Quote Originally Posted by Sushi Warrior View Post
As I told you in [H], "architecturally imbalanced" is the biggest load of bull I've heard. What I DO believe is they used DIFFERENT DRIVERS for the testing. That is HARD, SOLID FACT. 40-50mHz clock differences (5% difference at most) do not balance out with 15+% architectural differences to give results that are 3-4% off. Why on earth would Nvidia release a Titan which has "more shaders than it needs"? They have some of the most brilliant engineers in the field, who just so happened to make the mistake of giving a card "too many shaders". Put away your green flag and look at the facts.
So if there's a bottleneck in a working chip, what do you think it should be called? I'd say architectural imbalance is a good summation of it. For example, in most circumstances, GK104 benefits far more from a high memory OC than a high core OC. This indicates an imbalance with there not being enough memory bandwidth for those cases. It has nothing to do with a "green flag", it's just basics of how these kinds of electronics work (GPU, CPU, heck even memory simply with timings, etc.). I'm not sure where the anger is coming from...