![[H]ard|Forum](/styles/hardforum/xenforo/logo_dark.png){kind=logo}
-
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.
Looking for the $/Fps chart a guy made
- Thread starter Glow
- Start date
SEALTeamSix
2[H]4U
- Joined
- Aug 15, 2003
- Messages
- 2,434
Maybe you want to explain why...? Timed FPS graphs using a variety of settings in a variety of current games is a good way to judge the performance of a graphics card. Every graphics card has a price, as well. It seems to me price/performance charts help buyers determine which graphics card suits their needs and their pocketbooks the best.
-SEAL
DigitalEmperor
Gawd
- Joined
- Jan 24, 2004
- Messages
- 760
Yep, it was Tom's and FBucks as these guys stated. As for his bias, it is very much present...which is pretty obvious by his choice in advertisers. But Wixard is right on one point and wrong on the other; Tom's reviews do tend to be balanced (in comparison to the average net review), but his bias towards Intel is as strong as ever. Just read the ridiculous statement he made bashing AMD not too long ago, it drove me to boycott his site (I avoid it and no longer link to it, and whenever I see it mentioned - like here! - I make his bias clear). 
But anyway, FBucks is an interesting measurement, but its problem is that it relies on linear values and direct proportions between two dissimilar units (money and FPS). Neither of those units express linearity, compounding its ineffectiveness. Good idea, poor implementation. A better strategy would have been to use an exponential equation with a baseline (some good ole TI calculators can do this, no problem) with adjustment and non-linear progression (logrithmic) for the opposing axis.
But anyway, FBucks is an interesting measurement, but its problem is that it relies on linear values and direct proportions between two dissimilar units (money and FPS). Neither of those units express linearity, compounding its ineffectiveness. Good idea, poor implementation. A better strategy would have been to use an exponential equation with a baseline (some good ole TI calculators can do this, no problem) with adjustment and non-linear progression (logrithmic) for the opposing axis.
Originally posted by Maxx
Yep, it was Tom's and FBucks as these guys stated. As for his bias, it is very much present...which is pretty obvious by his choice in advertisers. But Wixard is right on one point and wrong on the other; Tom's reviews do tend to be balanced (in comparison to the average net review), but his bias towards Intel is as strong as ever. Just read the ridiculous statement he made bashing AMD not too long ago, it drove me to boycott his site (I avoid it and no longer link to it, and whenever I see it mentioned - like here! - I make his bias clear).
But anyway, FBucks is an interesting measurement, but its problem is that it relies on linear values and direct proportions between two dissimilar units (money and FPS). Neither of those units express linearity, compounding its ineffectiveness. Good idea, poor implementation. A better strategy would have been to use an exponential equation with a baseline (some good ole TI calculators can do this, no problem) with adjustment and non-linear progression (logrithmic) for the opposing axis.
Well it could be hes still intel biased, i wouldnt know because i dont read it anymore.
The last time i really read toms i think was back in the early athlon/late k6 days. Although thats what like 5 years ago now? Something like that.
Originally posted by Wixard
Well it could be hes still intel biased, i wouldnt know because i dont read it anymore.
The last time i really read toms i think was back in the early athlon/late k6 days. Although thats what like 5 years ago now? Something like that.
I only wish you had been correct. I don't read him anymore, either, but a few months ago I was given a link to his anti-AMD link and my jaw dropped. Unbelievable that a "hardware journalist" would be so damn biased...