What on Earth does Nvidia have to do with this? :shakes:Quote:
Originally Posted by Nintendork
What on Earth does Nvidia have to do with this? :shakes:Quote:
Originally Posted by Nintendork
i think that he is saying that NV payed them off to only put that up for ati, as its a site that always is pro NV and is know to bench things to favor them. but this would happen with NV or any1 with that system as its all cpu. just look at it, each attack on each unit has like 10 roles, then when u have over a hounded units all needing the cpu on a single threaded game what else would happen.Quote:
Originally Posted by Carfax
this would happen with anything and thats what i think its the comment is for, but i dont see any1 picking a card to play SC2 as its fully playable even with low fps as its an RTS.
Back in the day i use to for d3, every bit of fps counted hehe, But yeah 30fps maby if it was a eyefinity resolution but i dont see how it would be 30 fps on a 1080p or @ 1920 res.. seems low:shrug:Quote:
Originally Posted by Sparky
Interesting, I could have swore I saw my cpu hit 50+% usage while playing. Maybe I forgot to turn off another program though, no telling until I play again.Quote:
Originally Posted by zanzabar
When has chiphell become NV favorable?Quote:
Originally Posted by zanzabar
I have seen alot of leaks from them that have made NV look unfavorable, especially with unreleased products.
http://www.techreaction.net/2010/03/...h-the-fingers/
E.g gtx 470 vs 5870 in the above article. If they are always pro-nvidia, explain the above article.
http://www.madshrimps.be/vbulletin/f...s-beans-71048/
The above is more accurate than anything and does not seem pro nvidia at all.
Chiphell is way more known for early hardware leaks than anything.
It sounds like your trying to explain a rationalize something, but your just talking out of your ass.
i remember on the g92 and g200, they had some bias but it could just be those. im not trying to say that they are a toms or legit or start a debate on it. it just looks like its being anti ati from the lack of NV when its the same problem as its a cpu oneQuote:
Originally Posted by tajoh111
One more thing. What was posted was a forum post. Do you think Nvidia, would be paying someone to just post a forum post rather than a article.Quote:
Originally Posted by zanzabar
Atleast they would get a full fledged article out of it. Just think about it. How much effect you think a forum post is going to attract? And how much damage is going to happen to AMD.
This is just Nintendork being a irrational or fanboyish.
I guess it not impossible though..Look what happened to Nedjo. He stopped posting because his post looked like he was basically trying to sabotage anything that wasn't AMD related and Movieman said, basically if he attacks another NV or Intel thread again, he going to get banned.
http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/...9&postcount=57
Guess what, he stopped posting altogether. Nedjo works for AMD marketing.
So since AMD is capable of paying people to post forum crap, it doesn't make it impossible.
makes sense we have had that on both sides then. i really hate all of thees sc2 threads made from people who dont do RTS games, rts are all about low fpsQuote:
Originally Posted by tajoh111
Utter crap this post regarding fps, perhaps they should test with some other cards to.
HAd the same issue; running 10.3 untill beta16, once beta 17 released sometimes black screen, this was reported often in beta forum. upgrading to 10.6 fixed my issue, no more issues afterwards in final releaseQuote:
Originally Posted by aintz
lol you are joking right, or you are a joke with such a post :D Nedjo wasn't payed by AMD to post crap in Intel threads, it was just his own personal intention against Intel.Quote:
Originally Posted by tajoh111
funny i just did that level with all effects on high/ultra with my phenom 9850 and 4870 1gb catalyst 10.6. noticed no hiccups @ 1680x1050 running borderless windowed mode no less
Wow, blowing up the proportions of a small issue. Just... wow, why is SC II so hyped?
may be cause there ware many fans of SC 1 ?
He just forget to mentioned that he works for amd marketing.. so yeah... i guess his opinion has nothing to do with his job at all. :rofl:Quote:
Originally Posted by duploxxx
so :rofl: you're ANTI AMD and PRO Intel opinion is also lousy so cut the crap, weather or not you work is IT related, one should be able to have his own opinion. same goes for JF - dr who and others....Quote:
Originally Posted by Hornet331
It's the cloaked effect on the Protoss Units that rape frame rates
my 4870 handled that mission just fine. 1680*1050 everything maxed.
don't think it's an issue.
Interesting observation.Quote:
Originally Posted by Nintendork
I did the same a few days ago with my 4870X2 and AMD 940. No hiccups no lag nothing throughout the entire game.Quote:
Originally Posted by SKYMTL
Hell I'm still running 10.2 drivers here. Windowed mode alone would kill performance probably.
I would always prefer window mode if possible, as I don't have multiple monitors.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sparky
Quote:
Originally Posted by zerazax
Quote:
Originally Posted by Soultaker52
I would be curious to see how you guys claiming no fps drop can handle that situation. Please give a screenshot of mothership cloaking at least 12 carriers in battle, or I'll simply treat these as BS.Quote:
Originally Posted by SKYMTL
@sniper_sung: What is your point?
Everybody who ever played RTS has experienced slowdowns when larger groups of enemies fight - so nothing special here.
Is "lower than 20 fps" too slow? Then watch these graphs (scroll down the german text). It shows the cpu scaling of SC2 with a GTX480 graphics card (@1024x768 resolution without AA/AF to minimize gpu impact). There are a lot of sub 20 fps grey "minimum fps" bars - so nothing special here, either.
http://www.pcgameshardware.de/aid,76...giespiel/Test/
Edit: A video of the test scene is shown, too.
Do note that I'm not at that mission yet, I meant my experience so far has been great. The title for this article was a silly generalization that isn't true, was my point of posting mine.Quote:
Originally Posted by sniper_sung
Also did that mission on my 5850 + Q9550. No problems on maxed settings.
Load of bs.
The reviewer isn't a gamer...
Sounds like they just don't know wtf their doing.:ROTF:
From what I've noticed JF doesn't post unless he can back up his statements, Dr Who seems to just post his mind.Quote:
Originally Posted by duploxxx