AMD Challenges NVIDIA: World's Fastest Graphics Card? Prove it!

[moshpit]

100% agreed.

100% disagreed. In fact, it's unusual for you to so totally overlook an obvious point. I wouldn't think the fact that new cards and new drivers break old games was over your head. Monday morning sucks.

[SIrPauly]

And that site AlienBabelTech, hammered nVidia for just that point when with older titles, the GTX 470, offered less performance than last generation and needed their drivers to improve older titles in the GTX 470 piece.

Personally find GPU limited examples more important but it's good to see older titles sprinkled in to see how they compare, too.

Why?

Because I play newer and older content.

[acroig]

100% disagreed. In fact, it's unusual for you to so totally overlook an obvious point. I wouldn't think the fact that new cards and new drivers break old games was over your head. Monday morning sucks.

, good one.

Still, I base my comment on what I play and I have had very little time to play so old games are off the list. Your point is very valid but to me I'd like to see games 4 years and newer that push the envelope (Crysis, Metro, etc) than argue about if I can play Soldier of Fortune or not.

Just my take on it.

[moshpit]

Acroig, look at that ENTIRE middle section of the performance summery. Methinks you missed about half the chart if you think most of those older games are over 4 years old. Quite a few of those middle section games are VERY popular still.

And sorry, but I think it's terribly short sighted to assume older stuff will work right on new hardware without seeing it do so first. I don't keep my old Voodoo 2's around anymore, so if I join up a group of gamers getting retro on Half Life CS (just as example), still one of the most popular multiplayer FPS ever, I don't care that it runs 300FPS so much as knowing it was tested and still works fine. Seeing the 300fps number just confirms that it ran and obviously ran really well.

I'll never make the silly assumption that just because new hardware rips through modern loads means it kept ANY kind of decent and usable backwards compatibility to still very valid games. I've seen that assumption bite too many hands too make it myself.

[Sound_Card]

If you want to see if they work for the sake of seeing if it works then that is one thing(but that sound like more of review about drivers than about a launch of a card). But if you want to see the performance then that is another. So which is it?

It's not like they are testing starcraft 1 or UT99. These games have had SLI/CF profiles for a long time. I seriously doubt ABT testing these old games for the sake of seeing if it works. They tested for performance.

A lot of those games could of been taken off there.
HAWX and HAWX 2
Lost Planet and Lost Planet 2
Crysis and Crysis Warhead

Thats redundant.

No reason for FEAR, Call of Juarez at all. We are not in 2007.

Substitute
LFD for LFD 2
UT3 for BioShock 2 or ME2
WIC for SC2
COD4 for MW2 or BO


Maybe with the time saved by taking off at least 5 pointless games, perhaps they could of tested the bios 2 switch in the general testing which they are wrong about not being honored.

They have inconsistencies and a slight ignorance with concern about AMD/ATI. In their some what recent article on the thrashing of MLAA by a writer called "BFG"(wonder what inspired him to make that name?) it was stated that and MLAA was suppose to be higher quality and faster than MSAA. When I replied that AMD never said such thing and actually stated that MLAA is suppose to be between SS and MSAA in performance and quality wise meant for dithered shading engines where AA is half ass working or not all I got no response back. Thats just an example.

[Mangler]

If you want to see if they work for the sake of seeing if it works then that is one thing(but that sound like more of review about drivers than about a launch of a card). But if you want to see the performance then that is another. So which is it?

It's not like they are testing starcraft 1 or UT99. These games have had SLI/CF profiles for a long time. I seriously doubt ABT testing these old games for the sake of seeing if it works. They tested for performance.

A lot of those games could of been taken off there.
HAWX and HAWX 2
Lost Planet and Lost Planet 2
Crysis and Crysis Warhead

Thats redundant.

No reason for FEAR, Call of Juarez at all. We are not in 2007.

Substitute
LFD for LFD 2
UT3 for BioShock 2 or ME2
WIC for SC2
COD4 for MW2 or BO


Maybe with the time saved by taking off at least 5 pointless games, perhaps they could of tested the bios 2 switch in the general testing which they are wrong about not being honored.

They have inconsistencies and a slight ignorance with concern about AMD/ATI. In their some what recent article on the thrashing of MLAA by a writer called "BFG"(wonder what inspired him to make that name?) it was stated that and MLAA was suppose to be higher quality and faster than MSAA. When I replied that AMD never said such thing and actually stated that MLAA is suppose to be between SS and MSAA in performance and quality wise meant for dithered shading engines where AA is half ass working or not all I got no response back. Thats just an example.

Since Hawx 2 is one of the few dx11 titles out there, should it really be discarded this soon?

[Sound_Card]

Since Hawx 2 is one of the few dx11 titles out there, should it really be discarded this soon?

I did not say that. They tested HAWX 1 and HAWX 2. No need for HAWX 1.

[moshpit]

I did not say that. They tested HAWX 1 and HAWX 2. No need for HAWX 1.

Sound Card, you're whole point is motivated by not liking the reviews more even conclusion, of COURSE you want to get rid of anything that looks bad for AMD/ATI. But in my experience, ATI/AMD has a LONG and bad history of breaking old games performance whether you like that fact or not, SC. Sorry man, but you've proven too biased for one side for too long to take seriously when you complain. At least I switch teams regularly enough to really have a idea of what I'm saying about both teams.

Sorry SC, I won't credit you on this one as my point stands about how these older games should run, and run well. Benchmarking them is the ONLY way to determine that and show it to others. If that's over your fanATIc head, not my problem. Seeing as I buy from both companies and you don't, I don't take your word on these points. You have no credibility for legitimate and unbiased comparisons because of your obvious and strong allegiance. In fact, you really should be forced to have "ATI Focus Group Member" in your sig

Edit: That last part was kidding around, not really meant as mean as it sounds. I mean, really, "ATI Focus Group Member"? If that's not an obvious joke in itself (AMD fortunately doesn't pull that stuff) I don't know what is

[Sound_Card]

Sound Card, you're whole point is motivated by not liking the reviews more even conclusion, of COURSE you want to get rid of anything that looks bad for AMD/ATI.

Deleting most of your troll post, I never said the review makes AMD look bad. The games AMD lost were years old and yet they lost only by a few FPS. So I don't see how this review makes them look BAD. I don't even you even read the review. The games the 6990 wins, half the time is murder. Wolfenstien, Batman, and F1 for example.

If you can't debate what I said in my previous post, but go after me, then nuff said really. It's simply not a site I would hold up to xbit, anand, guru etc. It's blog site with most of it's ads being from NV. A lot of those games were rather pointless. FEAR? Come on.

[acroig]

Sorry SC, I won't credit you on this one as my point stands about how these older games should run, and run well. Benchmarking them is the ONLY way to determine that and show it to others.

Valid point for those that play older games.

[moshpit]

Deleting most of your troll post, I never said the review makes AMD look bad. The games AMD lost were years old and yet they lost only by a few FPS. So I don't see how this review makes them look BAD. I don't even you even read the review. The games the 6990 wins, half the time is murder. Wolfenstien, Batman, and F1 for example.

If you can't debate what I said in my previous post, but go after me, then nuff said really. It's simply not a site I would hold up to xbit, anand, guru etc. It's blog site with most of it's ads being from NV. A lot of those games were rather pointless. FEAR? Come on.

LOL, sensitive are we? You know it's true, you admit it clearly yourself on a regular basis. Sorry man, but you're too predictable. Your lack of ability to take an unbiased view on the competition is well established here, that's undeniable. I don't need to rehash the same points over and over, old games DO matter and your dismissal of that is obviously bias based. Rehashing same points isn't debating, you FAILED to invalidate my original point to begin with.

You've made little effort to conceal your bias, why deny it now?

[Sound_Card]

LOL, sensitive are we? You know it's true, you admit it clearly yourself on a regular basis. Sorry man, but you're too predictable. Your lack of ability to take an unbiased view on the competition is well established here, that's undeniable. I don't need to rehash the same points over and over, old games DO matter and your dismissal of that is obviously bias based. Rehashing same points isn't debating, you FAILED to invalidate my original point to begin with.

You've made little effort to conceal your bias, why deny it now?

oh god mosh. If anybody is overly sensitive on this board it's you.

What I prefer to buy and support little affects my objectivity on calling it the way it is. This is the second post now you you choose to go after me rather than debate what I said. If you don't want to debate then just say so. Other wise make another thread about SC.

I very much did invalidate your view point unless you can tell me why HAWX 1 is there when HAWX 2 is there, or Lost planet when Lost planet 2 is there, or Crysis when War head is there. Or why LFD is there at all? or COJ, or COD4 over 6 or 7. Or FEAR. A lot of these games I'm saying have not reason to be in there, AMD won(*just in case for another character attack).

Anyways, you said before that you like seeing old games tested because it shows if the IHV's are not forgetting about old games. So can you answer my other question. Do you think ABT threw these old games in to see if they work or to test performance? Simple question.

[moshpit]

No, I'm serious. WHEN have you ever taken a properly unbiased view of ANYTHING Nvidia does? Honestly now, I'd like to believe you, but have NEVER seen a remotely even minded post from you about them. It's AMD or nothing in every post. Have I missed one out of a hundred where you gave Nvidia a fair shake? If so, show me and I'll leave off disregarding your opinion on Red versus Green. As it is though, even when Nvidia is doing good, I've only seen you diss on them (or grudgingly give a point, only to take it right back with something counter). This has nothing to do with attacking your character and far more to do with unbiased credibility in my eyes, which you lack severely up till now. Prove me wrong on that and I'll HAPPILY change my mind about you.

Edit: More then changing my mind, I'll change my posting habits in regard to you as well. As it is, I often skip over your posts because I don't expect to find any brand objectivity in them. I'll rip Intel, Nvidia, or AMD a new one happily if they deserve it. I have never seen anything like that from you, only a desire to rip on Nvidia and Intel specifically. Let em all have it, I say!

[Sound_Card]

Thats 3 times now.
Can you show me were I did not give them a fair shake? I rarely even post in the general graphics, so I'm quite curious now about what seems to be a history assesment over my view point. You got links and quotes?

Can you answer my questions or no? Or are you going to keep talking about SC and side stepping the debate?

[SIrPauly]

If you want to see if they work for the sake of seeing if it works then that is one thing(but that sound like more of review about drivers than about a launch of a card). But if you want to see the performance then that is another. So which is it?

It's not like they are testing starcraft 1 or UT99. These games have had SLI/CF profiles for a long time. I seriously doubt ABT testing these old games for the sake of seeing if it works. They tested for performance.

A lot of those games could of been taken off there.
HAWX and HAWX 2
Lost Planet and Lost Planet 2
Crysis and Crysis Warhead

Thats redundant.

No reason for FEAR, Call of Juarez at all. We are not in 2007.

Substitute
LFD for LFD 2
UT3 for BioShock 2 or ME2
WIC for SC2
COD4 for MW2 or BO


Maybe with the time saved by taking off at least 5 pointless games, perhaps they could of tested the bios 2 switch in the general testing which they are wrong about not being honored.

They have inconsistencies and a slight ignorance with concern about AMD/ATI. In their some what recent article on the thrashing of MLAA by a writer called "BFG"(wonder what inspired him to make that name?) it was stated that and MLAA was suppose to be higher quality and faster than MSAA. When I replied that AMD never said such thing and actually stated that MLAA is suppose to be between SS and MSAA in performance and quality wise meant for dithered shading engines where AA is half ass working or not all I got no response back. Thats just an example.

BFG, maybe the BFG acronym in Quake? And you go right to it must be some sort of bias based on the BFG company that created nVidia GPU's. This is the same BFG that hammered nVidia for older titles with the GTX 470 -- how is that for bias?!

[moshpit]

Thats 3 times now.
Can you show me were I did not give them a fair shake? I rarely even post in the general graphics, so I'm quite curious now about what seems to be a history assesment over my view point. You got links and quotes?

Can you answer my questions or no? Or are you going to keep talking about SC and side stepping the debate?

Absolutely I can answer your question, and your thinking you can feign ignorance of your position is counter productive to your point. Your very presence in this thread has been to poo-poo on any thing positive looking for the GTX590 through out, including the point you already LOST in regards to old games mattering. I already demanded proof out of YOU, throwing it back at me doesn't work since I'm not the accused of bias and inability to make a fair call. You are. And the proof of THAT is every posting you made in response to belittle the ONE review with a broad spectrum of tested games that ended up with a more balanced appearance.

[moshpit]

Additionally, nobody has tried to take away 6990's "fastest card" title here. But being able to see the pluses and minuses to both sides is something I rarely expect from you, SC. And you're dissing that review based on not liking older games included in it really proves that to me. Do I have the wrong impression here? Explain if so, because up till now all you've done is stand by the stance that the whole review is bunk because you don't like the inclusions of older games.

[SIrPauly]

I did not say that. They tested HAWX 1 and HAWX 2. No need for HAWX 1.

It's good to see how games are in, OpenGL, DirectX 9, 10, 10.1 and 11.

[moshpit]

It's good to see how games are in, OpenGL, DirectX 9, 10, 10.1 and 11.

Bingo.

[acroig]

Additionally, nobody has tried to take away 6990's "fastest card" title here. But being able to see the pluses and minuses to both sides is something I rarely expect from you, SC. And you're dissing that review based on not liking older games included in it really proves that to me. Do I have the wrong impression here? Explain if so, because up till now all you've done is stand by the stance that the whole review is bunk because you don't like the inclusions of older games.

BTW, I do agree with you that nV has better older game compatibility than AMD.

[nycdarkness]

Keep in mind, I'm discussing boards from Asus, EVGA and even Gigabyte that exhibit this symptom. A serious problem with AMD's cooling solutions because AMD insists that you have an extra slot while Nvidia only advises it, but gives room for in case you don't - properly acknowledging the reality of EXCELLENT multi-GPU capable boards without needing to waste space on an extra space between the first 2 GPU slots when we're already coughing up 2 slots for each card as it is!!!

This is a major sticking issue for me with AMD right now. I totally disrespect AMD's choice on this matter and think it's ridiculous. I'm not the first or only person bitten by AMD's short sighted approach to this issue.

Completely agree. The box design is stupid. Yesterday I had to jam something in between the cards just so there would be some air passing by, something I will have to do for my own system as well while I get the watercooling parts. Also I find it funny how Crossfire bridges that come with cards are so short yet, they recommend having a slot in between lol? I understand certain boards come with longer bridges and blah blah but it seems quite common that people look for longer bridges. Since the bridges are flexible anyway they should jsut come with the cards.