IVIYTH0S Posted August 12, 2008 Posted August 12, 2008 i know hence my joke on the $1400 280gx2 but still I wonder how Nvidia will retaliate. Maybe some further price drops Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
GlimmerMan Posted August 12, 2008 Posted August 12, 2008 Other review sites seem to be getting much (40-60%) bigger performance gaps over the GTX280. I'm pretty sure your quad (in the review) is bottlenecking the X2. EDIT: double checked... Your quad is SEVERELY limiting the card. I think you should re do it with a much faster chip. Although you may argue "most people don't have high end processors" etc etc, it is very unfair to compare the cards with such a large bottle neck. It's like throwing a 4870 and geforce ti4800 into a 478 P4 system and saying "hmm, well, the 4870 and ti4800 seem to be on par together, and the only time the HD 4870 seems to outperform the ti4800 is when you crank the resolution past 6,533,600x4,096,000". Common OCC! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
InCrYsIs Posted August 12, 2008 Posted August 12, 2008 I think I will stick with my 2 4850s for now. I pop off 17000 in 3dmark 06 at 1280X1024 and almost 15000 at 1600X1200. I was playing Mass Effect maxed out at 1920X1200 without a problem. Don't think I need to spend 500 bucks on this card. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Waco Posted August 12, 2008 Posted August 12, 2008 Other review sites seem to be getting much (40-60%) bigger performance gaps over the GTX280. I'm pretty sure your quad (in the review) is bottlenecking the X2. Most other reviews use crazy resolutions and antialiasing as well, where this card seems to shine. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Puck Posted August 12, 2008 Posted August 12, 2008 Your quad is SEVERELY limiting the card. I think you should re do it with a much faster chip. Although you may argue "most people don't have high end processors" etc etc, it is very unfair to compare the cards with such a large bottle neck. It's like throwing a 4870 and geforce ti4800 into a 478 P4 system and saying "hmm, well, the 4870 and ti4800 seem to be on par together, and the only time the HD 4870 seems to outperform the ti4800 is when you crank the resolution past 6,533,600x4,096,000". Common OCC! Those were my thoughts as well. A top end card needs a top end cpu. At least clock it to 3.6ghz, which most quads can do with some tweaking. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bosco Posted August 12, 2008 Posted August 12, 2008 Your quad is SEVERELY limiting the card. I think you should re do it with a much faster chip. Although you may argue "most people don't have high end processors" etc etc, it is very unfair to compare the cards with such a large bottle neck. It's like throwing a 4870 and geforce ti4800 into a 478 P4 system and saying "hmm, well, the 4870 and ti4800 seem to be on par together, and the only time the HD 4870 seems to outperform the ti4800 is when you crank the resolution past 6,533,600x4,096,000". Common OCC! We are not other review sites. We are not going to redue the review with a faster CPU. Ccokeman showed what it could do in 3dmark, other review sites use faster CPU's. We are realistic I am not going to spend $10000 on CPU's for reviewers when the average person cannot afford them. We use a standard system across the board and that will not change until next year. We are not going to go down this road every single time someone doesn't like something. We are not going to give unrealistic scores. Overclocking a CPU doesn't show what the card does stock and imo its not what I want to see. The population that does not overclock is more then the ones that do. OCC has been doing this the same way for a long time and will continue to do this. Another thing you guys have to remember is why don't have these cards for weeks on end. We got it on Friday so we do what we can with the time we have, and we are not going to be like other sites that run overclocked 24/7 in every review. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
GlimmerMan Posted August 12, 2008 Posted August 12, 2008 Ok fair enough, but you can't start going on about how dissapointing the card is when you are running it on a 2.6GHz chip. At least mention this a lot of times in the review so people realise that there is a severe bottleneck in the system. It just doesn't seem fair really. Oh, and I am not an ATI fanboy at all (contrary to my avatar) - I go for the best at the time. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
InCrYsIs Posted August 12, 2008 Posted August 12, 2008 We are not other review sites. We are not going to redue the review with a faster CPU. Ccokeman showed what it could do in 3dmark, other review sites use faster CPU's. We are realistic I am not going to spend $10000 on CPU's for reviewers when the average person cannot afford them. We use a standard system across the board and that will not change until next year. We are not going to go down this road every single time someone doesn't like something. I agree. Stick with the common setup. Small percentage have monster machines. I would rather see how it performs on the kind of machine I would own. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bosco Posted August 12, 2008 Posted August 12, 2008 Ok fair enough, but you can't start going on about how dissapointing the card is when you are running it on a 2.6GHz chip. At least mention this a lot of times in the review so people realise that there is a severe bottleneck in the system. It just doesn't seem fair really. Oh, and I am not an ATI fanboy at all - I go for the best at the time. Since the test setup is one of the most accessed pages in our reviews I would think they could see that point clearly. I would love to give every reviewer a 9770 but I can't justify considering how often a great card comes out Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
GlimmerMan Posted August 12, 2008 Posted August 12, 2008 Since the test setup is one of the most accessed pages in our reviews I would think they could see that point clearly. I would love to give every reviewer a 9770 but I can't justify considering how often a great card comes out Again, fair enough. Thos are expensive CPU's Yeah, I just think this point should be made a little bit clearer when you test high end cards. That's all Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bosco Posted August 12, 2008 Posted August 12, 2008 Noted Another thing I want to point out is that OCC is not trying to be the only review site on the net. We have great affilation with other sites and alot of them use higherend CPU's and thats fine and dandy I have no issues with that. Which is why we put their news and reviews on the home page for our readers to visit. Our policy is to not forget all the little guys sort of speak which is why we still use 1024X768 in our reviews. Sooner or later will drop that and had something in above 1920. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
IVIYTH0S Posted August 12, 2008 Posted August 12, 2008 Noted Another thing I want to point out is that OCC is not trying to be the only review site on the net. We have great affilation with other sites and alot of them use higherend CPU's and thats fine and dandy I have no issues with that. Which is why we put their news and reviews on the home page for our readers to visit. Our policy is to not forget all the little guys sort of speak which is why we still use 1024X768 in our reviews. Sooner or later will drop that and had something in above 1920. and take crysis up to high settings Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts