on this topic and the way he handled the whole affair. I am quit sure Kyle feels the same way.

I was also impressed at how the members here conducted themselves with Dave's post.

I remember not to long ago Dave posted at ATF on a video discussion thread . The members there showed their immaturity by their flaming post to Dave's Post on that subject.

Dave is a very knowledgeable video card guru and under no circumstances does he deserve to be disrespected by forum members. I believe I seen A few aimed at Kyle in this thread that showed disrespect. I don't know if its jealousy or just ignorance but to try and imply ignoble to Kyle is just ignominious.

Kyle and Dave are both straight shooters. That demands respect! They are not perfect. Each has a certain flair and it suite's both their site's well.

Jesus Christ was the only perfect human to ever to live and look what ignorant people done to him.

 

[$BangforThe$]

There is no DX10. Its WGF 1.0 and WGF 2.0. In WGF theres D3D10.

Well glad they finely settled on a name for D3D10 . And I was fully aware of Windows graphics foundation for 1.0L and 2.0 compliance.

 

[geo]

Side note: AEG members do not get assigned to a board by it's relevance, we post where we like to post. The fact there are three AEG members posting at B3d probably has more to do with the type of discussions the three members like to partake in than anything else. (as I'm sure they'd tell you)

"Assigned" wasn't the word I used, tho if someone got that impression then I'm happy to have it corrected. Tho you might consider the exact opposite of what you posted --that NV found the kind of person who enjoys B3D-like conversations predominately attractive for the program.

 

[DukenukemX]

Problem with Beyond3D is that they are sponsors of 3DMark. Which can sway ones opinion on how benchmarks should be done and how they should be looked at.

As a gamer I care about my PC's performance as a whole. The graphics is just one of the many components that can effect it's performance. I argued that if 3DMark was in fact a gamers benchmark that is should be playing sound or at least have the option to turn it on. Many gamers spend the extra $100 for the faster video card only to loose over 10 or 15 fps in having a high CPU utilizing sound card.

If your playing games you're going to have a graphics card which is going to be in a system with a sound card that's certain to be playing back audio. Then of course there's the issues of OpenGL.

It's very simple. Beyond3D wants to look at the graphics card and only the graphics card. While HardOCP looks at the graphics card as to see how playable it runs depending on the amount of eye candy you have turned on. It's easy to see that Beyond3D has become Futuremarks bitch.

 

[Kombatant]

Problem with Beyond3D is that they are sponsors of 3DMark. Which can sway ones opinion on how benchmarks should be done and how they should be looked at.

As a gamer I care about my PC's performance as a whole. The graphics is just one of the many components that can effect it's performance. I argued that if 3DMark was in fact a gamers benchmark that is should be playing sound or at least have the option to turn it on. Many gamers spend the extra $100 for the faster video card only to loose over 10 or 15 fps in having a high CPU utilizing sound card.

If your playing games you're going to have a graphics card which is going to be in a system with a sound card that's certain to be playing back audio. Then of course there's the issues of OpenGL.

It's very simple. Beyond3D wants to look at the graphics card and only the graphics card. While HardOCP looks at the graphics card as to see how playable it runs depending on the amount of eye candy you have turned on. It's easy to see that Beyond3D has become Futuremarks bitch.

Don't mean to sound inflammatory or anything, but you really seem to have an opinion on B3D because of the things you *hear* or *think you know* about the site and not because you actually visit it.

 

[Suflex]

Problem with Beyond3D is that they are sponsors of 3DMark. Which can sway ones opinion on how benchmarks should be done and how they should be looked at.

As a gamer I care about my PC's performance as a whole. The graphics is just one of the many components that can effect it's performance. I argued that if 3DMark was in fact a gamers benchmark that is should be playing sound or at least have the option to turn it on. Many gamers spend the extra $100 for the faster video card only to loose over 10 or 15 fps in having a high CPU utilizing sound card.

If your playing games you're going to have a graphics card which is going to be in a system with a sound card that's certain to be playing back audio. Then of course there's the issues of OpenGL.

It's very simple. Beyond3D wants to look at the graphics card and only the graphics card. While HardOCP looks at the graphics card as to see how playable it runs depending on the amount of eye candy you have turned on. It's easy to see that Beyond3D has become Futuremarks bitch.

3DM06 was harshly criticized @ B3D forums because of the way it favors (according to them) NV cards in its scoring system.

 

[DukenukemX]

Don't mean to sound inflammatory or anything, but you really seem to have an opinion on B3D because of the things you *hear* or *think you know* about the site and not because you actually visit it.

I've been there and posted for a while. Though it's been a while since I visited it.

3DM06 was harshly criticized @ B3D forums because of the way it favors (according to them) NV cards in its scoring system.

Like I said I haven't been there in a while. When I was posting there it seemed like everyone was circle jerking around the 3DMark benchmark. This was when 3DMark05 came out even.

Guess they have a new opinion on that benchmark. I haven't even tested 06. I've given up on the whole thing.

 

[razor1]

Problem with Beyond3D is that they are sponsors of 3DMark. Which can sway ones opinion on how benchmarks should be done and how they should be looked at.

As a gamer I care about my PC's performance as a whole. The graphics is just one of the many components that can effect it's performance. I argued that if 3DMark was in fact a gamers benchmark that is should be playing sound or at least have the option to turn it on. Many gamers spend the extra $100 for the faster video card only to loose over 10 or 15 fps in having a high CPU utilizing sound card.

If your playing games you're going to have a graphics card which is going to be in a system with a sound card that's certain to be playing back audio. Then of course there's the issues of OpenGL.

It's very simple. Beyond3D wants to look at the graphics card and only the graphics card. While HardOCP looks at the graphics card as to see how playable it runs depending on the amount of eye candy you have turned on. It's easy to see that Beyond3D has become Futuremarks bitch.

How can you sway anthing when they don't compare the two cards up against each other? Your right B3D looks at the more technical side of things, doesn't mean thier are futuremark's bitch, I remember quite a few people got on Futuremark's CEO's case about 3dmark 06 , he does post there for posters opinions and ideas.