oh come on, systems like this should be tested with in at least 1920x1080 resolution, some ~30 inch monitors have a native resolution of 2560x1600, let's be onest - who would by such system and play in 1280 resoution? the other thing is when You buy system like this, that cost a lot of money, You wanna see the best possible graphics - that means AF and AA enabled... for gaming in high details in 1280 resolution GF9800 is enough...
- Status
"I'd totally disagree. I'm seeing more and more CPU bottlenecking lately."
Back to my previous statement, instructions-per-clock isn't getting much better for anyone, it's hit the point of diminishing returns. Most apps are compiled for i386 or i686, there's really no way to get more of those instructions in a single clock-cycle except for adding cores(ramping up clockspeed is dead). Those that are JIT compiled are also hitting the point of dimishing returns, the newer SSE instructions aren't making advances like they used to, and this trend will continue. Most games don't really make truly good use of more than 2 cores, and do you know the reason why developers aren't putting more effort in quad-core optimization?
BECAUSE GAMES CONTINUE TO BE PRIMARILY GPU LIMITED!!!!!!!
PS: Hurry up with that child-support check, beyotch 😛
Back to my previous statement, instructions-per-clock isn't getting much better for anyone, it's hit the point of diminishing returns. Most apps are compiled for i386 or i686, there's really no way to get more of those instructions in a single clock-cycle except for adding cores(ramping up clockspeed is dead). Those that are JIT compiled are also hitting the point of dimishing returns, the newer SSE instructions aren't making advances like they used to, and this trend will continue. Most games don't really make truly good use of more than 2 cores, and do you know the reason why developers aren't putting more effort in quad-core optimization?
BECAUSE GAMES CONTINUE TO BE PRIMARILY GPU LIMITED!!!!!!!
PS: Hurry up with that child-support check, beyotch 😛
- Mar 7, 2003
- 12,012
- 0
- 40,790
[citation][nom]Cleeves_Other_Babys_Momma[/nom]BECAUSE GAMES CONTINUE TO BE PRIMARILY GPU LIMITED!!!!!!![/citation]
Caps are a poor replacement for evidence. Oddly enough, putting your point in caps doesn't really prove anything more than putting it in lowercase characters.
You'll get your cheque when my laundry is done, beyotch #2. 😀
Caps are a poor replacement for evidence. Oddly enough, putting your point in caps doesn't really prove anything more than putting it in lowercase characters.
You'll get your cheque when my laundry is done, beyotch #2. 😀
Cleeve,
I also appreciate, as most of others, that you redo tests under better defined conditions as you posted. I think that results will be indeed interesting and therefore, I would ask you to put into it also Core 2 Quad for comparison. I think this makes sense as it is way cheaper than i7 and it may perform outstanding too, so it would be nice to see it.
I also appreciate, as most of others, that you redo tests under better defined conditions as you posted. I think that results will be indeed interesting and therefore, I would ask you to put into it also Core 2 Quad for comparison. I think this makes sense as it is way cheaper than i7 and it may perform outstanding too, so it would be nice to see it.
Why_Me
Titan
- Jan 17, 2008
- 16,874
- 2,654
- 72,340
I think all the AMD peeps should conduct their own bloody test instead of wasting this sites bandwidth with their sniveling. The i7 has spoken like the true KING that it is. Now all you AMD fanboys get on your knees and praise the i7 for it's far superior technology.
Some people were meant to drive Fords (AMD's) and some were meant to drive Ferrari's (i7's)
Some people were meant to drive Fords (AMD's) and some were meant to drive Ferrari's (i7's)
Dear Cleeve,
Caps were not my first choice, the intent was to place emphasis on that statement. I would've opted for bold font, but AFAIK the bold tags don't work for unregistered users.
What kind of evidence do you want? A tech article on a hardware site? I think it's common knowledge that alot of "journalists" on a lot of hardware sites are bought and paid for by the manufacturers, do you doubt for a minute that I can't google up an article to support ANY statement? I could probably google up an article to prove to you that i286 is technically superior to Core i7 if you wanted me to.... Of course, I could do my own benchmarks(like some already have in the comments), but I'd either be ignored or called a biased(and lying) fanboy if the results contradicted yours.
Caps were not my first choice, the intent was to place emphasis on that statement. I would've opted for bold font, but AFAIK the bold tags don't work for unregistered users.
What kind of evidence do you want? A tech article on a hardware site? I think it's common knowledge that alot of "journalists" on a lot of hardware sites are bought and paid for by the manufacturers, do you doubt for a minute that I can't google up an article to support ANY statement? I could probably google up an article to prove to you that i286 is technically superior to Core i7 if you wanted me to.... Of course, I could do my own benchmarks(like some already have in the comments), but I'd either be ignored or called a biased(and lying) fanboy if the results contradicted yours.
Schip
Distinguished
- Jul 7, 2008
- 35
- 0
- 18,530
@A-Dub
Props for providing links as other have done but, as Cleeve already mentioned, you can't really use it as a comparison as they are at different resolutions and settings.
@Cleeve
Also looking forward to the test but not because of this article. I've just been dying for some more i7 vs Phenom II goodness. Also I think you should still use triple channel for the i7. You could buy a 3x2Gig kit and just use two sticks for the Phenom II or something. Any how, I'm interested in as much info from that article as can reasonably be provided (ie three to four resolutions with three to four settings per resolutions and as many games as possible). I suppose that is asking a lot but I think that would provide very valuable info. Also if the same cooler could be used for their overclocking that would be great! Cheers!
@Why_Me
A lovely thought but clearly a Ford/Ferrari analogy is a poor one or else a lot more people would be using AMD 😉
Props for providing links as other have done but, as Cleeve already mentioned, you can't really use it as a comparison as they are at different resolutions and settings.
@Cleeve
Also looking forward to the test but not because of this article. I've just been dying for some more i7 vs Phenom II goodness. Also I think you should still use triple channel for the i7. You could buy a 3x2Gig kit and just use two sticks for the Phenom II or something. Any how, I'm interested in as much info from that article as can reasonably be provided (ie three to four resolutions with three to four settings per resolutions and as many games as possible). I suppose that is asking a lot but I think that would provide very valuable info. Also if the same cooler could be used for their overclocking that would be great! Cheers!
@Why_Me
A lovely thought but clearly a Ford/Ferrari analogy is a poor one or else a lot more people would be using AMD 😉
- Mar 7, 2003
- 12,012
- 0
- 40,790
[citation][nom]Cleeve_jr_is_hungry[/nom]What kind of evidence do you want? A tech article on a hardware site? I think it's common knowledge that alot of "journalists" on a lot of hardware sites are bought and paid for by the manufacturers, do you doubt for a minute that I can't google up an article to support ANY statement? [/citation]
If that's your attitude, then why read anything?
I'm sorry if I'm not quite as callous as you, I'm not of the opinion thast everyone reviewing hardware has been bought or sold.
I also value hard evidence more than your opinion, Caps or not, and for that I do not apologize.
If that's your attitude, then why read anything?
I'm sorry if I'm not quite as callous as you, I'm not of the opinion thast everyone reviewing hardware has been bought or sold.
I also value hard evidence more than your opinion, Caps or not, and for that I do not apologize.
Cleeve: You're either an Intel fanboy and completely naive, or a yet another journalist who has sold out all morality and honesty so that they could "make it" in journalism.
"I'm not of the opinion thast everyone reviewing hardware has been bought or sold."
*sarcasm*
Because it's a fantastic industry that's done a wonderful job of regulating itself, right? Lots of great resources out there offering fair and balanced reviews to aid the smart consumer in making informed choices. We all know that American corporations would never seek to have undue influence. That's like all of these kooks who suggest that the private health insurance companies are trying to prevent congress from passing universal healthcare by making millions in bribes... er... campaign donations(to be pocketed when the politician retires) to congress people in exchange for voting no... We all know that the health insurance people are just good honest folks, trying to make an honest living, and that there is nothing wrong with the current system....
*/sarcasm*
Moving on to this:
"I also value hard evidence more than your opinion"
80% of the people leaving comments are of the opinion that this article is complete bullshi t, you should be offering evidence to back up your claim, if you are going to blame AMD's CPU, you need to test a whole plethora of machines to prove it. You make some claims that unprecedented in the sheer spread of the benchmarks, YOU provide some evidence... This is easily the worst article on here since the infamous Tuan Nguyen Mac articles, he pulled this same "act indignant" crap that you're pulling now, and he eventually manned up... He would've never made it here if he hadn't...
"I'm not of the opinion thast everyone reviewing hardware has been bought or sold."
*sarcasm*
Because it's a fantastic industry that's done a wonderful job of regulating itself, right? Lots of great resources out there offering fair and balanced reviews to aid the smart consumer in making informed choices. We all know that American corporations would never seek to have undue influence. That's like all of these kooks who suggest that the private health insurance companies are trying to prevent congress from passing universal healthcare by making millions in bribes... er... campaign donations(to be pocketed when the politician retires) to congress people in exchange for voting no... We all know that the health insurance people are just good honest folks, trying to make an honest living, and that there is nothing wrong with the current system....
*/sarcasm*
Moving on to this:
"I also value hard evidence more than your opinion"
80% of the people leaving comments are of the opinion that this article is complete bullshi t, you should be offering evidence to back up your claim, if you are going to blame AMD's CPU, you need to test a whole plethora of machines to prove it. You make some claims that unprecedented in the sheer spread of the benchmarks, YOU provide some evidence... This is easily the worst article on here since the infamous Tuan Nguyen Mac articles, he pulled this same "act indignant" crap that you're pulling now, and he eventually manned up... He would've never made it here if he hadn't...
Look again, Far Cry 2 at very high, Crysis at high. Actually, the FC2 test was with no AA, the FC2 benchmark at overclockersclub was with 2x AA and still managed better fps with a single 260gtx at 1280 and 1680 resolutions.
- Mar 7, 2003
- 12,012
- 0
- 40,790
[citation][nom]Eat_a_d-ick_Cleeve[/nom]Cleeve: You're either an Intel fanboy and completely naive, or a yet another journalist who has sold out all morality and honesty so that they could "make it" in journalism."[/citation]
Heheh. It's hard to care about your opinion when you're spending all of your effort insulting me and none on providing evidence.
Still no numbers to back up your opinion, just a lot more hot air. It amuses me that you have so much to say without actually making a point.
Now that you've degraded into mere insults, it'll only go downhill for you from here, son. 😀
Heheh. It's hard to care about your opinion when you're spending all of your effort insulting me and none on providing evidence.
Still no numbers to back up your opinion, just a lot more hot air. It amuses me that you have so much to say without actually making a point.
Now that you've degraded into mere insults, it'll only go downhill for you from here, son. 😀
- Mar 7, 2003
- 12,012
- 0
- 40,790
[citation][nom]n00bsauce[/nom]Look again, Far Cry 2 at very high, Crysis at high. Actually, the FC2 test was with no AA, the FC2 benchmark at overclockersclub was with 2x AA and still managed better fps with a single 260gtx at 1280 and 1680 resolutions.[/citation]
But if the Oveclockersclub bench wasn't at very high, that would potentially remove a CPU bottleneck. If it was set to very high, I'd be interested in seeing the results... linky please?
But if the Oveclockersclub bench wasn't at very high, that would potentially remove a CPU bottleneck. If it was set to very high, I'd be interested in seeing the results... linky please?
OK, here's evidence that you're an Intel fanboy:
"Nothing new to see here, as the overclocked Phenom II 955 is struggling to keep pace with the stock Core i7-920."
"The overclocked Gamer Dragon manages to score a slim victory against the stock Core i7-920 here, but when overclocked, the Intel CPU easily regains the win."
"But enough application tests, as we all know that the Core i7 is faster than the Phenom II."
Nothing fanboyish there, huh? Nobody can infer from your writing style that you have a preference, right?
GTFO, cun.t
"Nothing new to see here, as the overclocked Phenom II 955 is struggling to keep pace with the stock Core i7-920."
"The overclocked Gamer Dragon manages to score a slim victory against the stock Core i7-920 here, but when overclocked, the Intel CPU easily regains the win."
"But enough application tests, as we all know that the Core i7 is faster than the Phenom II."
Nothing fanboyish there, huh? Nobody can infer from your writing style that you have a preference, right?
GTFO, cun.t
- Mar 7, 2003
- 12,012
- 0
- 40,790
[citation][nom]Cleeve_can-lick_my-balls[/nom]GTFO, cun.t[/citation]
Heheh. You can infer whatever you like. On one hand, there's people who interpret results from which there's evidence to base them on.
On the other hand, there's folks who aren't confident enough in their points to avoid sharing them without finding crafty ways to spell inappropriate terms over a forum filter.
I'll happily stay a member of the former group, IMHO they have more credibility. 😉
Heheh. You can infer whatever you like. On one hand, there's people who interpret results from which there's evidence to base them on.
On the other hand, there's folks who aren't confident enough in their points to avoid sharing them without finding crafty ways to spell inappropriate terms over a forum filter.
I'll happily stay a member of the former group, IMHO they have more credibility. 😉
Here ya go Cleeve:
http://www.overclockersclub.com/reviews/phenom2_955/8.htm
http://benchmarkreviews.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=313&Itemid=63&limit=1&limitstart=6
http://www.overclockersclub.com/reviews/phenom2_955/8.htm
http://benchmarkreviews.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=313&Itemid=63&limit=1&limitstart=6
You're not the one to be talking about credibility:
"I'll happily stay a member of the former group, IMHO they have more credibility. 😉"
You yourself professed to being "shocked" by just how much better the i7 did on the gaming benchmarks, and even though such a disparity has never been reported anywhere on the internet prior, you are just sure that it must be accurate. I wonder what Intel is doing for you in return...
Please note that I was not disputing those particular productivity benchmarks(nor confirming them, I do however dispute the gaming benchmarks), I was only noting that the writing style there strongly suggests Intel fanboyism, clearly the intent was to produce an article showing Intel superiority by a wide margin, even though Intel superiority is known to be neglible in real-life(unless of course you build a machine just to do video encoding and synthetic benchmarks).
As far as:
"Here ya go Cleeve:
http://www.overclockersclub.com/re [...] _955/8.htm
http://benchmarkreviews.com/index. [...] mitstart=6"
Both of those article's authors are suggesting that those games would be very GPU limited, with benchmarks to back it up...... I'm eagerly awaiting your excuse to validate your results and dismiss theirs.....
"I'll happily stay a member of the former group, IMHO they have more credibility. 😉"
You yourself professed to being "shocked" by just how much better the i7 did on the gaming benchmarks, and even though such a disparity has never been reported anywhere on the internet prior, you are just sure that it must be accurate. I wonder what Intel is doing for you in return...
Please note that I was not disputing those particular productivity benchmarks(nor confirming them, I do however dispute the gaming benchmarks), I was only noting that the writing style there strongly suggests Intel fanboyism, clearly the intent was to produce an article showing Intel superiority by a wide margin, even though Intel superiority is known to be neglible in real-life(unless of course you build a machine just to do video encoding and synthetic benchmarks).
As far as:
"Here ya go Cleeve:
http://www.overclockersclub.com/re [...] _955/8.htm
http://benchmarkreviews.com/index. [...] mitstart=6"
Both of those article's authors are suggesting that those games would be very GPU limited, with benchmarks to back it up...... I'm eagerly awaiting your excuse to validate your results and dismiss theirs.....
Schip
Distinguished
- Jul 7, 2008
- 35
- 0
- 18,530
Wow, I feel really silly. I looked at the Far Cry 2 results from the article @ OC club and thought, well their frame rates do not look that different from the Cyberpower machine (even though they had 2xAA on), and then I realized they were only using a single GTX 260 to do their testing and the Cyberpower machine has TWO 4890's. Thanks for the links guys, and thanks to Cleeve for taking a more in depth look at the phenomenon of these results. What is also interesting is the results from OC club seem to confirm the results from the i7 rig here at toms (ie, not quite linear scaling moving to two GTX 260's as apposed to the one at OC club). Of course, my comments just now are based off of a single game which isn't usually the best idea. They just happen to be quite comparable.
I am suprised you are taking the time to respond to some of the feedback, but it shows you actually read what others input are instead of just "I benched it, deal with it" attitude.
I will be looking at the review you are working on and will be interested in these points:
1. Just how important is a good MB when your planning on using dual high end video cards? (x8 vs x16 pci-e)
2. How crippled can a machine get with bad choices in support hardware (ie memory, hdd, mb, ect.)
I have not been able to find a review on the gigabyte board used in the cyberpower machine, but I speculate its part of the problem, we will see.
I will be looking at the review you are working on and will be interested in these points:
1. Just how important is a good MB when your planning on using dual high end video cards? (x8 vs x16 pci-e)
2. How crippled can a machine get with bad choices in support hardware (ie memory, hdd, mb, ect.)
I have not been able to find a review on the gigabyte board used in the cyberpower machine, but I speculate its part of the problem, we will see.
wh3resmycar
Distinguished
- Sep 12, 2007
- 2,515
- 8
- 21,015
- Mar 7, 2003
- 12,012
- 0
- 40,790
[citation][nom]clicky clicky[/nom]Here ya go Cleeve:http://www.overclockersclub.com/re [...] _955/8.htmhttp://benchmarkreviews.com/index. [...] mitstart=6[/citation]
Thank you! Some stuff to dig into.
First, the overclockersclub article: single GTX 260 used, the Phenom II benched at both stock clocks as well as 3.8 GHz.
far Cry 2 benched at the same Dx10 'Very high' setting which is nice, although they added 2xAA to the mix which will confuse things a bit. but for the most part the AA impact should be minimal as 2xAA isn't overly demanding for a GTX 260, although at 1920x1200 it might start to be a pretty big burden.
Let's look at the numbers:
Cyberpower Phenom 2, 3.6 GHz, dual Radeon 4890s:
1280x1024: 67.1
1680x1050: 62.7
1920x1200: 62.0
Overclockersclub Phenom 2, 3.79 GHz, single GTX 260:
1280x1024: 73
1680x1050: 70
1920x1200: 62
Delta:
1280x1024: 6.1 fps
1680x1050: 7.3 fps
1920x1200: 0 fps
There is an anomaly here, but if this game is CPU limited as I suggest, is it that big of an anomaly? The overclockersclub system is running 200 MHz faster, so if this game is indeed CPU bottlenecked, isn't this *exactly* what we'd expect to see... the dual-card setup having little effect, but the CPU overclock having more of an impact?
Digging a little deeper though, the overclockersclub Phenom II had very little benefit from the 3.8 GHz overclock, only gaining a single fps at each resolution, suggesting the system speed is having less of an effect than the graphics system.
Having looked at this however, it's hard to argue the Cyberpower system is grossly underperforming untile we have difinitive evidence that the game can perform much better with a better graphics subsystem. However, when we look at the Core i7 results...
SBM Core i7, stock, dual GTX 260s:
1280x1024: 89.5
1680x1050: 88.1
1920x1200: 86.8
Overclockersclub i7 920, stock, single GTX 260:
1280x1024: 64
1680x1050: 55
1920x1200: 49
Delta:
1280x1024: 25.5 fps
1680x1050: 33.1 fps
1920x1200: 37.8 fps
Wow. We're seeing a massive discrepancy here, when the i7 920 is paired with the single GTX 260 it's getting killed by the Phenom II, and when it's paired with two GTX 260's in SLI, it's soaring.
Conflicting evidence, to be sure. But we've experienced this type of thing before... Chris Angelini did a bit of research into it, as the i7 920 has performed poorly in conjunction with a single GTX card in the past, specifically with Far Cry 2 no less:
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/geforce-gtx-280,2156.html
This looks as wonky to me as it does to you guys, so I'm certainly going to dig a little deeper into this puzzle and spend a good deal of time putting Far Cry 2 through some different testing scenarios. But honestly, based on all of this information, it seems a little more likely to me that Far Cry 2 is demonstrating some anomalously low numbers when a single GTX card is paired with the i7, and that problem looks to be dissapearing when dual cards are used.
We'll see what happens after a thorough examination though.
As for the benchmarkreview.com numbers, it mentions they're using the Crysis benchmark too, but I can't find any information about whether they're using the default GPU test, or the optional CPU test.
At Tom's, we use the CPU test because we find it better simulates gameplay. In the CPU test, the camera follows the character actually shooting buildings and destroying the environment from a first person view, just like the game is played. We find this preferable to the GPU test, which simply renders a flyby of the island - not something a player will really experience during the game. And since we prefer to generate numbers closer to real-life game expectations, we use the CPU, not GPU test (which incidentally also relies on GPU power quite a bit, hey, it's Crysis). We've foun d Crysis to be quite reliant on both CPU and GPU speed to get decent frame rates.
in any case, thanks for the linkys, gives me some direction into what I can be looking for.
Thank you! Some stuff to dig into.
First, the overclockersclub article: single GTX 260 used, the Phenom II benched at both stock clocks as well as 3.8 GHz.
far Cry 2 benched at the same Dx10 'Very high' setting which is nice, although they added 2xAA to the mix which will confuse things a bit. but for the most part the AA impact should be minimal as 2xAA isn't overly demanding for a GTX 260, although at 1920x1200 it might start to be a pretty big burden.
Let's look at the numbers:
Cyberpower Phenom 2, 3.6 GHz, dual Radeon 4890s:
1280x1024: 67.1
1680x1050: 62.7
1920x1200: 62.0
Overclockersclub Phenom 2, 3.79 GHz, single GTX 260:
1280x1024: 73
1680x1050: 70
1920x1200: 62
Delta:
1280x1024: 6.1 fps
1680x1050: 7.3 fps
1920x1200: 0 fps
There is an anomaly here, but if this game is CPU limited as I suggest, is it that big of an anomaly? The overclockersclub system is running 200 MHz faster, so if this game is indeed CPU bottlenecked, isn't this *exactly* what we'd expect to see... the dual-card setup having little effect, but the CPU overclock having more of an impact?
Digging a little deeper though, the overclockersclub Phenom II had very little benefit from the 3.8 GHz overclock, only gaining a single fps at each resolution, suggesting the system speed is having less of an effect than the graphics system.
Having looked at this however, it's hard to argue the Cyberpower system is grossly underperforming untile we have difinitive evidence that the game can perform much better with a better graphics subsystem. However, when we look at the Core i7 results...
SBM Core i7, stock, dual GTX 260s:
1280x1024: 89.5
1680x1050: 88.1
1920x1200: 86.8
Overclockersclub i7 920, stock, single GTX 260:
1280x1024: 64
1680x1050: 55
1920x1200: 49
Delta:
1280x1024: 25.5 fps
1680x1050: 33.1 fps
1920x1200: 37.8 fps
Wow. We're seeing a massive discrepancy here, when the i7 920 is paired with the single GTX 260 it's getting killed by the Phenom II, and when it's paired with two GTX 260's in SLI, it's soaring.
Conflicting evidence, to be sure. But we've experienced this type of thing before... Chris Angelini did a bit of research into it, as the i7 920 has performed poorly in conjunction with a single GTX card in the past, specifically with Far Cry 2 no less:
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/geforce-gtx-280,2156.html
This looks as wonky to me as it does to you guys, so I'm certainly going to dig a little deeper into this puzzle and spend a good deal of time putting Far Cry 2 through some different testing scenarios. But honestly, based on all of this information, it seems a little more likely to me that Far Cry 2 is demonstrating some anomalously low numbers when a single GTX card is paired with the i7, and that problem looks to be dissapearing when dual cards are used.
We'll see what happens after a thorough examination though.
As for the benchmarkreview.com numbers, it mentions they're using the Crysis benchmark too, but I can't find any information about whether they're using the default GPU test, or the optional CPU test.
At Tom's, we use the CPU test because we find it better simulates gameplay. In the CPU test, the camera follows the character actually shooting buildings and destroying the environment from a first person view, just like the game is played. We find this preferable to the GPU test, which simply renders a flyby of the island - not something a player will really experience during the game. And since we prefer to generate numbers closer to real-life game expectations, we use the CPU, not GPU test (which incidentally also relies on GPU power quite a bit, hey, it's Crysis). We've foun d Crysis to be quite reliant on both CPU and GPU speed to get decent frame rates.
in any case, thanks for the linkys, gives me some direction into what I can be looking for.
- Mar 7, 2003
- 12,012
- 0
- 40,790
[citation][nom]Cleevus_and_Butthead[/nom]I'm eagerly awaiting your excuse to validate your results and dismiss theirs.....[/citation]
Nice! You don't want an explanation, you're not interested in learning anything. You've already made up your mind, regardless of further investigation and testing.
To you this is nothing more than the opportunity to complain over results you don't like because they don't fit in your tidy view of the universe. And throw a few insults around while you're at it.
Heheh. Thanks for making my point better than I ever could, lad.
As for me, I'd rather spend my time a little more constructively by investigating the information without pre-deciding that the 'conspiracy people' are trying to pull the wool over my eyes. 😀
Nice! You don't want an explanation, you're not interested in learning anything. You've already made up your mind, regardless of further investigation and testing.
To you this is nothing more than the opportunity to complain over results you don't like because they don't fit in your tidy view of the universe. And throw a few insults around while you're at it.
Heheh. Thanks for making my point better than I ever could, lad.
As for me, I'd rather spend my time a little more constructively by investigating the information without pre-deciding that the 'conspiracy people' are trying to pull the wool over my eyes. 😀
Ogdin
Distinguished
- Jun 14, 2007
- 284
- 0
- 18,780
[citation][nom]Cleeve[/nom]Heheh. Please aquiant yourself with the game settings - they do not match the settings I used in the review.No malice back at you either, player. I'm just here trying to see what mistakes I've made if any, and to see if I can't do a more suitable test that will answer everyone's questions in a more appropriate manner.I'm hoping a direct 790FX/Phenom II vs. i7/X58 test using the same ram & videocards can clear it up for everybody.[/citation]
Ya that would be nice.
Ya that would be nice.
Fair cry is from all the test that i read a game that can take great advantage of the power in i7.
I like the test done of anandtech, even if it was with 4870 cf
http://www.anandtech.com/showdoc.aspx?i=3533&p=5
I like the test done of anandtech, even if it was with 4870 cf
http://www.anandtech.com/showdoc.aspx?i=3533&p=5
seems like a great deal , but from my budget i would get a 2.2ghz,2gb ram, 160g harddrive, and about 512m graphic card for about $310 from ebay
- Status
TRENDING THREADS
-
Review Nvidia GeForce RTX 5080 Founders Edition review: Incremental gains over the previous generation- Started by Admin
- Replies: 154
-
News Reviewer reports RTX 5080 FE instability — PCIe 5.0 signal integrity likely the culprit
- Started by Admin
- Replies: 51
-
News Trump to impose 25% to 100% tariffs on Taiwan-made chips, impacting TSMC
- Started by Admin
- Replies: 37
-
-
Review Nvidia GeForce RTX 5090 Founders Edition review: Blackwell commences its reign with a few stumbles
- Started by Admin
- Replies: 225
-
News DeepSeek's AI breakthrough bypasses industry-standard CUDA, uses assembly-like PTX programming instead
- Started by Admin
- Replies: 39
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram