R420 vs NV40 benchmarks leaked

[rms]

Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.ati,alt.comp.periphs.videocards.nvidia (More info?)

Take these with a grain of salt til confirmed, but they are still
interesting:
http://www.popclone.com/leakedx800bench/

rms

 

[Slug]

Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.ati,alt.comp.periphs.videocards.nvidia (More info?)

rms wrote:
> Take these with a grain of salt til confirmed, but they are still
> interesting:
> http://www.popclone.com/leakedx800bench/
>
> rms

Leaked from where? And who the hell is popclone. This looks bogus to me.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.ati,alt.comp.periphs.videocards.nvidia (More info?)

i kinda hope nvida comes out with a card that preformes better this round.
if they do then ati will have to one up them in the next round. its a win
win for us. we get better cards when nvida and ati compeat.

My ati 9700pro is holding up great so im skiping this round. but next round
im in for a upgrade.

--


-------------------------------------------------------------------------
FIGHT BACK AGAINST SPAM!
Download Spam Inspector, the Award Winning Anti-Spam Filter
http://mail.giantcompany.com


"rms" <rsquires@flashREMOVE.net> wrote in message
news:JGAlc.14075$kG7.3009@newssvr31.news.prodigy.com...
> Take these with a grain of salt til confirmed, but they are still
> interesting:
> http://www.popclone.com/leakedx800bench/
>
> rms
>
>

 

[NaDa]

Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.ati,alt.comp.periphs.videocards.nvidia (More info?)

"rms" <rsquires@flashREMOVE.net> wrote:
> Take these with a grain of salt til confirmed, but they are still
> interesting:
> http://www.popclone.com/leakedx800bench/
>
> rms

If I'd just spent 500 bucks for 5950 Ultra, I'd feel like a complete
dork. That has to be someone's old TNT card.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.ati,alt.comp.periphs.videocards.nvidia (More info?)

"rms" <rsquires@flashREMOVE.net> schreef in bericht
news:JGAlc.14075$kG7.3009@newssvr31.news.prodigy.com...
> Take these with a grain of salt til confirmed, but they are still
> interesting:
> http://www.popclone.com/leakedx800bench/
>
Ultra gives a very good fight considering its 120mhz lower GPU-clockrate. I
would call it a tie, maybe a slight win for the XT.

 

[Ryan]

Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.ati,alt.comp.periphs.videocards.nvidia (More info?)

Jelle wrote:
> "rms" <rsquires@flashREMOVE.net> schreef in bericht
> news:JGAlc.14075$kG7.3009@newssvr31.news.prodigy.com...
>
>>Take these with a grain of salt til confirmed, but they are still
>>interesting:
>> http://www.popclone.com/leakedx800bench/
>>
>
> Ultra gives a very good fight considering its 120mhz lower GPU-clockrate. I
> would call it a tie, maybe a slight win for the XT.
>
>
yeah, i dont know why nvidia can't win, if you look at the specs the
nvidia should win, and the new drivers are worse.

 

[Jimmy]

Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.ati,alt.comp.periphs.videocards.nvidia (More info?)

Almost looks like Toms Hardware


"Slug" <no@email.here> wrote in message
news:109dr9gb97vbr2e@corp.supernews.com...
> rms wrote:
> > Take these with a grain of salt til confirmed, but they are still
> > interesting:
> > http://www.popclone.com/leakedx800bench/
> >
> > rms
>
> Leaked from where? And who the hell is popclone. This looks bogus to me.

 

[Daniel]

Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.ati,alt.comp.periphs.videocards.nvidia (More info?)

And while it may be a fake, it looks good enough to look real


"Jimmy" <samnjimmy@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
news:OzClc.44450$Fu.12286@newssvr29.news.prodigy.com...
> Almost looks like Toms Hardware
>
>
> "Slug" <no@email.here> wrote in message
> news:109dr9gb97vbr2e@corp.supernews.com...
> > rms wrote:
> > > Take these with a grain of salt til confirmed, but they are still
> > > interesting:
> > > http://www.popclone.com/leakedx800bench/
> > >
> > > rms
> >
> > Leaked from where? And who the hell is popclone. This looks bogus to me.
>
>

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.ati,alt.comp.periphs.videocards.nvidia (More info?)

If these benchs are any good at all, i think Fx6800 will be a very worthy
oponent to Radeon cards. Not that i am a Nvidia fan, but from what i heard
and read so far, this 6800 card is already worrying ATI.
I think it will all come down on price. Both are almost equal matched. So
the cheapest one will be the winner.


"rms" <rsquires@flashREMOVE.net> wrote in message
news:JGAlc.14075$kG7.3009@newssvr31.news.prodigy.com...
> Take these with a grain of salt til confirmed, but they are still
> interesting:
> http://www.popclone.com/leakedx800bench/
>
> rms
>
>

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.ati,alt.comp.periphs.videocards.nvidia (More info?)

On Mon, 03 May 2004 23:35:05 GMT, "rms" <rsquires@flashREMOVE.net>
wrote:

>Take these with a grain of salt til confirmed, but they are still
>interesting:
> http://www.popclone.com/leakedx800bench/
>
>rms
>

Is this the full article?
http://www.tomshardware.com/graphic/20040504/index.html

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.ati,alt.comp.periphs.videocards.nvidia (More info?)

rms wrote:
> Take these with a grain of salt til confirmed, but they are still
> interesting:
> http://www.popclone.com/leakedx800bench/
>
> rms
>
>

LOL! You call this a benchmark??
Where is the text accompanying the tests?
Anyone could have cut and paste phony results onto
THG graphic. Anyone doing a legit test would have
more, so these graphs are an attempt to fool people.
I'm sure whoever did this is getting a good laugh from
the gullible responses.

Jeff B

 

[chip]

Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.ati,alt.comp.periphs.videocards.nvidia (More info?)

"jeff b" <fakeaddy@fjyfj.com> wrote in message
news:1wNlc.29624$0H1.2518712@attbi_s54...
>
>
> rms wrote:
> > Take these with a grain of salt til confirmed, but they are still
> > interesting:
> > http://www.popclone.com/leakedx800bench/
> >
> > rms
> >
> >
>
> LOL! You call this a benchmark??
> Where is the text accompanying the tests?
> Anyone could have cut and paste phony results onto
> THG graphic. Anyone doing a legit test would have
> more, so these graphs are an attempt to fool people.
> I'm sure whoever did this is getting a good laugh from
> the gullible responses.
>
> Jeff B

Bet you wish you'd never said this ;-) LOL

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.ati,alt.comp.periphs.videocards.nvidia (More info?)

http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.html?i=2044

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.ati,alt.comp.periphs.videocards.nvidia (More info?)

>
>
> I am sure you know ;-)
>
>

Know what?

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.ati,alt.comp.periphs.videocards.nvidia (More info?)

Tony DiMarzio wrote:
> lol... right
>

Today's developments prove the so-called 'review' on popclone was bogus,
just as I said.

Jeff B

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.ati,alt.comp.periphs.videocards.nvidia (More info?)

Uh.... The so-called 'review' from popclone was just a rip or leak of all
the benchmark images from "Tom's Hardware"'s review posted the day after.

http://www.tomshardware.com/graphic/20040504/ati-x800-12.html

the 'proof is in the puddin' so to speak.
--
Tony DiMarzio
djtone81@hotmail.com
djraid@comcast.net

"jeff b" <fakeaddy@fjyfj.com> wrote in message
news:QAimc.37999$Ik.2542853@attbi_s53...
>
>
> Tony DiMarzio wrote:
> > lol... right
> >
>
> Today's developments prove the so-called 'review' on popclone was bogus,
> just as I said.
>
> Jeff B
>

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.ati,alt.comp.periphs.videocards.nvidia (More info?)

Tony DiMarzio wrote:
> Uh.... The so-called 'review' from popclone was just a rip or leak of all
> the benchmark images from "Tom's Hardware"'s review posted the day after.

No, it wasn't.
The background was taken from Tom's, but the data was made up,
different from anything on Tom's site.
Like I said, the graph on popclone was a cut and paste forgery.
Yesterday's developements (i.e. the removal of the bogus 'popclone'
site and with it, the phony graph)) proves this.
I guess you were one of the people who were fooled.

Jeff B

 

[chip]

Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.ati,alt.comp.periphs.videocards.nvidia (More info?)

"jeff b" <fakeaddy@fjyfj.com> wrote in message
news:gTrmc.41789$I%1.2738983@attbi_s51...
>
>
> Tony DiMarzio wrote:
> > Uh.... The so-called 'review' from popclone was just a rip or leak of
all
> > the benchmark images from "Tom's Hardware"'s review posted the day
after.
>
> No, it wasn't.
> The background was taken from Tom's, but the data was made up,
> different from anything on Tom's site.
> Like I said, the graph on popclone was a cut and paste forgery.
> Yesterday's developements (i.e. the removal of the bogus 'popclone'
> site and with it, the phony graph)) proves this.
> I guess you were one of the people who were fooled.
>
> Jeff B

Jeff, let me give you a little bit of friendly advice. If you were to say
the words "sorry guys, I got it wrong", then people would respect you
instead of thinking you were a dickhead. Its really no big deal being
wrong. I do it all the time ;-)

BTW, I just took another look at the numbers posted on popclone. (I know
the site is down, but the screens got copied elsewhere.) For example:

Popclone:
Call of Duty 8xAniso 1600x1200
X800XT: 94.7
X800Pro: 71.7
9800XT: 40.8
6800 Ul v61.11 109.1
6800 Ul v60.72 108.3
FX 5950: 35.4

Tomshardware:
Call of Duty 8xAniso 1600x1200
X800XT: 94.7
X800Pro: 71.7
9800XT: 40.8
6800 Ul v61.11 109.1
6800 Ul v60.72 108.3
FX 5950: 35.4

Coincidence? I suspect not ;-)

Chip

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.ati,alt.comp.periphs.videocards.nvidia (More info?)

Amen brotha

--
Tony DiMarzio
djtone81@hotmail.com
djraid@comcast.net

"Chip" <anneonymouse@virgin.net> wrote in message
news:2fv1fiF2k74bU1@uni-berlin.de...
>
> "jeff b" <fakeaddy@fjyfj.com> wrote in message
> news:gTrmc.41789$I%1.2738983@attbi_s51...
> >
> >
> > Tony DiMarzio wrote:
> > > Uh.... The so-called 'review' from popclone was just a rip or leak of
> all
> > > the benchmark images from "Tom's Hardware"'s review posted the day
> after.
> >
> > No, it wasn't.
> > The background was taken from Tom's, but the data was made up,
> > different from anything on Tom's site.
> > Like I said, the graph on popclone was a cut and paste forgery.
> > Yesterday's developements (i.e. the removal of the bogus 'popclone'
> > site and with it, the phony graph)) proves this.
> > I guess you were one of the people who were fooled.
> >
> > Jeff B
>
> Jeff, let me give you a little bit of friendly advice. If you were to say
> the words "sorry guys, I got it wrong", then people would respect you
> instead of thinking you were a dickhead. Its really no big deal being
> wrong. I do it all the time ;-)
>
> BTW, I just took another look at the numbers posted on popclone. (I know
> the site is down, but the screens got copied elsewhere.) For example:
>
> Popclone:
> Call of Duty 8xAniso 1600x1200
> X800XT: 94.7
> X800Pro: 71.7
> 9800XT: 40.8
> 6800 Ul v61.11 109.1
> 6800 Ul v60.72 108.3
> FX 5950: 35.4
>
> Tomshardware:
> Call of Duty 8xAniso 1600x1200
> X800XT: 94.7
> X800Pro: 71.7
> 9800XT: 40.8
> 6800 Ul v61.11 109.1
> 6800 Ul v60.72 108.3
> FX 5950: 35.4
>
> Coincidence? I suspect not ;-)
>
> Chip
>
>

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.ati,alt.comp.periphs.videocards.nvidia (More info?)

Chip,

I don't apologize for being right as you are asking me to do.
The the popclone site was hastily removed
at the same time as THG numbers were posted .
To quote you,
"Coincidence? I suspect not ;-)"
looks like you were fooled to.

Jeff B

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.ati,alt.comp.periphs.videocards.nvidia (More info?)

this isn't rocket science Jeff. Of course the site was "hastily removed"
....that's because it was posting THG copyrighted material and could
potentially face legal implications if THG wanted to go through all the
hastle and litigate. That's to be expected.

However, the fact that it was hastily removed in no way affects the fact
that the popclone leaked benchmarks were identical to that of THG's, and
thus a valid (not bogus) leak.

ehem... now then.... Just admit that you were wrong and we can all get on
with our lives

--
Tony DiMarzio
djtone81@hotmail.com
djraid@comcast.net

"jeff b" <fakeaddy@fjyfj.com> wrote in message
news:dPumc.30875$Ia6.5034913@attbi_s03...
> Chip,
>
> I don't apologize for being right as you are asking me to do.
> The the popclone site was hastily removed
> at the same time as THG numbers were posted .
> To quote you,
> "Coincidence? I suspect not ;-)"
> looks like you were fooled to.
>
> Jeff B
>
>

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.ati,alt.comp.periphs.videocards.nvidia (More info?)

How can he be fooled when those numbers were same on both THG and that
popclone site? I had those images in my "temporary internett files folder"
and yes, they are exact the same as THG ones..



"jeff b" <fakeaddy@fjyfj.com> wrote in message
news:dPumc.30875$Ia6.5034913@attbi_s03...
> Chip,
>
> I don't apologize for being right as you are asking me to do.
> The the popclone site was hastily removed
> at the same time as THG numbers were posted .
> To quote you,
> "Coincidence? I suspect not ;-)"
> looks like you were fooled to.
>
> Jeff B
>
>

 

[chip]

Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.ati,alt.comp.periphs.videocards.nvidia (More info?)

"jeff b" <fakeaddy@fjyfj.com> wrote in message
news:dPumc.30875$Ia6.5034913@attbi_s03...
> Chip,
>
> I don't apologize for being right as you are asking me to do.
> The the popclone site was hastily removed
> at the same time as THG numbers were posted .
> To quote you,
> "Coincidence? I suspect not ;-)"
> looks like you were fooled to.

Humility is a wonderful attribute. You should try it sometime.

Chip

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.ati,alt.comp.periphs.videocards.nvidia (More info?)

jeff b left a note on my windscreen which said:

> I don't apologize for being right as you are asking me to do.
> The the popclone site was hastily removed
> at the same time as THG numbers were posted .
> To quote you,
> "Coincidence? I suspect not ;-)"
> looks like you were fooled to.

You've done so much digging you should of hired a JCB.
--
Stoneskin

[Insert sig text here]