Quote Originally Posted by DilTech View Post
I get the feeling things are about to get extremely controversial on this card...



Look thru the discussion about the review, you'll see people attacking them left and right, mainly pointing out the Anandtech review, which after reading thru you notice they use demos/flybys/cutscenes to bench. For call of duty 4 Anandtech used the cutscene of the guy smoking a cigar for their numbers, this doesn't even test the performance of really any of the engines effects(explosions, gunshots, etc)... [H] also explain the reason they do things the way they do, and that's because of the FX series benchmark scores compared to what it was capable of in gaming itself.

Kinda makes me think it's time someone does a "benchmark vs real-world gameplay" review, merely to show if [H] has been full of it the past few years or if they've been right for quite some time. I personally haven't given [H] too much thought before, but they might just be on to something here.

Personally, I'm not taking sides until we see how this pans out. Either way, even if it took 2 gpus to do it, atleast ATi are finally making their way back into the fight. Hopefully it can compete with it's real competition!
Yeah, but if ALL cards are run with the SAME benchmark, it still gives a RELATIVE scale of performance. I don't see what water your argument or [H]'s argument holds.

Quote Originally Posted by Krizby87 View Post
Funny, cause even single card ATI need optimized driver too with their VLIW architecture. I guess no one learns their lessons since the introduction of HD2900XT and the promises of "future" drivers that deliver performance surpassing 8800GTX, only to see now that you need 2 of them to actually get anywhere near that.
Considering games are built on the nvidia architecture? Go figure.