FERMI Benchmarked?

[trinibwoy]

well this may be fake but i would expect that kind of numbers from fermi, i mean what less for 512 shaders , thats more than 2x GT285
5970 and 5870 numbers dont seem genuine, c'mon GTX360 matching 5970 is blasphemy

Games aren't shader bound so the shader increase isn't enough to predict performance. Until we know more about the architecture (and clock speeds) it's impossible to know how it will scale. Cypress didn't change much at all architecturally over RV770 and it doubled everything except bandwidth and only managed 50% more performance on average.

[kurt124]

please 'doo'

[Piotrsama]

Courtesy of [H] forums.

[Florinmocanu]

Here is one more for the road...

Larrabee unleashed to the public.

[FischOderAal]

Yes, very skeptical
Let's read it again...

In this post he was refering to the FPS AMD's cards had. But in another post he says this:

It could really go either way, but my personal opinion would be that there is more evidence suggesting it is real than not.

[dinos22]

Tom put on a few kgs heh
really nice guy i hope those figures are real and cards come out asap we need some competition or AMD prices will start going stupid like Intel CPU prices are right now

[N19h7m4r3]

Tom put on a few kgs heh
really nice guy i hope those figures are real and cards come out asap we need some competition or AMD prices will start going stupid like Intel CPU prices are right now

Exactly!

I can understand the NV hate going around with some slides and that fake card.

But I for one can't wait for Fermi to be out, i want lower prices badly, and the same goes for Intel CPUS

[003]

Yes, very skeptical
Let's read it again...

This is the post I was referencing to. And when I said it "looks legit", I was referring to the fact that the FC2 performance figures on the 5970 were in fact accurate in real life, and that the graphs do appear as they are from Nvidia.

In fact, saying they look legitimate is still a perfectly acceptable statement, even now, because they do in fact look legitimate. Whether or not they actually are is a different story.

Also does anybody have a link back to the original thread where "successful_troll" posted these graphs? Because I did see some graphs posted on Tom's Hardware by a user named "successful_troll", and these graphs are completely different from the ones I saw.

[kurt124]

Here is one more for the road...

Larrabee unleashed to the public.

WOW im gettin larrabee!!

[Florinmocanu]

This is the post I was referencing to. And when I said it "looks legit", I was referring to the fact that the FC2 performance figures on the 5970 were in fact accurate in real life, and that the graphs do appear as they are from Nvidia.

In fact, saying they look legitimate is still a perfectly acceptable statement, even now, because they do in fact look legitimate. Whether or not they actually are is a different story.

Also does anybody have a link back to the original thread where "successful_troll" posted these graphs? Because I did see some graphs posted on Tom's Hardware by a user named "successful_troll", and these graphs are completely different from the ones I saw.

This is were these slides appeared the first time, no source, nothing.

http://forums.overclockers.co.uk/sho...php?t=18089093

[003]

This is were these slides appeared the first time, no source, nothing.

http://forums.overclockers.co.uk/sho...php?t=18089093

Why isn't the name of the poster "successful_troll" then? Or did people just get that mixed up with this?

[Piotrsama]

Larrabee unleashed to the public.

Wants!

[Florinmocanu]

check the results. THey are identical to the ones from the THG forum. They just took the numbers and put them in the slides. If there were from different sources, i doubt you would get identical results for all the cards.

[h0bbes]

Well i am thinking that successful_troll (who posted the benchmarks in the tomshardware forums) is the same person as svs22 (who posted the benchmarks in the overclockers forums). This might be stupid reasoning but:

From tomshardware thread:

successful_troll

This benchmarks is not fake, is from the tomshardware review about the GTX 300 series.

Looking at those benchmarks the GTX 3xx seems to be more powerful than we expected, I am surprised.

From overclockers thread:

svs22

Looking at those benchmarks the GTX 3xx seems to be more powerful than we expected, I am surprised.

[kurt124]

This is the post I was referencing to. And when I said it "looks legit", I was referring to the fact that the FC2 performance figures on the 5970 were in fact accurate in real life, and that the graphs do appear as they are from Nvidia.

In fact, saying they look legitimate is still a perfectly acceptable statement, even now, because they do in fact look legitimate. Whether or not they actually are is a different story.

Also does anybody have a link back to the original thread where "successful_troll" posted these graphs? Because I did see some graphs posted on Tom's Hardware by a user named "successful_troll", and these graphs are completely different from the ones I saw.

this is it i think
http://www.tomshardware.co.uk/forum/...6100_15_0.html

[Florinmocanu]

Well i am thinking that successful_troll (who posted the benchmarks in the tomshardware forums) is the same person as svs22 (who posted the benchmarks in the overclockers forums). This might be stupid reasoning but:

From tomshardware:

successful_troll

This benchmarks is not fake, is from the tomshardware review about the GTX 300 series.

Looking at those benchmarks the GTX 3xx seems to be more powerful than we expected, I am surprised.

From overclockers:

svs22

Looking at those benchmarks the GTX 3xx seems to be more powerful than we expected, I am surprised.

He is right, he posted the same thing on both forums =))

He has FERMi hands so he cannot type that much...

Maybe he is Jen Hsuan in disguise.

[skugpezz]

Why isn't the name of the poster "successful_troll" then? Or did people just get that mixed up with this?

successful_troll


This benchmarks is not fake, is from the tomshardware review about the GTX 300 series.

Looking at those benchmarks the GTX 3xx seems to be more powerful than we expected, I am surprised.

http://www.tomshardware.co.uk/forum/...6100_15_0.html

it is the 8th post on the page. Now 003 please stop trolling

[kurt124]

:

successful_troll wrote :

This benchmarks is not fake, is from the tomshardware review about the GTX 300 series.

Looking at those benchmarks the GTX 3xx seems to be more powerful than we expected, I am surprised.

MARSOC_Operator wrote :

Care to post a link then? I think you fail.

successful_troll wrote :

http://www.tomshardware.co.uk/nvidia...iew-31769.html

omg he's telling the truth!...

[kurt124]

...404 error figures

so its still a mystery to the gt300's performance as there was clearly no review, and there wouldn't be one anyway since nvidia havent even made a benchmark yet. i cant believe one guy made so much hype.

[Florinmocanu]

haha, i thought you already knew the link was fake...

But forget about Fermi, we must wait for the GPU to rule them all, Larrabee...

[dengyong]

http://www.tomshardware.co.uk/forum/...6100_15_0.html

it is the 8th post on the page. Now 003 please stop trolling

It's probably not a good idea to argue constantly and call people trolls when you just got your foot in the door.

I don't want you to think I'm taking sides, so click on your user name and find more post by "your name" and look back through them.
Do the same for the person you accuse, then ask yourself who needs the...
.
.

[kurt124]

haha, i thought you already knew the link was fake...

But forget about Fermi, we must wait for the GPU to rule them all, Larrabee...

i did jus didnt fink no1 saw it yet.
Goooo larrabee!

[SKYMTL]

Here is one more for the road...

Larrabee unleashed to the public.

I see the makings of another News article on certain sites!!!

[Eastcoasthandle]

According to this post, the slides are fake per nvida.

[Florinmocanu]

I see the makings of another News article on certain sites!!!

Shhhh, don't give them ideas...