8 Replies. 1 pages. Viewing page 1.
Newer [  1  ] Older
8.
 
Re: Morning Tech Bits
Jul 20, 2016, 17:34
Beamer
 
8.
Re: Morning Tech Bits Jul 20, 2016, 17:34
Jul 20, 2016, 17:34
 Beamer
 
Quboid wrote on Jul 20, 2016, 17:15:
I thought you were a fanboy yesterday when you referred to a "bias fiasco". I wonder why people keep on mistaking you for one. Granted, I've only bought Nvidia cards recently (although over 20 years, I could also name most manufacturers ever).

Assuming you're correct - I don't know and I don't understand that chart but what you say makes sense - does that matter? If only one of these implementations is supported by Nvidia cards, only one of these implementations is going to be used by game developers, no? A benchmark which isn't even trying to represent real world conditions is no use to me. Unless implementing more than one method is easy, I don't know.

I don't understand fanboys in this industry right now.

Objectively, NVIDIA makes the best cards over $250. Objectively, AMD has the best value under $200.

Objectively, Intel makes the best chips over $250. Objectively, AMD has the best value on the lower end.

Objectively, there will be exceptions to this. When there are, buy them. There's no "best card," there's "best card at this price," and that fluctuates near-daily at some price points.

Buy to your price range. Boom. Simple. The actual cards are mostly commoditized at this point.




Sincerely, a Canopus Pure 3D Fanboy.
7.
 
Re: Morning Tech Bits
Jul 20, 2016, 17:15
Quboid
 
7.
Re: Morning Tech Bits Jul 20, 2016, 17:15
Jul 20, 2016, 17:15
 Quboid
 
I thought you were a fanboy yesterday when you referred to a "bias fiasco". I wonder why people keep on mistaking you for one. Granted, I've only bought Nvidia cards recently (although over 20 years, I could also name most manufacturers ever).

Assuming you're correct - I don't know and I don't understand that chart but what you say makes sense - does that matter? If only one of these implementations is supported by Nvidia cards, only one of these implementations is going to be used by game developers, no? A benchmark which isn't even trying to represent real world conditions is no use to me. Unless implementing more than one method is easy, I don't know.
Avatar 10439
6.
 
Re: Morning Tech Bits
Jul 20, 2016, 13:44
6.
Re: Morning Tech Bits Jul 20, 2016, 13:44
Jul 20, 2016, 13:44
 
"AMD fanboy" Owned 3 Nvidia GPUs, 2 ATI, 2 3dfx, 1 PowerVR, 1 Matrox in the last 20 years. Yeah super "fanboy" xD.

Verno, if for you implacable logic in the face of obvious evidence = excuses, well, I feel sorry for you... You have all my compassion, and then some!

I'd like to see your faces in 2 years when they release Volta and "suddenly" Futuremark releases a true async test using all 3 methods instead of only one that caters to the lowest common denominator. "Fairness" and everything.

RedEye, read the whole thing and for once educate yourself from independent third parties, if you can't read between the lines instead of swallowing the PR whole like a fish, its pretty useless to quote them and only make you sound like some kind of conformist acting out of ignorance and repeating like a Brave New Worlds parrot repeats hypnopedic quotes.

****************************************

You know, I've been around this site for more than a decade, as well as Ve3D back in the days, back then we used to have real tech journalism and the comments section was always shockfull to the brim of intelligent comments that left me simply no place to interject, so I never bothered to subscribe to comment, all had been said already.

No matter what was discussed, no matter which company was indirectly targeted when discussing their actions, people didn't have preferences nor defended one companies actions over the other or accused one another of "fanboyism" and other petty insignificant labels to defend ignorance ( at worst it was pretty uncommon ), they talked about issues and debated them and it was beautiful to watch. I used to have a blast reading the comments section even without commenting myself.

But the last few years... It all took a pretty hard nosedive and it seems the comment section has followed the same trend, falling in line with the overall trend of rising anti-intellectualism in favor of idiocracy with not only a lack of critical thought, but also the petty mockeries of it which are now pretty much widespread wherever you go, albeit not everywhere, altho its pretty rampant.

These are dark ages for tech journalism ( not to mention journalism as a whole, where has investigative journalism gone? )... and tech news sites comments sections.

I truly wish you all good luck with your intellectual issues people. You deserve better.

This comment was edited on Jul 20, 2016, 13:57.
5.
 
Fanboy IGNORES the Obvious.
Jul 20, 2016, 12:48
5.
Fanboy IGNORES the Obvious. Jul 20, 2016, 12:48
Jul 20, 2016, 12:48
 

I wonder why Futuremark bothers explaining the facts, fanboys can't read.

For benchmarks to be relevant and useful tools, they must be fair, impartial, and unbiased. This is why 3DMark Time Spy, and all other Futuremark benchmarks, are developed with industry-leading hardware and software partners through our Benchmark Development Program using a process that's been government vetted for fairness and neutrality. This process ensures that our benchmarks are accurate, relevant, and impartial.
A mask is not a political statement.
It's an IQ test.
It's a compassion test.
It's a decency test.
It's a social responsibility test.
Avatar 58135
4.
 
Re: Morning Tech Bits
Jul 20, 2016, 12:41
Verno
 
4.
Re: Morning Tech Bits Jul 20, 2016, 12:41
Jul 20, 2016, 12:41
 Verno
 
He certainly seems to have an excuse for everything.
Playing: FF7R
Watching: The Last Dance
Avatar 51617
3.
 
Re: Async
Jul 20, 2016, 12:34
3.
Re: Async Jul 20, 2016, 12:34
Jul 20, 2016, 12:34
 
You sound like an AMD fanboy.
2.
 
Async
Jul 20, 2016, 11:41
2.
Async Jul 20, 2016, 11:41
Jul 20, 2016, 11:41
 
About Async, one picture and one quote says it all...

https://i.imgur.com/s51q4IX.jpg

Futuremark quote: "The implementation is the same regardless of the underlying hardware."

DirectX12 requires that the developer does the job of choosing and coding which kind of implementation is to be used ( as can be clearly seen on the above picture ). And Futuremark can't dispute this, its part of DX12's core functions ( google it ).

Since there is only 1 implementation ( see quote above ) and Nvidia only supports context switching/preempt. And also by their own admission Pascal do support the implementation they have in TimeSpy.

We can conclude, per their own admissions, that TimeSpy is thus coded for the only method which can run on both Pascal and AMD's hardware without hardware specific paths. That method being preempt, with the 2 other faster methods having no code written for them and thus not being used on AMD hardware.

In other words their quote essentially says ( when taking into account that they can't do hardware specific paths ): 'We had to cater to the lowest common denominator out of "fairness", so AMD's hardware gets strawmanned into looking slower than it really is. See how noble and unbiased we are!'

Quod erat demonstrandum.

Now that we got their bit of sophistry deciphered, you are free to conclude whatever you want.

This comment was edited on Jul 20, 2016, 12:04.
1.
 
Re: Morning Tech Bits
Jul 20, 2016, 10:47
1.
Re: Morning Tech Bits Jul 20, 2016, 10:47
Jul 20, 2016, 10:47
 
Peter Bright is probably the only one surprised by Windows' strength of earnings.
8 Replies. 1 pages. Viewing page 1.
Newer [  1  ] Older