Information

Did you know you could become an X-bit labs fan on Facebook or follow us on Twitter?



Discussion

Discussion on Article:
Roundup: New Graphics Cards from $100 to $260, or How Much for FPS?

Started by: Vlad | Date 06/11/09 10:19:21 PM
Comments: 24 | Last Comment:  06/23/09 04:11:42 PM

Expand all threads | Collapse all threads

[1-9]

1. 
I think the numbers of COD5 and HAWX are somewhat wrong...!They are extremely different from the numbers of the previous review that used the same drivers.
0 0 [Posted by: Vlad  | Date: 06/11/09 10:19:21 PM]
Reply
- collapse thread

 
The link, please.
And see the drivers settings in review's.
0 0 [Posted by: Jordan  | Date: 06/12/09 10:19:23 AM]
Reply
 
0 0 [Posted by: Vlad  | Date: 06/12/09 01:18:33 PM]
Reply
 
Try to compare this:
http://www.xbitlabs.com/a...0-crossfirex_3.html#sect0
and this:
http://www.xbitlabs.com/a...m-roundup-2_12.html#sect0

And also the hard configuration, OS systems, and versions of games, and demos, and levels for tests.
0 0 [Posted by: Jordan  | Date: 06/12/09 02:24:09 PM]
Reply
 
Ok.They are the same.The same quality setts in the drivers implied in both tests, and the same demos used in both tests.....
0 0 [Posted by: Vlad  | Date: 06/12/09 06:24:56 PM]
Reply
 
Open your eye's! They are different!
0 0 [Posted by: Jordan  | Date: 06/12/09 09:27:35 PM]
Reply
 
The IQ setts in the driver are the same, and the demos used, or are the same as well.
Oh and as the guy below me said, it is impossible for a gtx275 on stock clocks to obtain such high result in HAWX...
My Pal's gtx285 overclocked to 718MHz/1635MHz barely get 60 average fps and that's at 1680 x 1050 pixels with 8x aa man...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XQq2oZChqHQ

This review is getting real fishy...
0 0 [Posted by: Vlad  | Date: 06/13/09 07:50:23 AM]
Reply
 
and the demos used, or are the same as well.

They can't be the same. I use my own demo in CoD 5.

In Tom Clancy’s H.A.W.X. the results can be so as yours in 2 reasons:
- Ambient Occlusion (as I already said);
- DX10.1 for the NVIDIA was off

My Pal's gtx285 overclocked to 718MHz/1635MHz barely get 60 average fps and that's at 1680 x 1050 pixels with 8x aa man...

My system is more speedy then yours. Look to the CPU and memoty settings.

This review is getting real fishy...

In the review are 17 test's, and if I am nevertheless not right in 1 of them, all adhere at itself such expressions.
0 0 [Posted by: Jordan  | Date: 06/13/09 08:46:16 AM]
Reply
 
They can't be the same. I use my own demo in CoD 5.


So changing the track caused the ATI cards, that were significantly outperforming their counterparts in the previous review, to fall behind?


In Tom Clancy’s H.A.W.X. the results can be so as yours in 2 reasons:
- Ambient Occlusion (as I already said);
- DX10.1 for the NVIDIA was off

Ok, so no Ambient occlusion, although you didn't mention that in the test bed...And no DX10.1 for Nviidia cards...."cuz" Nvidia cards do not support DX10.1...not convincing.

Anyways, i hope i wasn't rude in my posts.
0 0 [Posted by: Vlad  | Date: 06/13/09 09:14:11 AM]
Reply
 
So changing the track caused the ATI cards, that were significantly outperforming their counterparts in the previous review, to fall behind?

I don't know. This is just another test systems, and OS.

Thanks!
0 0 [Posted by: Jordan  | Date: 06/13/09 09:31:41 AM]
Reply
 
I have noted at so many review sites the red roosters having a fit when the bias for ati isn't pronounced.
AT for instance is terrible with ati bias.
It is clear also that most reviews have system components far above the quality of those coming to the site to see the reviews, and various sites have a WIDE difference in Nvidia vs ati frame numbers and resolutions.
Although 1280x1024 (indicating CRT useage)is the most used resolution according to polls, it is often omitted at nearly all review sites because an LCD is being used and "widescreen" resolutions are preferred by the testers.
So you did a fine job, and I'm laughing as the red roosters complain. Not that I'm any different, I've seen so much massive red rooster ati bias the last few years I'm convinced most of those posting are somewhat insane. A common red rooster root and cheer is for the smaller ati core, supposedly a great money saver, so the clucking barnyard flappers shriek... then I point out ati has lost a billion a year several years in a row, and not a single red rooster responds, EVER.
Thank you for posting a review where ati cluckers have whined.
I deeply appreciate it.
0 0 [Posted by: SiliconDoc  | Date: 06/22/09 12:02:11 AM]
Reply
2. 
the numbers in this review seem completely wrong and obviously fabricated.
heres stanbony's TRI gtx285 superoverclocked cards getting 68 average FPS in hawX.

http://www.youtube.com/wa...&feature=channel_page

How did you get 98 average FPS with a single stock clocked GTX275 at the same settings and resolution using the same benchmarking tool.

And in the previous review the 4890 was beating the GTX275 and GTX285 in COD5.How did you get the 4890 to lose in this review by a large margin?

The reliability of this site is going down hill...
0 0 [Posted by: bloody-d  | Date: 06/11/09 10:56:48 PM]
Reply
- collapse thread

 
In youtube settings are:"H.A.W.X Bench 1920X1200 DX10 8xaa Very high Ambient Occlusion"and in our test we don't use it. Read attentively, please, in the future.
0 0 [Posted by: Jordan  | Date: 06/12/09 10:23:19 AM]
Reply
 
Tell me your'e joking...!
Heres what you exactly wrote about hawX test settings:

"Tom Clancy’s H.A.W.X. (Direct3D 10.1) – version 1.01, maximum graphics quality settings, HDR and DOF enabled, two runs of the built-in benchmark."

And why wouldn't you enable Ambient Occlusion on very high? the option is included with the rest of the graphics settings in the game,and theres absolutely no reason to not include it.

With my 4850 i get over 55 avg FPs at your maximum settings and resolution with ambient occlusion and DX10.1 enabled,so why wouldn't you include Ambient Occlusion in the test?

I still stand on what iv'e said that this review either Fake or Messedup intentionally...
0 0 [Posted by: bloody-d  | Date: 06/12/09 04:14:13 PM]
Reply
 
And why wouldn't you enable Ambient Occlusion on very high?

The "Ambient Occlusion" was off because with this option on my system was the distortion of picture and nothing more. That is why.
May be in the new drivers|patches this bag will be correct.

I still stand on what iv'e said that this review either Fake or Messedup intentionally...

It is your problem.
0 0 [Posted by: Jordan  | Date: 06/12/09 09:35:14 PM]
Reply
 
I thought ambient occlusion only worked on nvidia cards -
Perhaps if you had distortion on the ati cards, that would be the reason.
Also, if that feature is on for both cards, and only nvidia makes use of it, then a framerate hit may occur - quite unfairly some may say. Same with the PhysX.
If ati people want PhysX left on in NV control panel for the couple frames per advantage, leave it on and test mirror's edge, or warmonger, etc. - and let then see the ati crawl to a stop.
Fair is fair.
0 0 [Posted by: SiliconDoc  | Date: 06/23/09 04:11:42 PM]
Reply
3. 
I'm disappointed with the numbers as well
0 0 [Posted by: sstass  | Date: 06/12/09 12:31:30 AM]
Reply
4. 
good solid review.
0 0 [Posted by: 3Dkiller  | Date: 06/12/09 07:17:01 AM]
Reply
5. 
This review is a joke.My 4870 beats my friend's gtx285 super overclocked in HAWX by over 10fps.HAWX is known to be an ATI game due to its DX10.1 support.
0 0 [Posted by: konstantine  | Date: 06/12/09 08:29:13 AM]
Reply
6. 
I examined this review and noticed what others have noticed. The results shown in this review is not accurate. I only ask that Sergey Lepilov be removed from reviewing video cards and also ask that Alexey Stepin & Yaroslav Lyssenko continue reviewing video cards as they have done in the past. Alexey Stepin & Yaroslav Lyssenko appear to represent what I actually get in game.

"The "Ambient Occlusion" was off because with this option on my system was the distortion of picture and nothing more. That is why."
Having read this it should have been included in the review. With photos showing what the problem is and with what driver. The results of that benchmark should have been highlighted but none of this was done. Only a quick blurb to a reply. AKA: A rebuttal to concerned viewers as to why the numbers don't add up. We (as viewers) don't care about this person's system. What we do care about is accurate reporting.
0 0 [Posted by: CPUGuy  | Date: 06/13/09 08:28:04 AM]
Reply
- collapse thread

 
"The "Ambient Occlusion" was off because with this option on my system was the distortion of picture and nothing more. That is why."
Having read this it should have been included in the review.
We will add this information in article.
0 0 [Posted by: Jordan  | Date: 06/13/09 08:54:40 AM]
Reply
7. 
I guess we have as the ONLY dual card setup in this review the 4770 dual, just so a red bar can be streched across the page as much as possible every time.
No GTX9800+ dual in sli mode to offset that massive ati bias.No GTX260 sli either.
Whatever, it's ALWAYS something red rooster ati biased advantage - anything to make ati look better than it is.

When nvidia takes the whole game page, the reviewer says " the 512 cards fall behind" (avoiding saying ati -lol it's so pathetic).Nvidia takes another whole page of game tests, and the following page ati has a win on those games, and on the ati page the reviewer points out the ati frame wins specifically, and forcefully, but the prior page when nvidia wins big it's all a "meh".
I feel sorry for reviewers, they must be so haraunged by red rooster fanboys that they just constantly spew for them, it's like listening to a certain political party that talks up everything for their side.I'm so sick of hearing it I hope ATI completely folds fromm it's billions of dollars of losses the last few years - hope they close their doors, that would be fitting justice - it would be tremendous - but then we'd have to listen for years to red roosters crying about their terrible loss - and hear more big fish wives tales endlessly.
I'll say this much - congratulations to DDR5 and woe is the red rooster when they don't have it - then their brand new core goes down in flames to "the most whined about nvidia "rebranded" two year old "old technology" backwards .. needs to get modern" - blah blah blah G80/G92 core.
Goodnight red roosters, I'm bringing the big green game tractor right into your clucking farm pen and running you all over, have a nice mush.
0 0 [Posted by: SiliconDoc  | Date: 06/22/09 12:27:01 AM]
Reply
8. 
Oh, gee, where's the GTS250 sli ?
Here we have in Enemey Territory Quake Wars, the 4770 xfire at 68 frames in 1900x1200 with aa and af up.
http://www.xbitlabs.com/a...m-roundup-2_14.html#sect1
---
then for the GTS250 sli, here we have 66.4 frames - very competitive and probalby a win in several resolutions not comparable by the two reviews differing resolutions
http://www.xbitlabs.com/a...f-gts250-sli_8.html#sect1
---
So the GTS250 SLI would have been humiliating in a performance comparison to the 4770 xfire, not to mention the 9800GTX+ sli or even the 9800GTX sli.
---
See, we have their review numbers here buit they've been omitted for the SLI nvidia, all for the glory of the current crazed 4770 that you cannot even find available online - and they have been in very little sold numbers, sold out for like 2 months - with a few reviews because the vendors only had a half dozen of them.
Whoo hoo - a card that I can't buy in any name brand selection to speak of (I see one powercolor available as I write), let alone two of them, and the still available in mass quantity and brand selection with hundreds sold at sites that still have them GTS250 sli is OMITTED...
But it's framerate was 66.4 vs 68.0 in comparison.
THANKS FOR THE GIGANTIC BIAS IT'S REALLY GREAT !!!!
GREAT!!
I LOVE IT RED ROOSTERS!
LOVE YOU RED ROOSTERS !
0 0 [Posted by: SiliconDoc  | Date: 06/22/09 12:52:06 AM]
Reply
9. 
THIS THE KIND OF CRAP I'M TALKING ABOUT. LET'S TAKE PAGE 14 AND THE KNEE JERK COMMENTARY IN MASSIVE BIAS FOR THE ATI CARD, THE NEW CRAZY 4770... OH MY IT'S SOOOOOOOOO DARN GOOD... ;
" As opposed to the two synthetic benchmarks, the real-life game shows no surprises. The Radeon HD 4770 is the slowest card in the total of test modes and resolutions but not much slower than the GeForce GTS 250. "

=== oh really, not much slower ? It's 8 frames behind, 7 frames behind and 7 frames behind the GTS250 in 3 of the 4 resolutions. But it's only 3 frames ahead in the highest - but 3 frames on one of 4 rezzes makes equal when it loses by 7 and 8 frames, and let's not forget the 4850 lost to the GTS250 EVERY TIME and that isn't emphasized... ==== GREAT THNAK YOU SO MUCH !!!!!
== AT LEAST WE KNOW THE 4850 LOST TO THE GTS250 IN EVERY RESOLUTION BUT THAT IS NEVER MENTIONED!=== GREAT THANK YOU THANK YOU !!!!!
here's the ret of the brilliant red rooster 4770 fan bloviating in the review ! ;
'
"This card is even ahead of Nvidia’s products and of the low-frequency Radeon HD 4850 in the hardest visual mode. Thus, the four cards priced below $150 are actually similar in World of Conflict. "
GEE THAT'S GREAT !!! THE GTS 250 WUNS EVERY SINGE TEST EXCEPT ONE FROM THE CARDS MENTIONED, AND IS ONLY BEHIND BY 3 FRAMES IN THAT, BUT WINS BY 7 AND 8 FRAMES IN THE OTHER REZZES - BUT THE CARDS ARE SIMILAR !!! HAHAHAHA
THANK YOU SO MUCH RED ROOSTER FANS!!!!!!!!
it's just great, I love it, I just love the bias !
I can hardly wait till the 4770 wins by 7 or 8 frames it will be a stomping won't it ! hahaha of course! I bet I can find it in the article! I know I can!
0 0 [Posted by: SiliconDoc  | Date: 06/22/09 01:05:21 AM]
Reply

[1-9]

Back to the Article

Add your Comment

[Login] [Forgot password?] [Registration]


Our Sponsors

Crucial.com by Micron Technology, Inc. Kingston Technology