Quote Originally Posted by hurleybird View Post
The ironic thing here is that this article is perpetuating one of the most common benchmarking mistakes of today: providing minimum frame rates without qualifying them. Minimum FPS by itself is worthless, since for all you know it be for a single frame at the start of the level, or conversely that card might be hitting that minimum frame-rate all of that time. Another example, if one card hits a very low minimum frame rate once for a very short period, and another card hits a higher minimum frame rate but goes there more often, it's the first card with the lower min fps that is providing the better game play experience. If you want to provide minimum frame-rates, you MUST qualify them with a graph of fps over time, or at the very least a description of the gameplay. Unfortunately this poor methodology is very widespread.
Thats why you have the average frame rate
the closer the min is to the average, the more often that card hits the low-end. I find min to be fairly useful in determining which cards will deliver smoother gameplay. Its not accurate all the time, but its good for when you want to breeze through the pages