TheINQ: GT200 kicking ass? Not this time, Nvidia.

<swims up... sniffs bait.... swims away>

I'll wait for unbiased reports to make my own opinion here...

I really doubt everything said in that article is true.

Or we could just wait like one more week and get the real reviews??? No offense but wasn't it rumored way back when that the 2900XT was going to "pwn" the old 8800GTX and Ultra?????

My oh My. What a terrible author.

I would fire him on the spot.
Does not matter if his numbers are correct or wrong.

As a reporter you are supposed to be unbiased, which with their name calling they clearly are not.

As a result, I don't beleive the numbers due to their apparent extreme disdain for NVIDIA.

Second, Even if they are correct and good numbers, they lose credibility due to the authors attitude.

If he had just feigned impartiality, it would have been much better.

Clearly a site with little integrity or good editorial control.

But the HD2900 does beat the 8800GTX and Ultra... in 3D mark that is.

Also I remember how the Inq warned us about how bad the 8 series were when compared with the HD2/3 series, how nice of them to point us in the right direction again.

You must either be British or do some research about British tabloids before you flame TheINQ: they're supposed to be biased. That's the fun and humour of the website - even if it hurts your heart. You have thousands of "standard news sites" around the web and if these guys have something to say they just say it right away.

Hey, Jaydee! What's up, man? Here's some new drivers for you:

http://www.theinquirer.net/gb/inqu [...] t200-dates

Some encoding application support is coming.

Yea dude. I mean, EVERYBODY read the INQ just for the fun of it!! How about that article 4-5 years ago predicting Intel runninf it's pentium 4 line at speeds of 10-12 GHz?? Hahaha! Still laughing from that article...

Sadly, this is what Intel claimed too, and hoped. At the time, they had no knowledge where the wall would be

Yeah, the P4 was supposed to scale to 10+ GHz. It was in all of Intel's roadmap presentations when the P4 launched. I read it everywhere.

just because british tabloids are less biased, doesn't mean they are exactly paragons of truth.... assholes will specifically lie if they calculate they'll make more money from it than the legal fees will be worth.
as ever the message is wait for real benchmarks..... *yawn*

If he is an ass, you are an idiot.

You really do not see how biased rags like the Sun and Daily Heil are?

And by feck the Daily Heil is a tabloid, full of putrid racist, xenophobic sh!t. Don't even dare try to quantify it as a broadsheet and therefore outside of UK tabloids.

Yeah, faux news are extremely biased.

Bill O'Reilly should be shot for hate crimes against humanity. The man is a stupid aswhole, worst of all, he is a stupid aswhole in a position of great influence.

i did say least biased not "completely unbiased"

Personally I love the Inquirer, even though about 80% of it is BS. Its always good for a read while Im at work. Gives me something to laugh at.

That being said, their always is a grain of truth in what they say.

Actually, I'm Brazilian and our troops don't cause many incidents out there. Besides, Charlie Demerjian *IS* biased regarding Nvidia - that's exactly why I and many others read TheINQ. If you want unbiased news, go to www.theregister.co.uk. TheINQ has a completely different approach than those of other news sites and shouldn't be flamed by doing so. Just read their slogans: "The INQUIRER: misinforming people for years"; "Buy the rumour, sell the news". It's supposed to be *FUN*.

I see a problem in this statement. If the Inq is giving correct and good numbers, I don't care what their attitude is. Truth is truth, no matter who says it. Does truth change if its given by someone who isn't biased? As far as integrity goes, any supposed bias was clearly and forthrightly stated in the opening line of the article. They felt Nvidia had treated them badly, so they weren't going to do Nvidia any favors. I don't think that's a biased statement, but an informative one. It says that they are under no constraints to fudge any numbers in order to make Nvidia look good. A biased statement would read something like, "Nvidia gave us an exclusive look at their card and here are their really great numbers compared to their competition." That would be a biased statement with a corresponding lack of integrity.

As for the disparaging comments about Nvidia and the new cards, again, are they true or not? We will find out in the next few weeks. If true, the statements may have been put in a more diplomatic fashion, but that still doesn't change the essence of the statement. If false, then what can be said, but that the Inq screwed up again, as it commonly does.

Also, there's the DAMMIT + Intel/Havok thing: http://www.theinquirer.net/gb/inqu [...] ok-physics

This summer is certainly going to be as bloody as hell.

Thats awful, my 9800 GX2 get around 30 fps at 1080p Very High...:| maybe the 280 GTX isn't the way to go:S.

I'm not too worried about the 4870 X2 thats not scheduled till fall, and I have school then haha.

I find this difficult to believe, but if it is true perhaps I will end up just getting a 9800GX2, or a pair if they drop in price. But, I'll reserve judgment until I hear from a more reliable source (and by that I mean a source that is reliable at all, I place little faith in those guys)

Eww, 9800GX2...dude don't do it. I'm a big fan of..."If you want SLI, do it yourself!" Dual GPU/dual PCB cards basically suck!

LOL quad sli is a little off, but only because the drivers aren't mature. There are benchmarks that show the cards pull their own weight otherwise I wouldn't have bought it.

The Truth is the Truth, but if you want to inform and educate, you need to work on your reputation and respect. It does not matter how correct you are, if you are not a reliable source your information will be discounted.

My best friend is a Nuclear Physist who once was trying to explain to me how full of it the Nobel Peace Price winner in Physics "Stephen Hawking" was.

I told him, There is simply no point in trying to convince me. It does not matter how correct you may or may not be. I will trust the opinion of "Stephen Hawking" over you.

The same with the Inquirer.
It does not matter how true their numbers and facts may be.
What they report will be dismissed and not dissuade me.

If the Goal of the Inquirer is to inform and educate, they will have failed by necessity.
If their Goal is to convince people to go ATI because they dislike NVIDIA, they have failed.

If you wish to perfrom Biased reporting, it is best to do it so as appear to be unbiased.
If you wish to perform unbiased reporting, well we know that is a failure.

If he was a student writer, I would have graded him an "F" even if he was taking a High School journalism class. I could not even imagine a college freshmen writing such a poor story.

What if its goal is just to "entertain while informing"? Of course you are not meant to like it, however, TheINQ has a specific target: people who want to laugh with biased information. It's definitely not the site to read if you want the "pure fact" - and it was never meant to be. This is the whole point.

This whole thread sounds like arguing if Aliens really exist because a major tabloid said so.For fewk sakes most of us know the INQ is full of BS , why split hairs over a obviously bogus article.......I am not a a Fanboy , i will buy the current leader in hardware specs , but honestly i hope ATI/AMD get there sh!t together and force Nvidia off there cellulite laurels and put out decent cards.


But as regards to this bogus article , until i see real benchies , i will assume nothing.

I suppose at this point I should point out that in the fact that their track record is such that whatever they print, biased or not, I don't trust what they have to say. Their articles are more like a roll of the dice then anything to be taken as reliable. Yes, they do print the truth a fair amount of the time, but they also print enough fiction, or fantasy that is real only in the eyes of their writers, that I take what they print with a grain of salt, and then I throw the salt away. Did they print the truth this time? For myself, I won't know until what I think are reliable test sites do reviews and put out the full benches for all to see. At that time, and no sooner, will I say something as to whether the Inq was right this time, or they screwed it up again.

As for the bias, everyone has bias to some degree. How it shows up is a matter of how well its hidden, or sometimes, how its perceived. Even if no bias is intended, the claim of bias is easily tossed about. Through the years I've seen many people say that Tom's is biased toward Intel, while others claim its biased against AMD. So sometimes the claim of bias is simply in the eye of the beholder.