And what about HD 4850 with 120° on Furmak ? Too hot ?
Printable View
And what about HD 4850 with 120° on Furmak ? Too hot ?
I don't know much about these drivers, but is is natural with some limitations so early. Specially for these cards that are based on a totally new architecture.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sn0wm@n
Are you dismissing the driver problems in such a early stage?
LOL @ nvidia fanboy blaming driver bug
It's not a driver bug. It's the Dirt2 Demo lacking the correct profiles for the GTX 4X0 cards (The demo was released 6 months ago)Quote:
Originally Posted by Sn0wm@n
The full game does seem to have the correct profiles.
Not mentioning that the benchmark is GTX470@DX9 vs HD5870@DX11 is a differend topic
Don't be so patronising, everyone has bugs.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sn0wm@n
As for cheating the rules have changed, in DX10 they added rasterisation rules. If a card is rendering something it has to be a certain way. So now if it isn't done the right way, it's normally because something is wrong not to get a speed boost.
Since DX10 you've not seen as many attacks on image quality except for the bs concerning the DX 10.1 of a certain game, nvidia smashed that like the hammer of Thor. But yeah as far as Microsoft are concerned they don't want to see any crap from ATI, nvidia or whoever.
So nope it's unlikely for nvidia to cheat, at least directly.
3 more days and all this Fermi nonsense hopefully ends.
Is it all you got to say?Quote:
Originally Posted by Sn0wm@n
It is a good idea to keep the person focus out of a technical discussion. Does this means that you dismiss driver problem in such a early stage?
I'll be waiting for reviews, but it's definitely a 470 or 480 for me: it just depends on performance and 100% certain pricing on newegg that will decide it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Chickenfeed
You know what they say. Where there's smoke....Quote:
Originally Posted by GoldenTiger
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sam_oslo
so i have to explain it in a technical manner as to why i think its not a driver problem but more of a cheat that nvidia pulled to make fermi look like its a good piece of trash ????
come on ... all the sudo news + all the leaked benchy pointed to it months ago ... and now this dx9 stunt .....
Sure, but there's been smoke spread out a lot all over, so it's hard to pinpoint where the actual fire is ;).Quote:
Originally Posted by trinibwoy
Some claim a 480 is barely on-par with a 5870. Some claim a 470 is 10% faster than the 5870.
I asked you a simple question, you don't need to talk about all other stuff. Unless you want to avoid to answer, of course.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sn0wm@n
Let me ask again. Do you dismiss the possibility that driver problems may be affecting the performance in such a early stage?
Quote:
Originally Posted by GoldenTiger
True. It was a fun ride but it's almost over. Wonder when that Hecatoncheires speculation thread will get started....
(Goes off to make thread)Quote:
Originally Posted by trinibwoy
:rofl:
remember to put... part 1 :ROTF:Quote:
Originally Posted by GoldenTiger
It's OK because it's ATI, not Nvidia. It's also OK that eventually, the VRMs on that card will pop when running Furmark. Again, because it isn't nvidia.Quote:
Originally Posted by Olivon
"Where there's smoke, there's a..." Fermi at idle? :)Quote:
Originally Posted by trinibwoy
again..... driver problem are dismised... wanna know why???? they had the fricking card for so long in their hand tweaked it that they had to tweak the driver package .... but hey your right its all speculation until release day ...Quote:
Originally Posted by Sam_oslo
and why run a benchmark in dx9 and say we are having driver problem instead or do some pr spin on it ???? the reason is nvidia didnt want it to be known.... now the question is why ???
heres why i made the assumption.....
The VRMs don't pop. The card simply crashes and goes into a protection mode, because furmark (or was it OCCT?) was causing the OCP to kick in. Still a design flaw, but it only affected benchers and people running stresstests. Wasn't causing any problems for real games. Still a serious and bad problem though :shakes:Quote:
Originally Posted by ElSel10
I haven't heard of any cards hitting 120C though :shocked:
You guys are ignoring the fact that Charlie has been wrong about clocks , Shader count , Power Consumption and nearly every aspect of GTX 4xx series except for the launch dates !
Shhh! :slap:Quote:
Originally Posted by DavidGraham
looks like he was right about the performance, though...
welcome btw, are you from B3D? I remember seeing you on some other forum
It's much better now. As long as you don't forget you are amusing, guessing and speculating, then it is OK .Quote:
Originally Posted by Sn0wm@n
Let me ask you a new question.
When you know your own ideas are based on speculations and assumption, how can you be so sure about your own impressions that you dismiss others ideas so firmly (even an obvious idea as possible driver problems in early stage), by calling them fanboys and such ?
I have seen the case with a HD 4850 Sapphire classic 2 slots cooler on a bad ventilated mid-ATX case with Furmark. Really massive heat :shocked:Quote:
Originally Posted by Musho
http://forums.techpowerup.com/showpo...0&postcount=11Quote:
the card is designed to withstand 120°C operating temperatures - W1zzard
Then the Nvidia cards are designed to withstand whatever temperature they operate at (and 80-90c load is not uncommon at all for GPUs!)Quote:
Originally Posted by Olivon