Beyond3D Forums Close & Delete Benchmarking Discussion.

Brent_Justice said:
Dave is a good guy, I like him, he gets down to the technical facts and is very fair, he's got a good site and pumps out good info, but I think he would agree that there is a bias on the forum, and one he's probably not thrilled over.

I honestly think a lot of people on the forum there have lost touch with what gamers want and get out of a video card. I think you can be so involved in something that you lose touch with what the target audience wants for a product, I think that's the problem with some people on the forum there.

But the site itself pumps out great information and does appeal to their audience. That's what it comes down to, your audience. We try and appeal to the gamer, it's just a different audience, and that's ok. We give good information, they give good information, so read as many websites as you can and draw your own conclusion.

Hugs for everyone

/i'm in a loopy mood caused by lack of sleep ;)
Click to expand...

I think B3D are great, but thier reviews thrive on too much technical data and very little actual gameplay experience. Even a little addition like MIN FPS is very usefull (and necessary) in order to see a worst case scenario.

I don't beleive in shunning all the technical aspects of the cards or cutting corners in regard to IQ. I also don't see [H] doing those things, sure they don't get as technical as B3D but no other site besides B3D does.

It's a shame that thread derailed into a flame war about nothing, I think "reviewing reviewers" is alos very important and gives a chance for us to ask for changes or understand motivating factors in review strategies.

Keep at it folks! I think you're doing your community a great service!!
 
Lord of Shadows said:
I dont know about you guys, but it would take a "its better in every shape and form" situation for me to go ati. Sure makes everything easy for me decision wise.

(my fx5900u has way more features than a 9800p, although my old voodoo5500pci which it replaced has better AA with rotated grid samples and who could resist the T-Buffer. I dont think this fancy AA thing will catch on though... But the T-Buffer is the future)
Click to expand...

ATi is currently better in every way shape or form.. yes.. total domination. Currently ATi is the king of the hill driver wise, image quality wide (2D, 3D or Video playback), feature wise, speed wise, future oriented wise and we're not even talking about there motherboard yet.

That is the current state of things.

As for an FX card having mroe features then a 9800 Pro well it does not have more features then a 9800 Pro. I'm not sure were you got that. The FX line was a disaster. Cannot even run SM2.0 games at decent speeds.
 
ElMoIsEviL said:
ATi is currently better in every way shape or form.. yes.. total domination. Currently ATi is the king of the hill driver wise, image quality wide (2D, 3D or Video playback), feature wise, speed wise, future oriented wise and we're not even talking about there motherboard yet.

That is the current state of things.

As for an FX card having mroe features then a 9800 Pro well it does not have more features then a 9800 Pro. I'm not sure were you got that. The FX line was a disaster. Cannot even run SM2.0 games at decent speeds.
Click to expand...



That is soon about to change. ATi has a great GPU but its brand new, and they couldn't muster large enough wins (% difference) with over 70 mill extra transistors. And the next few drivers from nV will show dramatic increase in performance in certain applications, and dynamic branching. Which will just wash away, ATi's performance crown, with a chip thats smaller, uses less power, and technically less advanced, but less advanced by who's standards.

ATi leads only with one thing, well two features. Thats about it.

And nV built around Carmack's design descision, it wasn't the other way around. Keep in mind the Fx line is very competitive the r300's and equivelent in Doom 3.

About drivers, ATi is no where near better, its about the same in Dx, but other then that they abosultely are things you find at the bottom of your toilet.
 
ElMoIsEviL said:
ATi is currently better in every way shape or form.. yes.. total domination.
Click to expand...
That's all a matter of personal perspective.

For example.... Why are you using a motherboard adorned with an NVidia chipset instead of an ATI chipset? You just said ATI was better in every way, shape, or form (total domination). Or are your comments and arguments strictly targeted for ATI vs. NV video cards?

We each have our likes and dislikes when it comes to silimiar products from differing manufacturers. And what one person sees as a great product, there will always be another saying it's inferior and shitty.

k thnx bai :D
 
ElMoIsEviL said:
ATi is currently better in every way shape or form.. yes.. total domination. Currently ATi is the king of the hill driver wise, image quality wide (2D, 3D or Video playback), feature wise, speed wise, future oriented wise and we're not even talking about there motherboard yet.

That is the current state of things.

As for an FX card having mroe features then a 9800 Pro well it does not have more features then a 9800 Pro. I'm not sure were you got that. The FX line was a disaster. Cannot even run SM2.0 games at decent speeds.
Click to expand...
I dunno about EVERYTHING... i hated ATi's drivers last time i used them (i dunno a few months ago, i doubt they could have completely revamped em, but thats one of the, hell it IS the main reason i dont like ATi very much...)
 
DejaWiz said:
That's all a matter of personal perspective.

For example.... Why are you using a motherboard adorned with an NVidia chipset instead of an ATI chipset? You just said ATI was better in every way, shape, or form (total domination). Or are your comments and arguments strictly targeted for ATI vs. NV video cards?

We each have our likes and dislikes when it comes to silimiar products from differing manufacturers. And what one person sees as a great product, there will always be another saying it's inferior and shitty.

k thnx bai :D
Click to expand...

ATi's newer control panel with the CATS is the most conveluted POS i've ever seen. Glad nVidia is keeping things simple and not going Flashmedia on us.
 
DejaWiz said:
That's all a matter of personal perspective.

For example.... Why are you using a motherboard adorned with an NVidia chipset instead of an ATI chipset? You just said ATI was better in every way, shape, or form (total domination). Or are your comments and arguments strictly targeted for ATI vs. NV video cards?

We each have our likes and dislikes when it comes to silimiar products from differing manufacturers. And what one person sees as a great product, there will always be another saying it's inferior and shitty.

k thnx bai :D
Click to expand...

Easy I buy what is better at any given time. You see when I bought my motherboard I had a 7800GTX SLI setup. Now I have an x1900XTX. So as you can see I, unlike others here, am not a !!!!!!..:p



That is soon about to change. ATi has a great GPU but its brand new, and they couldn't muster large enough wins (% difference) with over 70 mill extra transistors. And the next few drivers from nV will show dramatic increase in performance in certain applications, and dynamic branching. Which will just wash away, ATi's performance crown, with a chip thats smaller, uses less power, and technically less advanced, but less advanced by who's standards.

ATi leads only with one thing, well two features. Thats about it.

And nV built around Carmack's design descision, it wasn't the other way around. Keep in the Fx line is very competitive the r300's and equivelent in Doom 3.
Click to expand...

Wow that's a !!!!!! post if I ever saw one. the performance difference is quite staggering once you remove the cheating.. in OpenGL with high Quality AF. The 7900GTX will be slower... I repeat slower in newer games but faster in older games. Dynamic Branching is quicker on Ati's part then on nVidia's... who told you otherwise? nVidia's design cannot handle dynamic branching all too well.

And I suppose these dramatic increases you're speaking off will occur with Anisotropic Filtering enabed..;)

What do you think those 70million more transistors on ATi's part are for? Decoration? The card isn't even being used to any extent. It was built for Shader intensive games. While the 7900GTX will muster 80 to 90 Billion shader Ops per second.. teh x1900XTX already does well over 166Billion Shader Ops per second.

I'm not a !!!!!!.. I give credit where credit is due.. in games where Texturing is the limitation the 7900GTX will be quicker.. but in games where Shaders are the limitation.. the x1900XTX will push ahead. Aren't you forgetting that dev's are using shaders in upcoming titles for simple things like a characters clothes, skin, hair etc? Texturing power is to an extent taking the back seat to shader power. ;)
 
Lord of Shadows said:
I dont know about you guys, but it would take a "its better in every shape and form" situation for me to go ati. Sure makes everything easy for me decision wise.

(my fx5900u has way more features than a 9800p, although my old voodoo5500pci which it replaced has better AA with rotated grid samples and who could resist the T-Buffer. I dont think this fancy AA thing will catch on though... But the T-Buffer is the future)
Click to expand...

are you being cynical?

:p
 
Coldtronius said:
ATi's newer control panel with the CATS is the most conveluted POS i've ever seen. Glad nVidia is keeping things simple and not going Flashmedia on us.
Click to expand...

They are going .Net on you too... ATi's control panel was built for Vista which will require .NET for drivers..;)

It may be slow in Windows XP... but VISTA is built around .NET.
 
ElMoIsEviL said:
Easy I buy what is better at any given time. You see when I bought my motherboard I had a 7800GTX SLI setup. Now I have an x1900XTX. So as you can see I, unlike others here, am not a !!!!!!..:p





Wow that's a !!!!!! post if I ever saw one. the performance difference is quite staggering once you remove the cheating.. in OpenGL with high Quality AF. The 7900GTX will be slower... I repeat slower in newer games but faster in older games. Dynamic Branching is quicker on Ati's part then on nVidia's... who told you otherwise? nVidia's design cannot handle dynamic branching all too well.

And I suppose these dramatic increases you're speaking off will occur with Anisotropic Filtering enabed..;)

What do you think those 70million more transistors on ATi's part are for? Decoration? The card isn't even being used to any extent. It was built for Shader intensive games. While the 7900GTX will muster 80 to 90 Billion shader Ops per second.. teh x1900XTX already does well over 166Billion Shader Ops per second.

I'm not a !!!!!!.. I give credit where credit is due.. in games where Texturing is the limitation the 7900GTX will be quicker.. but in games where Shaders are the limitation.. the x1900XTX will push ahead. Aren't you forgetting that dev's are using shaders in upcoming titles for simple things like a characters clothes, skin, hair etc? Texturing power is to an extent taking the back seat to shader power. ;)
Click to expand...

Might want look back on what I usually post on ;) to see where I'm coming from, I have alot more information in my hands then you would have in a lifetime of internet searching. Since this was discussed else where, nV will get a 30% increase in shader intensive games in an upcoming driver. It will make the 512 7800 gtx close to the speed of the x1900xtx in Fear with High AA and AF at 1600x1200. Take the most shader intensive game for you, and put the 7900gtx with 100 mhz higher in core clock, and compare. Its going to be quite a bit faster in shader intensive situations. Its not about how many ALU's there are, its how they are used.

The extra transistors ATi has put into thier chip was specific for dynamic branching, unfortuantly this generation of graphics cards, doesn't matter if its fast or not, they won't see these types of shaders, and secondly if they did, in a real game situation it will bring them down to thier knees anyways.
 
For me, I don't spend much time reading through pages of information about the card unless I'm on the verge of buying it. Initially, I'm looking for the bottom line, a sentence or two explaining how the card compares to it's closest competitor and why it's the better choice or not. I think people like charts and graphs because they're easy to read and offer a summary of the data. Unfortunately, as we've all learned about the GPU market in the recent years, simple charts aren't representative of the true, overall quality of the products. That's where you have to provide a summary after presenting the numbers.

Overall, I'm pleased with the method of how [H] does it's reviews. If I had any suggestions at all, it would be to maybe include both bethods, benchmarks and real-world, and allow us readers to use that information as we will. But again, no real complaint about the current method.

Also, kudos to Kyle for your professionalism in matters such as this one with B3D. As a former CEO of a gaming site network, I know how tempting it is to get pulled into petty bickering and name-calling. Two thumbs up. :)
 
razor1 said:
Might want look back on what I usually post on ;) to see where I'm coming from, I have alot more information in my hands then you would have in a lifetime of internet searching. Since this was discussed else where, nV will get a 30% increase in shader intensive games in an upcoming driver. It will make the 512 7800 gtx close to the speed of the x1900xtx in Fear with High AA and AF at 1600x1200. Take the most shader intensive game for you, and put the 7900gtx with 100 mhz higher in core clock, and compare. Its going to be quite a bit faster in shader intensive situations. Its not about how many ALU's there are, its how they are used.
Click to expand...


Hmm a shill ;)

I don't think you realise the programability the x1900XTX has at it's disposal. The ATi Catalyst crew then program every aspect of it, AA, AF, Memory controller and ALU's.

It's not at all the basic design that comprises the 7800/7900 parts.
 
ElMoIsEviL said:
Easy I buy what is better at any given time. You see when I bought my motherboard I had a 7800GTX SLI setup. Now I have an x1900XTX. So as you can see I, unlike others here, am not a !!!!!!..:p
Click to expand...
Fair enough, but... many people here don't have the resouces to buy the best of the best the instant the next best thing comes to market.

What's a more important debate is what is going to be best given a breakdown in price ranges.

Best for $100-150?
Best for $150-200?
Best for $200-250?
Best for $250-300?
Best for $300-400?
Best for $400-500?
Best for $500+ ?

Does ATI fill every bracket there? I don't think so.

If you have the resouces to buy the fastest and most expensive gpu today, then of course you are going to bad mouth the slightly slower fastest and most expensive part from the competitors offerings.



ElMoIsEviL said:
I'm not a !!!!!!.. I give credit where credit is due.. in games where Texturing is the limitation the 7900GTX will be quicker.. but in games where Shaders are the limitation.. the x1900XTX will push ahead. Aren't you forgetting that dev's are using shaders in upcoming titles for simple things like a characters clothes, skin, hair etc? Texturing power is to an extent taking the back seat to shader power. ;)
Click to expand...
I agree with you here. High shader performance is going to be invaluable to all future gpu's.
 
ElMoIsEviL said:
Hmm a shill ;)

I don't think you realise the programability the x1900XTX has at it's disposal. The ATi Catalyst crew then program every aspect of it, AA, AF, Memory controller and ALU's.

It's not at all the basic design that comprises the 7800/7900 parts.
Click to expand...


of course I do, I'm a programmer its my job to know ;). I was the first person to come and say the g70 is much more flexible then what we have seen so far ALU wise, specifically because certain shaders I was testing I noticed some of the performance differences didn't add up when comparing a nv40 vs the g70. It has alot to do with basic design. Thats what makes a GPU go or any silicon. Same with programs. They are built around each other to provide maximum performance. If there is a deviation then there is possibility in performance failure.
 
I find it pretty sad that the B3D forum's has to attack Kyle and Brent to feel better about themselves. That's just immature.

I have always valued the "evaluations" found on [H]ardOCP but at the same time, I check many reviews. I never base my assessment on one site or one reviewer.

What I like the best about the [H] is that it has never attempted to be all things to all people. Quality reviews and evaluations that give me the bottom line on a peice of gear or a component! :)
 
I always am worried when I hear 30% bost from hardware thats been out for 6+ months. Useally these gains are in cases that are limited or restricting..but we will see...



I think this method that H uses is pretty good for most people. I do dissagree that if Brent does not see anything, then its not there or will detract from your game. Once you have seen an issue its pretty easy to spot it again (like when you get the first scrach on your new car, sticks out after you first see it) and everyone's eyes are different. I am sure Brent will catch a lot of things, but not everyone see the same thing.

I guess I would like to see H keep its normal review, then when IQ issues are brought up, really get to the bottom of them in an ideal world of course.


razor1 said:
Might want look back on what I usually post on ;)
Click to expand...

And what side of the ATI/NV issue you always post on :)
 
Jbirney said:
I always am worried when I hear 30% bost from hardware thats been out for 6+ months. Useally these gains are in cases that are limited or restricting..but we will see...

And what side of the ATI/NV issue you always post on :)
Click to expand...


Be skeptical, 2 reviewers already mentioned this at B3D JB you know that.

And what side do you post, on and how many times have I shown you to be wrong?
 
Brent_Justice said:
What it really all comes down to is does this negatively or positively impact your gaming experience. Can you notice it, do you see it, does it hurt your gameplay experience, does it impact your ability to play the game, does it distract you from the game, etc....
Click to expand...

But is it "the way it was meant to be played"? If you can't answer yes, it is a cheat.
 
AppaYipYip said:
I find it pretty sad that the B3D forum's has to attack Kyle and Brent to feel better about themselves. That's just immature.
Click to expand...
Uhm, where exactly was Kyle attacked? I do believe he's the one who started the fracas over there by attacking Hanners.
:confused:

If I'm wrong please correct me, but that's what I'm seeing. Kyle posted up and him and ONE member of B3D started arguing, then Kyle pulled out an attack on Hanners for something he wrote four months ago out of the blue.
 
I've said it before and I'll say it again: The problem with subjective reviews is just that - it's subjective. It seems to me that when you guys review a card, you think it's acceptable to crank the eye candy on as long as it's between 30 and 60 fps. I can't stand playing games below 40 and especially close to 30. If you had the reviews at around 60 or above being playable, I would like them a lot more. I've been here a while and this used to be the only place I'd go to see hardware reviews and I loved when you got rid of the "synthetic" testing, but now I go to multiple sources to draw a conclusion instead of just the [H].
 
digitalwanderer said:
Uhm, where exactly was Kyle attacked? I do believe he's the one who started the fracas over there by attacking Hanners.
:confused:

If I'm wrong please correct me, but that's what I'm seeing. Kyle posted up and him and ONE member of B3D started arguing, then Kyle pulled out an attack on Hanners for something he wrote four months ago out of the blue.
Click to expand...
I think he was referring to Radeonic2. Who clearly came before the Hanners post. Started by poking fun at the [H]'s review style and then personally at Kyle's Truck.
 
There is absolutely nothing wrong with [H} review style, I'm going to have to agree with Dave B, If thats what thier readers like thats what they like. Good reviews are based on what readers want. And if the majority here want these kinds of reviews that what they will get.
 
ElMoIsEviL said:
And what would you say the difference is between what you call a review and what you call an evaluation?
Click to expand...


I am not sure what other people call what they do, but this is how we see it here at HardOCP. We no longer review video cards and have not for years. We evaluate the gaming experiences the video cards provide in real-world gaming environments and base our opinions about the hardware on those experiences.
 
I think the biggest thing that has to be addressed by most hardware sites is the issue of optimisations. It is obvious and completely true that comparing optimised (read reduced quality) to non optimised driver settings is not and cannot be considered fair.

As long as sites choose to apply default driver settings, including those with optimisations (defined solely by the vendors themselves), then it can (and will be) assumed by many that bias exists.

The point can be argued indefinitely, and will be, until this bloody obvious oversight is finally addressed. It has been a problem for so long now however, that I think it will require NV to remove its driver optimisations before many review sites stop allowing them.


This is sad. And please don't try to argue the point. It is unfair no matter how you try to cut it.
 
So how do we take what we have now, and make it better for you guys that find value in our opinions?
 
Basically, whether hardware analysis is performed as a review or an evaluation, all attempts should be made to equalize image quality. This does not mean that default settings cannot also be tested, but that the outputted image quality with these settings should be discussed and compared as well; ie readers should be made aware of exactly what they are dealing with.

I would like to also make it clear that I am not pro either vendor. Both have had their share of image quality controversy in the past. I do however believe that us consumers will have to put up with these shenanigans for as long as the big hardware sites allow it to continue.
 
Just FYI the news post from yesterday on the front page doesnt reflect the fact that the thread was reopened.

How many video card threads have been locked here in the [H] forums? Sometimes to get things under control that is what it takes. They perceived your presence on thier forums as being nothing but promotion of the [H] site and an attack on theirs and obviously didnt want that to continue. I myself felt your first few post were just to brag about [H], but that is just my opinion.
 
BoogerBomb said:
Just FYI the news post from yesterday on the front page doesnt reflect the fact that the thread was reopened.

How many video card threads have been locked here in the [H] forums? Sometimes to get things under control that is what it takes. They perceived your presence on thier forums as being nothing but promotion of the [H] site and an attack on theirs and obviously didnt want that to continue. I myself felt your first few post where just to brag about [H], but that is just my opinion.
Click to expand...

3...2...1...banned.
 
it is impossible to equalize the graphics, both IHV's actaully all IHV's have different render patterns compared to the reference Dx rasterer.
 
Coldtronius said:
3...2...1...banned.
Click to expand...

And that right there is why I feel a lot of people here are scared to voice their opinions, they usually seem to get banned. Kyle says opinions are welcomed but if they arent in his favor you run the risk of being banned.
 
most people get banned for personl attacks, not so much as aurguing thier point of view
 
I don't like [H]'s review methods on video cards for the following reasons:

1) They do not seem to be consistent with "non-performance" issues: i.e. their take on the unavailability of ATI X1800 vs unavailability of NV 7800GTX 512 (NV got a much easier ride from [H] than ATI did IMO).

2) Their subjective analysis are THEIR subjective analysis. I have no idea what they like versus what I like.

What I do like about [H] review methods for video cards are:

1) They cover OCing quite well.

2) They compare to the appropriate competition (usually).

3) Because they use "real world" gameplay they are able to report driver issues.

What I want to see in [H] reviews are:

1) A chart along the lines of "max resolution and AA / AF game can be played at while achieving a minimum XX FPS" similar to their chart of comparable settings.

2) Some rare or niche game benchmarked - I play a LOT of different games and it's no secret that both video card companies optimize for the most popular games out there.... but I want to have an idea of how the card will work on average for all my games. I was one of the people who was greatly dismayed by the 3dmark problems because for someone like me 3dmark (if not cheated on) is actually the best representation of how a card will work on everything I have.

Me.
 
Subjective analysis is what seemed to be the ongoing issue at B3D, they wondered how readers could could feel that the card would be reflective of their gameplay experience if the review is purely subjective to the reviewrs point of view. The evaluations I have read so far do have graphs for settings and such though.
 
Kyle says opinions are welcomed but if they arent in his favor you run the risk of being banned.
Click to expand...

Nobody's perfect. Things heat up, words are thrown and mistakes are made. I've been at the blunt end of what I thought was an innappropriate warning at one point (by Brent, maybe? Can't quite recall). Some things are in line, some things fall out of line, but that's the name of the game. Kyle is human. Brent is human. They each have ideas, preferences and tendencies, but they're doing a solid job.

1) They do not seem to be consistent with "non-performance" issues: i.e. their take on the unavailability of ATI X1800 vs unavailability of NV 7800GTX 512 (NV got a much easier ride from [H] than ATI did IMO).
Click to expand...

At the time, the GTX 512 was (seemingly) plentiful. If you recall, it had actually been available a number of days before NDAs were lifted. The evaluation was written prior to the release, and thusly, no thoughts on releases could be given at the time. Could the article have been updated? Possibly, though I don't imagine what purpose that would really serve.

ATi caught some flack because of a number of reasons, not just availability. The "Canuck lies" posts were made because they were just that. nVidia never tried to mislead the public into thinking that the GTX 512 would be the pinnacle of mass availability (though one can hypothesize for days).


On launch days, [H] is not the first place I want to be, to be quite honest. I find value in the evaluations, but I still find more value in more typical benchmarks. I'd say I draw conclusions based on a combination of [H]'s evaluations and more typical benchmarks from other review sites (mostly the Tech Report these days). [H] gives me one tidbit of information I don't see elsewhere, though: minimum framerates. I still find that to be a highly valuable piece of information.
 
I had never really thought about it until you mentioned it but I dont recall too many sites with that information. That might even be more important than max fps and perhaps more reflective of what the GPU is capable of. It it has really low min FPS means that the GPU may not be as good as the other GPU that has higher min fps.
 
BoogerBomb said:
Just FYI the news post from yesterday on the front page doesnt reflect the fact that the thread was reopened.

How many video card threads have been locked here in the [H] forums? Sometimes to get things under control that is what it takes. They perceived your presence on thier forums as being nothing but promotion of the [H] site and an attack on theirs and obviously didnt want that to continue. I myself felt your first few post were just to brag about [H], but that is just my opinion.
Click to expand...


You are correct.

I am not sure how many have been locked. When the idiots start the blatant personal attacks we usually lock them.

I am unsure how you are informed of how and why B3D makes the decisions they make. In fact, I would suggest you are just making stuff up that sounds good to you.
 
razor1 said:
it is impossible to equalize the graphics, both IHV's actaully all IHV's have different render patterns compared to the reference Dx rasterer.
Click to expand...

This is not something that a lot of folks realize. They want "apples to apples" on their terms, not in reality. :(
 
BoogerBomb said:
And that right there is why I feel a lot of people here are scared to voice their opinions, they usually seem to get banned. Kyle says opinions are welcomed but if they arent in his favor you run the risk of being banned.
Click to expand...

Now that is just a lie. You seem to share an opinion that I do not and you are still here. Please point out all of these other cases that prove your point. The fact is that you are just an observer here and you DONT KNOW what goes on at all behind the scenes. Most times people do thigs worthy of a ban, we do not leave those posts public.

I don't like you at all. I think that many times you go out of your way to antagonize others, yet, you are still here. Why? Because you follow the rules. Being annoying and having a misinformed opinion is something we don't hold against anyone. Name calling and getting out of hand will get you the axe, along with a handful of other issues.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top