PC Stats a bad review site?

[Crashman]

Not to question anyone's journalistic integrety, but...

PC States just did a comparison of a 9800 Pro, 9700 Pro, and a couple 5900 Ultra (including an overclocked 5900 Ultra). The 9800 Pro won a few benchmarks, the 5900 Ultra a bunch more. This was with AA and AF turned off.

Then you go to the AA and AF benchmarks, and...all the ATI cards are missing! They only compare the nVidia cards with each other! This after making a point of the 5900 Ultra being superior in the previous benchmarks.

It's almost like they don't want us to see how well the ATI and nVidia cards compare with these features enabled? Isn't that just as bad as showing only the benchmarks nVidia won and excluding the others?

It seems like everything they test is the "best thing they've ever tested". Have you ever wondered how that is?

<font color=blue>Only a place as big as the internet could be home to a hero as big as Crashman!</font color=blue>
<font color=red>Only a place as big as the internet could be home to an ego as large as Crashman's!</font color=red>

 

[endyen]

You think maybe they were born yesterday, since everything is so new and exiting... na ... nobody gets that stupid that fast.

 

[Crashman]

You think maybe they've been bought? As in, they don't review cards so much as take money to advertise them?

<font color=blue>Only a place as big as the internet could be home to a hero as big as Crashman!</font color=blue>
<font color=red>Only a place as big as the internet could be home to an ego as large as Crashman's!</font color=red>

 

[TheRod]

It's bad to see that still in 2003 people destroy there credibility for money!

--
Would you buy a GPS enabled soap bar?

 

[cleeve]

Wow. A new low in journalistic integrity.

That is so pathetic. They sold their soul for a free GeforceFX 5900...

------------------
Radeon 9500 w/256 bit memory bus @ 367/310
AMD AthlonXP 2000+
3dMark03: 3439

 

[TKS]

We eat the pig and then we burn!!! Together we eat the pig and then burn!!! *cackle* *cackle*

sorry....I was having flashbacks....just goes to show you that Nvidia is trying to use their 'might' to push everyone around. I guess it's alright to have an opinion as long as Nvidia gives it to you. Can't wait for them to crash and burn. NO ONE is high and mighty enough to think they can get away with anything.

<font color=blue>I don't have to be careful! I have a gun!</font color=blue>
<font color=green>Homer Simpson</font color=green>

TKS

 

[Crashman]

Actually, 3DFX was just that high and mightly, up until they forgot to release new products.

<font color=blue>Only a place as big as the internet could be home to a hero as big as Crashman!</font color=blue>
<font color=red>Only a place as big as the internet could be home to an ego as large as Crashman's!</font color=red>

 

[ufo_warviper]

Speaking of unreleased 3dfx products, was the Rampage chip going to have T&L support? If so, it would have been interesting to see how the card and the Voodooo5 6000 128MB SD-RAM would have compared if pit up to a GeForce2 Ultra. Its interestin there was going to be a video card released with 128 megs back in 2000, oh well, the V5 probably couldn't have taken any realworld advantage with that much slow memory on a chip (4 of them SLI'ed) inferior to the GeForce2.

My OS features preemptive multitasking, a fully interactive command line, & support for 640K of RAM!

 

[Crashman]

Memory wasn't all that slow back then, the TNT2 (Original) and the GeForce4 MX420 both used 6ns SDRAM. So 6ns memory has been around a LONG time.

IIRC my VooDoo II used 8ns memory and my VooDoo used 10ns memory.

<font color=blue>Only a place as big as the internet could be home to a hero as big as Crashman!</font color=blue>
<font color=red>Only a place as big as the internet could be home to an ego as large as Crashman's!</font color=red>