Quote Originally Posted by Katzenschleuder View Post
Yes, I understand that the comparison of 20 games vs. 3DMark isn't enough for your neat standards.
Standards are merely an illusion of normality.

Quote Originally Posted by Katzenschleuder View Post
Holy crap in hell! Is it just fantasy reading this?
No, it has been my point all along.

- For initial performance indications, 3DMark gives quite good accuracy
- For detailed performance indications, you need to test real games.

Which is also what Futuremark said in an interview: http://hwbot.org/article/newsflash/9...mark_president.

The point of dispute is NOT(!) that testing 20 games is more useful. In fact, I would say the data based on multiple test scenarios provide more meaningful results. The point of dispute is that you are trying to prove 3DMark is inherently biased/incorrect/producing false results, whereas truth is that it's quite capable of identifying the performance of a certain product.

I think you've learned a valuable lesson about using big statements in 'public'. Perhaps in the future you'll be able to provide your opinion in a more balanced manner, which ultimately will make you lean closer to the true nature of things.