We really need a laughing gremlin.
-
Competitor rules
Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.
[H]Fall 2012 GPU and Driver Comparison Roundup
- Thread starter Final8y
- Start date
We really need a laughing gremlin.
Luckily I realised what it was before the video loaded!
lol This is why I use photobucket. I pay $1.99 a month I think it is for unlimited everything and the amount I use it, it is justified
Your BF3 1080p results are missing amongst others from the BM thread.
I'd ask for a refund.
Soldato
- Joined
- 28 May 2007
- Posts
- 10,222
I pulled them when I got questioned over the validity of the results. I put a lot of time and effort into them and saddened me to see my honesty questioned.
My fault lol although i was not questioning the validity. I was just asking why there was such a big difference between the 2 gtx680's in the thread. My wording ain't always the best and text in itself can come across stronger than words when it's not meant.
I pulled them when I got questioned over the validity of the results. I put a lot of time and effort into them and saddened me to see my honesty questioned.
Can you re-post them bud?
It's cool Tommy. Meatloaf and Rusty (who also got questioned) have theirs in there. I was just trying to give an honest bench of several games for users to see and help them decide what way to go. The amount of times I recommend AMD cards makes it obvious I am not a true fanboy and would happily run either in my computer.
I done a template for people who didn't know how to use excel and spent many many hours using 1 card 1 monitor 2 cards 1 monitor 2 cards 3 monitors no overclock small overclock big overclock rinse and repeat. I didn't do it for any other purpose than to show how an unbiased unpaid average joe got on with his system.
Not even laughable to be questioned on my honesty
TL: DR
No.
I done a template for people who didn't know how to use excel and spent many many hours using 1 card 1 monitor 2 cards 1 monitor 2 cards 3 monitors no overclock small overclock big overclock rinse and repeat. I didn't do it for any other purpose than to show how an unbiased unpaid average joe got on with his system.
Not even laughable to be questioned on my honesty
TL: DR
No.
Soldato
- Joined
- 28 May 2007
- Posts
- 10,222
Fact 1 was stock gtx680 signature 70 fps average. Fact 2 Greg gtx680 1324 core with 108fps average. Fact 3 that's over 50 percent difference running the same bf3 level for the benchmark. Now that can't imo be explained by the overclock on Greg's card or at least I don't think it can. So I asked why the gap was so big. I never at any point accused anyone of bogus results. The whole point of the thread was to get real user benchmarks to wipe out the doubts people have of review sites. Tell me Greg if there was such a wide gap between the 7970s would you not be interested in why.
There could be many reasons for the wide margin in results but you took it as an attack on your results. I won't say this again. I was not questioning your honesty but I was trying to find out why the gap was so wide. Take from this what you will as I won't be explaining it again.
There could be many reasons for the wide margin in results but you took it as an attack on your results. I won't say this again. I was not questioning your honesty but I was trying to find out why the gap was so wide. Take from this what you will as I won't be explaining it again.
Please show me where I get 108 fps average? Anyone who puts "Fact" better be correct or they make themselves look rather daft. That is the exact same chart I had posted.
Here it is again where me and PGI go head to head at the same clocks. I could have been nasty and said "Lets do this with a 1420Mhz core"
http://forums.overclockers.co.uk/showpost.php?p=23027237&postcount=246
When I run stock, my stock is 1202Mhz core. I am sorry I didn't under clock my card so that it suited your own personal satisfaction. This is what my cards are clocked at. I would tend to do some research before questioning someones results. You only have to look at my sig to see what I have.
That got my back up and that was your contribution to the whole of that thread. I didn't take it personal and felt my time could be better suited playing games instead of giving people an honest, unbiased benchmark. That thread was created for comparisons and not for fanboys to start and the last thing I expected was to be defending my results. I made sure I was in the middle of the action so it was "real world gaming" I could have hidden to get better fps (which it does).
Anyhooooo, you done me a favour because I was going to be posting quite a few more games and now I can save my time and just enjoy them
Last edited:
Please show me where I get 108 fps average? Anyone who puts "Fact" better be correct or they make themselves look rather daft. That is the exact same chart I had posted.
Here it is again where me and PGI go head to head at the same clocks. I could have been nasty and said "Lets do this with a 1420Mhz core"
http://forums.overclockers.co.uk/showpost.php?p=23027237&postcount=246
When I run stock, my stock is 1202Mhz core. I am sorry I didn't under clock my card so that it suited your own personal satisfaction. This is what my cards are clocked at. I would tend to do some research before questioning someones results. You only have to look at my sig to see what I have.
That got my back up and that was your contribution to the whole of that thread. I didn't take it personal and felt my time could be better suited playing games instead of giving people an honest, unbiased benchmark. That thread was created for comparisons and not for fanboys to start and the last thing I expected was to be defending my results. I made sure I was in the middle of the action so it was "real world gaming" I could have hidden to get better fps (which it does).
Anyhooooo, you done me a favour because I was going to be posting quite a few more games and now I can save my time and just enjoy them
This is why i down clocked my 7870 from what was a factory overclock; 1100 / 1200 to what is a reference card clock of 1000 / 1200.
If you say "stock" by which you mean (Factory overclocked) it creates confusion, misunderstanding and mistrust.
I know you said somewhere your card at stock was actually running faster than a refrance GTX 680 but that's not what it says in that cart, it just says (GTX 680 Stock) some reviewers do this while having (reference AMD cards) in the same chart giving a completely false impression.
Its one of the reasons we created that thread.
look at the difference between you and meatloaf http://forums.overclockers.co.uk/showpost.php?p=22993838&postcount=64
Last edited:
rusty, dint know if you know but you're eyefinity vs surround results were reposted on the overclock.net, where you have been accused of being biased for using games that favour AMD 
Just the mentality of some people, to go on the defensive if they don't like the truth
Just the mentality of some people, to go on the defensive if they don't like the truth
This is why i down clocked my 7870 from what was a factory overclock; 1100 / 1200 to what is a reference card clock of 1000 / 1200.
If you say "stock" by which you mean (Factory overclocked) it creates confusion, misunderstanding and mistrust.
I know you said somewhere your card at stock was actually running faster than a refrance GTX 680 but that's not what it says in that cart, it just says (GTX 680 Stock) some reviewers do this while having (reference AMD cards) in the same chart giving a completely false impression.
Its one of the reasons we created that thread.
Whoooaaaaaa tiger. Why would you downclock your card? All Lightnings come with a 1202Mhz clock (stock). At no stage am I going to gimp my card so it suits. I want everyone to know that the cards I bought are the 680s to buy. I paid top dollar for my cards and will give the results accordingly. If someone is looking to buy a 680 and wants to know the best one to buy, do I show them the results of a gimped card or the results of what they can expect from paying a bit more for the Lightning?
Of course my card runs faster than a reference 680....That is what I paid for.
Edit:
@ Humbug
I am looking at the difference between me and meatloaf and I can see a 5 fps difference on average and 2 fps highest. He must have had a spike for the frames to be that low. Use some common sense please.
Last edited:
I can't wait Tommy
I know Gregster.
Then again, it doesn't surprise me reading some of the remarks in this thread.
And it continues. I do wish some would take their blinkers off and use a brain.
rusty, dint know if you know but you're eyefinity vs surround results were reposted on the overclock.net, where you have been accused of being biased for using games that favour AMD
Just the mentality of some people, to go on the defensive if they don't like the truth
Ha ha I didn't know nope. Biased where I did the 680 results first before switching to 7950's wasn't even a thought?
Bias towards AMD? I suppose that's a full circle on the forum war front now!
Anyway on the AMD games (Sleeping Dogs/Dirt Showdown) I ran with and without the AMD favoured enhancements so it's not exactly even slightly true.
Because we didn't create that thread to show off our own branded cards with their respective factory overclocks, we created it as an unbiased GPU review thread.
5 FPS on your factory overclocked card is 7%, thats the difference of soneone in the same review with a 7970 that is not factory overclocked labeled the same as yours; stock looking that much slower in comparison than it actually is.
Its a false impression, if you don't want to spend the 2 minutes benching it at reference stock then at least label it as factory overclocked in your charts.
Give it a rest humbug - it's not a false impression at all.
It IS a thread to "show off" (I prefer the the term "showcase") what the cards can do with a factory overclock. What's the point benching a lighting at down clocked speeds?
Listen to what you're saying... Pay the money for a premium card but down clock it because a couple of AMD apparatchiks don't like the results. I agree that it doesn't make much sense to compare a stock 680 vs a Lightning but the only people doing that and getting upset were yourself and TheRealDeal. (Although I don't think he was necessarily upset)
He's benched his card as it is out of the box. To say otherwise is disingenuous at best.
It IS a thread to "show off" (I prefer the the term "showcase") what the cards can do with a factory overclock. What's the point benching a lighting at down clocked speeds?
Listen to what you're saying... Pay the money for a premium card but down clock it because a couple of AMD apparatchiks don't like the results. I agree that it doesn't make much sense to compare a stock 680 vs a Lightning but the only people doing that and getting upset were yourself and TheRealDeal. (Although I don't think he was necessarily upset)
He's benched his card as it is out of the box. To say otherwise is disingenuous at best.
Last edited:
As i said it creates confusion and a false impression, its not a big deal to label a factory overclocked card as factory overclock.