I read the article. Still confused that May 27 availability on a slide at the Nvidia launch presentation actually means may 27, and not some other date assumed by the observer.
The editorial read like an opinion piece explaining to the audience why nvidia isnt at fault. Their choice of words belies whose camp H clearly exists within, IE "very strange ride"
The "explanation" for 2.1gh clocks for the FE edition curiously omits the fact the card mustve had its fan at 100% to maintain its clocks and temperature. The whole idea that folks at "NVIDIA that were very much surprised at this clock rate" cant be believed, unless nvidia engineers communicate with no one inside the company. But the intent to show the card running at 2.1, 67 degrees (JHH said 65 first, so they had prepared this part of the presentation), was clear. It was not accidental or innocent of intent as H would have you believe. Everyone was blown away by the clock speeds, assumed it was the boost speeds, assumed the temp was the standard fan speed operating tempt, and assumed that this card would overclock more still. People on these forums claiming up to 2.5 with water, 2.3 - 2.4 on air. Even saw a claim of 2.7 on LN2. Thats all still possible of course, but these assumptions were a direct result of Nvidias showcase. No way they didnt know that would occur