So you have no idea if the bench program has been messed with. I fell better if a independent reviewer could install the OS and bench software then them just handing a system and say just run the bench.Quote:
Originally Posted by SKYMTL
Printable View
So you have no idea if the bench program has been messed with. I fell better if a independent reviewer could install the OS and bench software then them just handing a system and say just run the bench.Quote:
Originally Posted by SKYMTL
/tinfoilhatQuote:
Originally Posted by SnipingWaste
Thanks :up:Quote:
Originally Posted by SKYMTL
simulated performance on the 5870 in fc2? lulz. Of course they simulate way too low.
I just ran these and 71.66 fps on stock 5870. Overclocked to 1000/1300 5870 and resulted 79.54 fps. Dual 5870's @ stock resulted in 120.35 fps.
As I mentioned in the article, NVIDIA sent me their EXACT system specs when I tried to call them on using a hand picked system. I went out and bought an i7 960 and replicated their system. My GTX 285 results were within a mere few percentage points of theirs.Quote:
Originally Posted by SnipingWaste
Trust me, nothing was messed with the benchmark on my system and judging from my results, nothing was "optimized" on theirs either.....
It was me that simulated the HD 5870 after simulating the GTX 285 results they gave out. Trust me, unless they used a totally different test system for the GTX 285 and GF100, the results are pretty accurate. :DQuote:
Originally Posted by NCspecV81
Meanin you ran on DX9. In DX10, I got nearly exactly the same result using a stock 5870.Quote:
Originally Posted by NCspecV81
you simulated. enough said, they are inaccurate. I'm even running a phenom II to boot.Quote:
Originally Posted by SKYMTL
No it was dx10. I would be more than happy to post the graph.Quote:
Originally Posted by annihilat0r
better 8AA scaling, cool...Quote:
Originally Posted by GoldenTiger
and supposedly better AA quality as well... nice!
very nice perf scaling compared to a 285... but without knowing what res this was its not that useful...
lol from the pcp article:
errr nOooOoO? doom3 faces sucked...Quote:
Remember how impressed we all were when Doom 3 came out? How we now had human looking faces?
soooo wait... i thought the 360 was supposed to be 20% faster than the 5870...Quote:
the GF100 based high end card will be 15% to 20% faster overall than the HD 5870.
so fermi is as fast as a 1ghz 5870? :/
http://img62.imageshack.us/img62/279...lationperf.jpg
fermi is 6x faster in an nvidia custom benchmark compared to a 5870...now thats a useful perf indication! NOT! :P
http://img195.imageshack.us/img195/5875/wptextperf.jpg
250% the logic but only 50% perf boost? or is this some synthetic texturing benchmark? even if its only texturing perf, 50% isnt really a lot... shouldnt a 295 beat fermi in texturing perf then?
meh, this is all?
no perf numbers, no price, no detailed availability/launch date?
nothing about GF104? no pictures of the card? no pictures of the gpu die? no infos about ocing, temperatures in idle and load? :/
then it has got something to do with you running on Phenom. AT was telling that Nvidia + Phenom could perform better than Nvidia + Intel.Quote:
Originally Posted by NCspecV81
Phenom. 'Nuff said. Different mobo, processor architecture, PCI-E lane configuration from the chipset, not DDR3 tri channel....need I go on?Quote:
Originally Posted by NCspecV81
Honestly, these results are easily replicated with the proper system (960 or i7 920 overclocked to a 960's Turbo Mode speed) and running the same benchmark with 9.12 or 9.11 drivers.
I've never been able to achieve the kind of performance you're claiming... and I'm running an i7 920 @ 3.72g, an Indilinx Barefoot 256GB SSD with Samsung NAND, 6GB DDR3 @ 1560, with a Radeon 5870 (stock).Quote:
Originally Posted by NCspecV81
Don't tell me when it comes to FarCry2, Intel sucks compared to AMD.
Yea Far Cry 2 doesn't seem to give Core i7 much love, or it gives extra love to Phenom II. :DQuote:
Originally Posted by annihilat0r
cool, thx for spending so much time on this man! appreciated :toast:Quote:
Originally Posted by SKYMTL
so best case scenario in a tesselation benchmark, which to some degree already is a best case scenario, fermi is 50% faster than a 5870... hmmm so its slightly faster than a 5970 in heavy tesselation scenarios.Quote:
The cart you see below Unigine engine benchmark 60 seconds is taken from the walkway section of Heaven benchmark that has the most tessellation.
typo, theres a word missing after seperate :DQuote:
NVIDIA showed off one more bit of information about DX11 performance which was from a Microsoft DX11 geometry shader toolkit. The results you see below were taken during the rendering of two separate which ask the GPU to process up to six cubemap faces in one pass.
so was this a microsoft dx11 benchmark? or is it an nvidia benchmark based on microsofts toolkit? :D
looks like I expected it to
sorry turned down my OC to test nearly the same frequency. If you are trying to tell me a phenom performs much better in fc2 than intel...give me a break. There's been plenty of reviews that state otherwise.
http://www.overclock.net/gallery/dat...gle5870fc2.PNG
SKYML:
great article. Best article out there, starting to like your site over AT. keep up the great work.
Image thumbnail, please!
Sorry. A lot of stuff to type.Quote:
Originally Posted by saaya
The benchmark is built into MS's DX11 toolkit for testing of geometry shader code. It is an industry standard with developers as far as I know. I have asked for a bit more information about it but my developer contacts don't think it is publicly available.
Stay tuned for more on that.
It's a Canadian thing. :p:Quote:
Originally Posted by kgk
Um.....what? :confused:Quote:
Originally Posted by annihilat0r
I don't know which article, but it was there.Quote:
Originally Posted by Carfax
that's what I'm saying. The results posted for the 5870 are "simulated" and a mild guess at best and are "based off the performance obtained with the gtx285". Great. Just what we need floating around, especially for cards already out on the market!Quote:
Originally Posted by Carfax
overclocked results lol
pardon me I don't know how to put in thumbnail tags. Let me know and I will.
http://www.overclock.net/gallery/dat...fc2results.PNG
God, why on Earth do you continue posting overclocked results while it has absolutely no relevance?
Here is something from AT, with a 3.33GHz i7:
http://images.anandtech.com/graphs/r...2344/20103.png