Nvidia bias review site?

That review seems to speak highly favorable of the G10 and the 290. Not really seeing any bias. And they gave it a "Gold" award.

I agree that they should have included a graph of the VRM temps at stock clocks on the G10-cooled card to avoid confusion. However, they did include a suggestion to purchase some stick on heatsinks and even gave a link.
 
Well, you have a totally different system, your temps vs theirs is apples to oranges.
 
Every chip is different. Some chips have a lot of leakage and some don't. One chip to another can have massively different vrm temperatures. Plus overclocked 290 have massive increase in vrm temps.

it's insane to me that anybody would use this cooler without buying some little heatsink to stick on the vrm. This is why some aftermarket cards are significantly better for the g10 as a lot have a separate plate for vram and vrm that will fit with g10 bracket an are bolted on.
 
PCPer is a pure nVidia shill site. They were working with nVidia publishing FCAT results before it was known who supplied the test equipment and didn't mention who supplied them until well after.
 
Relayer said:
PCPer is a pure nVidia shill site. They were working with nVidia publishing FCAT results before it was known who supplied the test equipment and didn't mention who supplied them until well after.
Click to expand...

Agreed. While the issue did need to come to light, they were most certainly *helped* along by Nvidia, all while Nvidia was saying "Oh we are offering these tools to help YOU (the reviewer) do your job easier and realize that FPS data is flawed. We have no agenda at all, what so ever.":rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:

That being said, I don't see any bias in the this article OP.:confused:
 
It is sheer stupidity then to compare the temps of a stock clocked card with the same model with a different cooler O/C'd for the purpose of determining the relative effectiveness of the coolers.
 
Relayer said:
PCPer is a pure nVidia shill site. They were working with nVidia publishing FCAT results before it was known who supplied the test equipment and didn't mention who supplied them until well after.
Click to expand...

Agreed also, last time I've bothered to read anything from them. I usually prefer staying quiet rather than downing something, but pcper seems pretty unabashed about their nvidia bias.
 
I don't know if anyone else has the same setup as they tested, but my temps are almost 10c lower at the same settings.
 
ccityinstaller said:
Agreed. While the issue did need to come to light, they were most certainly *helped* along by Nvidia, all while Nvidia was saying "Oh we are offering these tools to help YOU (the reviewer) do your job easier and realize that FPS data is flawed. We have no agenda at all, what so ever.":rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:

That being said, I don't see any bias in the this article OP.:confused:
Click to expand...



If you pay attention to the site closely then you would know they've called Nvidia out on this many times. With NDA's an all other kinds of tools these companies hold over every review site, who knows what could or couldn't be said during the entire FCAT process until after the fact. They have made numerous remarks how Nvidia corrected their shit before their competition knowing exactly well what the results would be. Consider it more shady Nvidia marketing than PCPer's fault.

This article has nothing to do with Nvidia or a bias and anything drawn about PCPer specifically is based on opinions. AMD has had some negative press in the past 1 1/2 years and it isn't without cause. Nvidia is completely failing in some things that aren't being pointed out solely because review sites only stick with gaming and not other factors which AMD is flat out destroying Nvidia at. I would like to see other things taken into account other than just gaming performance, but we rarely do other than a paragraph or sentence if we're lucky.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top