or just higher compression ;)
Printable View
or just higher compression ;)
How big the installer is?
I see it's the same day as GTX 570 NDA ends. Is it just a coincidence, or is it again a conspiracy theory? I strongly believe that nVidia got much more excellent Division of Public Relations than AMD.Quote:
Originally Posted by FM_Jarnis
It is a coincidence. There were real bugs to be sorted and we would have actually launched on Monday except that Monday is Independence Day in Finland and a national holiday. So Tuesday it is.
The only way NVIDIA "influenced" the date is that they reported us at least one of the issues that just had to be fixed. I guess if you want to go all-in on tinfoilhattery, you could theorize about that. Meanwhile in the real world... sometimes coincidences happen. Really.
i think you guys should delay it a little more, just to prove that nvidia had no influence
that sounds fair right?
I thought this time AMD was the main partner - and I still think so.
How exactly is the release of 3DMark going to help NVIDIA?
Not sure. Tinfoil hat crowd might let us know :DQuote:
Originally Posted by Vardant
But ... wouldn't FM trying to make it look as if Nvidia had no influence by postponing the release be in fact proof that Nvidia had influence? I mean, if you don't have anything to hide ...Quote:
Originally Posted by Manicdan
You've been tinfoiled!
naa you have it backwords. delay it PAST the date, right now its looking to be on the date.Quote:
Originally Posted by massman
i say like 1 more week, which isnt an coincidence to being the AMD release date.
and who cares if theres an army mob of overclockers at my door with torches and pitchforks looking for something to do while they wait for its release.... o wait, i would
Maybe Nvidia wasn't the only party that was unhappy or had issues?
Prediction :)
AMD faster -> they rock!
nVidia faster -> cheats! scandal! payoffs!
Seriously though, it's obvious that both nVidia and AMD have a keen interest in not being shafted by Futuremark given how popular their benchmarks are. What causes suspicion is that these are all backroom dealings so we don't know what's being "fixed" and who is complaining about what. Granted it's not our right to know since the thing isn't even released yet but it would be nice to understand what's going on even from a purely technical standpoint. I've always wondered how Futuremark decides a given algorithm is fair given the differences in architecture and the different optimizations that may favor one IHV over another.
do you remember how well the 4800s did vs upper 200s. a 260 was able to keep up with all of ati's offerings.Quote:
Originally Posted by trinibwoy
but then we jump a year forward to 5800s vs 480/470s
vantage didnt change at all. and the efficiency of the 4800s was practically just doubled in 5800s. which is why the difference between old and new was also basically just doubled. so i would say that nvidia simply messed up in building a gpu which was not friendly with vantage style graphics. or i would say that games did not push shaders nearly as well as they could have and ati cards have technically been handicapped for a few years on alot of titles. (no vantage is not a game, but does have an engine which seems to push atis 5D well, so why has no other game?)
with vantage being out before fermi, theres really nothing futuremark did wrong, which is why ive just been quite disappointed in nvidia for this architecture, since what they had before was great for gaming, while their new stuff is just great for cuda.
nVidia's cards aren't great for gaming? That's news to me.
it was very clear in perf per mm2 that they are much worse off than if they just doubled their last generationQuote:
Originally Posted by trinibwoy
ati was the top for the rv7xx v g200 in vantage, and the 4890 was the top when the refreshes came, it look NV a specialty board and making a card with a huge voltera array, special bios, and 3pci-e power connectors that was not a viable card for non benching to beat the 4890 but that was right before the 5870, then there was the 480 and that was a beast for benching but i dont think that it was usable for home gaming use.Quote:
Originally Posted by Manicdan
on the vantage v games, ati did rather well overall and beat NV in alot of engines the only problem is that NV has TWIMTBP and they are a partner with epic who makes UT3 and since most games are using that since its easy to make cross platform with it, it not only held gaming back with its garbage graphics, use of physX instead of havoc for physics effects and terrible multithread support, it was something that NV was good at working with.
lolwut? look how many people own 480's for home gaming use. there is no difference using my 5870 or GTX 480 for practical home gaming besides the fact that my GTX 480 is a good bit faster.Quote:
Originally Posted by zanzabar
I am most interested to see if this version of 3dmark with push the visual bar a good amount. we seemt o have leveled off with Crysis or Heaven level visuals for the past while and it's getting a bit boring.
How did this become yet another AMD vs NVIDIA thread? From my knowledge, BOTH are EQUAL partners in this one.
Because it brings up the BEST in people :rofl:Quote:
Originally Posted by SKYMTL
More like "how on earth it managed 10 pages without degenerating into AMD vs NVIDIA grudge match until now?"... I think 10 pages is pretty good in that regard. :ROTF:Quote:
Originally Posted by SKYMTL
is it nov 30 yet?
The day after tomorrow it is:)Quote:
Originally Posted by STEvil
And after taking into consideration a feature set that goes above and beyond what's necessary for games? Anyway perf/mm has nothing to do with whether a chip is good for gaming or not - only absolute performance does. I don't see flashing neon signs about the die size of the chip under the heatsink when playing games.Quote:
Originally Posted by Manicdan
i said architecture, not chip.Quote:
Originally Posted by trinibwoy
LOL all this bickering about a POS benchmark :rofl: