• 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.

Review Guide from AMD

I made it 4 pages before It almost put me to sleep, do you actually read the entire thing when they send it to you?
 
I actually thought that was a pretty fair document. Pretty standard marketing speak and optimistically scaled graphs, but that would be expected. Nothing jumped out at me as being ridiculous, although I have heard NVIDIA's is/was worse? I'm curious to see that.
 
I'm a little bit confused as to how they got over 100% CFX scaling...
 
Rizen said:
They didn't, look at the graph again.
Click to expand...

FarCry2:

Single: 55.65 * 2 =111.34

CFX: 111.77

In fairness that is a pretty small amount but I also find it odd that nearly every one of those benchmarks show like 99.9% CFX scaling. I mean, those numbers are literally so close to 100% it's almost like they just multiplied the single-card results by 2.
 
MavericK96 said:
FarCry2:

Single: 55.65 * 2 =111.34

CFX: 111.77

In fairness that is a pretty small amount but I also find it odd that nearly every one of those benchmarks show like 99.9% CFX scaling. I mean, those numbers are literally so close to 100% it's almost like they just multiplied the single-card results by 2.
Click to expand...
Well, I'll wait until HardOCP's report on the CFX performance to draw a conclusion, but I know that the 6800 series and 6900 had very good scaling compared to the 5800 series, often around 90%. So obviously AMD has been hard at work on getting their scaling up to par. I don't think 100% is entirely out of the question in some cases but who knows?

A difference of .4 fps, out of a score of 111fps, is a tiny difference that is well within the margin of error.
 
darkstarcow said:
I made it 4 pages before It almost put me to sleep, do you actually read the entire thing when they send it to you?
Click to expand...

I glance over it, not at the benchmarks, but mainly to make sure I'm covering all the features I can, such as when things like MLAA/SSAA are talked about, etc... I don't want to miss any new features a card or driver brings to the table, so for me, it's a good resource to make sure I'm not missing any features.

Also note the end of the document, detailing FRAPS, this has been a staple in AMD/ATI reviewers guides since we here at HardOCP started using it as a standard for real-world gameplay evaluation. A long long time ago, no one was concerned about FRAPS, but since we started using it years ago for all real-world data, then AMD saw the importance of it and added that info into their documents. I like that, they see the value in real-world gaming evaluation.
 
Thanks! I always wonder about these things. I asked a while back about review guides and if there was pressure to review it their way. I think your response was along the lines of "They can't tell me shit". I love the reviews here!

It looks like this guide is along the lines of "here's about what you should expect from these cards and also our company rocks". I imagine Nvidia's guides say something similar.
 
Very interesting... I was wondering what these looked like. Thanks for sharing this. People also need to read your articles before frothing at the mouth, but I digress.
 
Brent_Justice said:
I glance over it, not at the benchmarks, but mainly to make sure I'm covering all the features I can, such as when things like MLAA/SSAA are talked about, etc... I don't want to miss any new features a card or driver brings to the table, so for me, it's a good resource to make sure I'm not missing any features.

Also note the end of the document, detailing FRAPS, this has been a staple in AMD/ATI reviewers guides since we here at HardOCP started using it as a standard for real-world gameplay evaluation. A long long time ago, no one was concerned about FRAPS, but since we started using it years ago for all real-world data, then AMD saw the importance of it and added that info into their documents. I like that, they see the value in real-world gaming evaluation.
Click to expand...

Same here. Though I rarely get actual review guides. Intel's are probably among the most informative.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top