Hardwareanalysis bench are fake

[johnnqq]

Originally posted by: Rollo

Originally posted by: Ackmed
The smart ones already thought this.

Its the ignorant ones that jumped in head first thinking that they were real.

Nice try Ackie!

Fortunately you and a 12 post member saying "Those can't be real and anyone who thinks they are is just a big poopie head!" isn't enough to discredit the website's info.

Neither of you has offered any links to another website that refutes the benchmarks as proof of your allegations? Why should we take your word over the Hardware Analysis?

ATI has some very good reasons to post that the benchmarks are fake, as they don't exactly portray their upcoming products in a very favorable light. (and they may be trying to sell off the rest of their stock before it totally tanks)

ATI could be scrambling to wring more performance out their parts before their "launch" and not want us to see where they're at now?

Did ATI tell us about the 16X12 at 60Hz limitation of their crappy multi-GPU pseudo-solution? No. We had to learn about it from Rage3d and Penstarsys.

Did ATI tell us about their insider trading antics? No. We had to wait for all the lawsuits to become public record.

Did ATI tell us they had trilinear optomizations in their drivers now? No. We had to get it from the web.

Did ATI tell us of their application specific "optomiztions" for 3dMark? No. We had to learn it on the web.

Did ATI tell us about their application specific "optomizations" for the 8500? (Quack) No. We had to learn it on the web.

Did ATI tell us about the "trylinear" optomizations? No. We had to learn it on the web.

Did ATI tell us about their insider trading a few years ago? No. We had to see them convicted of it and paying $900,000. in fines.

Etc ad infinitum.

The fact of the matter is that ATI has a long history of misleading the public. I don't particularly care as I'm only interested in their video cards, but don't make it out like they're some outraged "innocents" looking out for the public welfare denouncing the only benchmark info we have at this point. :roll:

always the ati basher
look. it's obvious that the benches are fake. even the nvidia cards don't get the right numbers half the time. on one of the benches (forgot which game) the gtx sli got like 150 frames but gt sli got like 90...?
even if the gtx crushes the x1800xt, the x1800xt can't be ONLY 10 frames better than an x850xtpe!

edit: 1 more thing. why is hardware analysis the only site with benches? shouldn't a bigger site like anand, toms, hardocp, and extremetech also get the cards(the get more traffic)

 

[EightySix Four]

Originally posted by: Rollo

Originally posted by: Ackmed
The smart ones already thought this.

Its the ignorant ones that jumped in head first thinking that they were real.

Nice try Ackie!

Fortunately you and a 12 post member saying "Those can't be real and anyone who thinks they are is just a big poopie head!" isn't enough to discredit the website's info.

Neither of you has offered any links to another website that refutes the benchmarks as proof of your allegations? Why should we take your word over the Hardware Analysis?

ATI has some very good reasons to post that the benchmarks are fake, as they don't exactly portray their upcoming products in a very favorable light. (and they may be trying to sell off the rest of their stock before it totally tanks)

ATI could be scrambling to wring more performance out their parts before their "launch" and not want us to see where they're at now?

Did ATI tell us about the 16X12 at 60Hz limitation of their crappy multi-GPU pseudo-solution? No. We had to learn about it from Rage3d and Penstarsys.

Did ATI tell us about their insider trading antics? No. We had to wait for all the lawsuits to become public record.

Did ATI tell us they had trilinear optomizations in their drivers now? No. We had to get it from the web.

Did ATI tell us of their application specific "optomiztions" for 3dMark? No. We had to learn it on the web.

Did ATI tell us about their application specific "optomizations" for the 8500? (Quack) No. We had to learn it on the web.

Did ATI tell us about the "trylinear" optomizations? No. We had to learn it on the web.

Did ATI tell us about their insider trading a few years ago? No. We had to see them convicted of it and paying $900,000. in fines.

Etc ad infinitum.

The fact of the matter is that ATI has a long history of misleading the public. I don't particularly care as I'm only interested in their video cards, but don't make it out like they're some outraged "innocents" looking out for the public welfare denouncing the only benchmark info we have at this point. :roll:

And nVidia told us about all of there's?

This is coming from the guy who bought a FX5800 and spit out some sh!t about it being a rare card and all. Dude, your a nvidia fanboy, get over it. Wait until benches from a trusted site come out, the site already said they're pissed at ATI and that they don't even have one of the cards in their own hands.

 

[nRollo]

Originally posted by: nitromullet

You are free to disregard me as you see fit Tanclearas. Perhaps those who read my posts and consider them see that I provide useful information from time to time, sometimes before anyone else? (e.g. I was the first on the web to post my experiences with nVidias shimmer fix)

You do post a lot of useful info, but i think that you should stop referring to the 78.03 drivers as a "shimmer fix", it did not fix the issue. I played about 8 hours of WoW over the past few days with the 78.03 drivers, 16xAF, LoD clamped, HQ, etc... and still the AF shimmer was present. I just wanted to point this out that to the rest of us that own a GTX, your claims of the shimmer being fixed (when I can see it's not with my own eyes) makes me question your credibility. You seem like a good guy overall, and I would think that you would rather be honest about the "fix" than let it tarnish your credibilty. Obvioulsy, I have just as much financially invested into my video card(s) as you do, so I don't want the shimmer to be there either, but no so much that I will choose to ignore it.

I'm not trying to mislead anyone Nitro. I didn't see the shimmer where I went back looking for it, but I am aware that it still exists to a lesser extent on some games.

I use the term "fix" for lack of a better one, perhaps I should have said "shimmer reducing".

 

[nRollo]

Originally posted by: crazySOB297
This is coming from the guy who bought a FX5800 and spit out some sh!t about it being a rare card and all. Dude, your a nvidia fanboy, get over it. Wait until benches from a trusted site come out, the site already said they're pissed at ATI and that they don't even have one of the cards in their own hands.

Heavens to Betsy! I earn enough money to try all the video cards I wish to and don't follow the usual "buy a card and keep it a year or two" pattern!

I must be evil!

LOL & :roll:

 

[Pabster]

Originally posted by: Rollo
Heavens to Betsy! I earn enough money to try all the video cards I wish to and don't follow the usual "buy a card and keep it a year or two" pattern!

Imagine that!

 

[ronnn]

Originally posted by: virtualgames0
The site saying it's fake is fake.

The person saying the site saying it's fake is fake is fake.

 

[Wreckage]

Originally posted by: Rollo

Originally posted by: crazySOB297
This is coming from the guy who bought a FX5800 and spit out some sh!t about it being a rare card and all. Dude, your a nvidia fanboy, get over it. Wait until benches from a trusted site come out, the site already said they're pissed at ATI and that they don't even have one of the cards in their own hands.

Heavens to Betsy! I earn enough money to try all the video cards I wish to and don't follow the usual "buy a card and keep it a year or two" pattern!

I must be evil!

LOL & :roll:

If you have any rusty old 7800GTX's lying around, I will take em off your hand so you don't fill up your trash can

 

[Ronin]

ronnn, I think you just confused yourself.

 

[ronnn]

Originally posted by: keysplayr2003

Originally posted by: Tanclearas

Originally posted by: Rollo
That is the point exactly. Since we have no proof to the contrary at this point, we have to consider the possibility that HAs benches are what they say they are: Accurate information posted to spite ATI.

You are doing far more than considering the possibility. You are trying to convince people in these forums that they are real. I am the one asking you to consider the possibility that they are fake, which obviously you will not do. Let me be clear. It is possible that those numbers are real. However, I believe that it is equally possible that the numbers are fake. I looked at them, but for the moment I am still going to stick with my "wait and see" attitude.

Originally posted by: Rollo
You capitalizing the word "actually" does no more to disprove the veracity of these benchmarks than Ackmed and Biatche saying anyone who believes them is "stupid". You have no proof to back your claims, so the HA findings have at least as much weight as your suppositions. To me they look possible, ATI has said their product will be "competitive" which is not "dominating".

My capitalization of the word was to stress that the only absolute fact is that we have no way of knowing how those benchmark figures were ACTUALLY generated. That is fact. That is the reason for the capitalization. The numbers might have been generated on the real thing, or they might not have been. We do not know how they were ACTUALLY generated. Clear?

Originally posted by: Rollo
You're right. I chose my words very carefully to convey my meaning that I feel X8XX Crossfire sucks in comparison to SLI. If you still think I'm "hinting": "To me X8XX Crossfire looks like it blows goats and borders on being a fraudulent attempt to separate unwary consumers from their hard earned cash." Clear?

Crystal. As long as everyone knows that this is opinion and not fact, fine.

Originally posted by: Rollo
Pretty much works too, doesn't it? The nVidia engineers are long gone, the ATI profiteers keep on bilking the public.

Once again, you have assigned guilt where none has been proven. You are prejudging people because others in their company were found guilty in the past. You are also assigning an "evil" tag to the entire company for the wrong-doings of individuals within the campany. Even if the current accused are found guilty, it doesn't mean that ATI is an evil company. At most it shows that ATI probably needs an Ethics Officer (or a more effective one).

Originally posted by: Rollo
The point was that ATI has a history of trying to scam the public that they don't always admit, even when caught. (e.g. instead they re-define "trilinear")

It is possible that ATI was trying to "scam the public", but I don't think so. I freely admit that this is my opinion (much like what you are providing is your opinion). I believe ATI was trying to explain why they made the optimizations they did. I also believe they made a mistake in not immediately releasing patches to permit people to remove the optimizations. I believe both ATI and Nvidia need to give the end-user the option of enabling/disabling such optimizations. Neither company has been particularly good at giving end-users that option. Does this make either company evil? No.

Originally posted by: Rollo
Vague allegations of agenda don't disprove anything I've said. What's your agenda?

No agenda. Sorry for being vague. Let me be clear again. You, Rollo, are intentionally trying to misinform and mislead readers of this forum by expressing "possibilities" and "accusations" as facts, and highlighting the failures of one company while ignoring those same failures by the other company.

And you, are trying to convince the very same people, that they are not true. How is that different than your accusation? I don't understand.

Get away from the keyboard and read or something. Really not enough time to go into detail on the differences between discussing a possibility as a fact and discussing a possibility as a possibility. So really stfu, until you do your homework.

 

[jasonja]

Rollo,

Why the hell do you waste so much time bashing ATI? If you don't like their products, don't buy them. It's quite simple. I don't like nVidia... but I don't jump on every thread and bash them and post every story I can find about them. I simply don't buy their products. Get a girlfriend or take up a hobby.. their's more to life than bashing ATI.

You don't know anything about the insider trading ALLEGATIONS. ATI was never convicted of insider trading.. the settled the case. The case against the Ho is still pending. The new cases are simple ambulance chasing by lawyers who don't even have plaintiffs. Once again you read what you want to and distort the facts. nVidia is just as guilty of optimizations and they too had insider trading convictions of employees. They have trilinear optimizations and application specific cheats. Somehow you always seem to miss half of the story.

 

[ronnn]

EDIT: I feel its also important to mention ATI have stated Sander sent the following email after he wasnt invited to editors day, it might be an insight into his state of mind.

> From: Sander Sassen - Hardware Analysis
> [mailto:ssassen@hardwareanalysis.com]
> Sent: 08 September 2005 09:39
> To: Andrzej Bania
> Subject: Re: Editors Day

>
> So you're telling me I'm not invited is that it? I feel an ATI column
> coming
> up, lets see if we can drop the stock price shall we?
>
> Sander Sassen

Zardon at Driverheaven states this email was sent to Ati by Sander Sassen. This is getting hilarious. :laugh:

 

[Ackmed]

Originally posted by: keysplayr2003


Ackmed, would you mind stop saying "Don't put words in my mouth.". It doesn't fly.
Anyone can read between the lines from your posts. It is too easy. We know which way you slant and that is fine. I don't have a problem with you supporting the current underdog which ATI seems to be in a huge way.

Every persons post carries a "tone" along with it. Deny it if you will, but it is so easly detectable. You should just put your 7800GTX up for sale and go with the 16 pipe cranked to the chones R520. Trust me, you will more than satisfied with it even if it is slower.

Sure it does "fly". Why? Because I NEVER said the benches were real, or fake. Just that we wait to see if they are real, or not. Rollo put quotes for something I did not say, again.

I said I prefer ATi more, and am bias towards them. However, you wont see me posting crap like Rollo does. I dont quote someone saying something, that they never did. He says hes not bias, which is clearly incorrect.

Ive already said before that if the R520 isnt substantially faster, or offer some really key new features, I wont be getting one. Im pretty happy with my GTX, aside from a few small things.

Originally posted by: keysplayr2003Can you tell the "tone" of my post here? I'm sure you can. It says, "Nvidia is currently ahead of ATI in almost every respect and they deserve the kudos that goes along with it. And ATI deserves a bit of ridicule for this poor excuse of a video card and xfire band aid they are offering." Just to make my tone clear.

Yes NV deserves "kudos" for their latest cards, and tech.

However, you "deserve a bit of ridicule" for believing that these benches are real. Time will tell, maybe they are. But believing that they are 100% real, is foolish with ZERO proof that they are. Its the same as believing the Inq is 100% truth.

Go ahead and reply again, you know you cant help trying to start something with me. Try as you might, you havent gotten away with it yet.

 

[Turtle 1]

Man this is better than football . The hitting is Harder. Way more Cheap shots And the fanboyism is outragious

 

[Overgloc]

Sander of HA have an axe to grind with ATI?


> From: Sander Sassen - Hardware Analysis
> [mailto:ssassen@hardwareanalysis.com]
> Sent: 08 September 2005 09:39
> To: Andrzej Bania
> Subject: Re: Editors Day

>
> So you're telling me I'm not invited is that it? I feel an ATI column
> coming
> up, lets see if we can drop the stock price shall we?
>
> Sander Sassen
> http://www.hardwareanalysis.com <http://www.hardwareanalysis.com/>

 

[johnnqq]

NOTHING is better than football.

 

[apoppin]

Originally posted by: lavaheadache

lets wait for the official benchmarks . . . personally i don't care as i am looking for the best bang-for-buck AGP part. -Apoppin

I'm right there with ya apoppin, although if I have to I'll adopt pci-e, then I'll sell you my BFG 6800GT for cheap

thanks for the offer . . . i really doubt that there will not be AGP hi-end 7800s and x1800s . . . sooner or later. . . . my 9800xt is still doing fine with all of today's games at 10x7.

and i plan to adopt PCIe when the PC gfx get better than the NextGen consoles' . . . two or three years or so.

 

[ronnn]

Originally posted by: johnnqq
NOTHING is better than football.

You football fanboys are totally biased. Now hockey, there is a real game that can be quantifiably proven to be the best.

 

[Keysplayr]

Originally posted by: Ackmed

Originally posted by: keysplayr2003


Ackmed, would you mind stop saying "Don't put words in my mouth.". It doesn't fly.
Anyone can read between the lines from your posts. It is too easy. We know which way you slant and that is fine. I don't have a problem with you supporting the current underdog which ATI seems to be in a huge way.

Every persons post carries a "tone" along with it. Deny it if you will, but it is so easly detectable. You should just put your 7800GTX up for sale and go with the 16 pipe cranked to the chones R520. Trust me, you will more than satisfied with it even if it is slower.

Sure it does "fly". Why? Because I NEVER said the benches were real, or fake. Just that we wait to see if they are real, or not. Rollo put quotes for something I did not say, again.

I said I prefer ATi more, and am bias towards them. However, you wont see me posting crap like Rollo does. I dont quote someone saying something, that they never did. He says hes not bias, which is clearly incorrect.

Ive already said before that if the R520 isnt substantially faster, or offer some really key new features, I wont be getting one. Im pretty happy with my GTX, aside from a few small things.

Originally posted by: keysplayr2003Can you tell the "tone" of my post here? I'm sure you can. It says, "Nvidia is currently ahead of ATI in almost every respect and they deserve the kudos that goes along with it. And ATI deserves a bit of ridicule for this poor excuse of a video card and xfire band aid they are offering." Just to make my tone clear.

Yes NV deserves "kudos" for their latest cards, and tech.

However, you "deserve a bit of ridicule" for believing that these benches are real. Time will tell, maybe they are. But believing that they are 100% real, is foolish with ZERO proof that they are. Its the same as believing the Inq is 100% truth.

Go ahead and reply again, you know you cant help trying to start something with me. Try as you might, you havent gotten away with it yet.

Your attempt at psychology is cute at best. I'll post as much as I want to whomever I wish. Where did I ever post that it is 100% real? Hmmm? Oh, that's right. I didn't.
I'll always leave room for doubt. As someone else has said in here, it would be interesting to see how your posts would have been if these benches were the other way around. Would you have discredited it so quickly if at all? As someone else said in here about you, we think "nein". LOL

You're pretty transparent dude. And just think, we cant stand each other over video cards and their respective companies. Well at least you can't stand me for that reason. I can't stand your manners and attitiude, but you already know that. Now that's a sad truth.
You have admitted your bias and that is very satisfying to me. Thank you.

 

[Keysplayr]

Originally posted by: ronnn

Originally posted by: johnnqq
NOTHING is better than football.

You football fanboys are totally biased. Now hockey, there is a real game that can be quantifiably proven to be the best.

Luv Hockey...

 

[Keysplayr]

Originally posted by: Overgloc
Sander of HA have an axe to grind with ATI?


> From: Sander Sassen - Hardware Analysis
> [mailto:ssassen@hardwareanalysis.com]
> Sent: 08 September 2005 09:39
> To: Andrzej Bania
> Subject: Re: Editors Day

>
> So you're telling me I'm not invited is that it? I feel an ATI column
> coming
> up, lets see if we can drop the stock price shall we?
>
> Sander Sassen
> http://www.hardwareanalysis.com <http://www.hardwareanalysis.com/>

Methinks ATI should have given Sander a NDA and let him be a part of the festivities. ATI is probably kicking themselves for not doing it. Would have saved themselves a lot of grief. Sander would then have to wait like everyone else to show benches. I don't think they are fake benches. Not worth ruining one's reputation.

 

[Corporate Thug]

its clear that sander has a vendetta towards ATi, the email and this quote makes me tip the favor to "the benchies are fake camp"

I have had some experience with a R520 and I have to say I find the results somewhat suspect. I am not going to get into an "Nvidia V ATI" debacle, the current Nvidia 7800 hardware is first class and has received a heavenly hardware gold award on Driverheaven, the issue at hand are the methods it appears some sites are getting their "results" of unreleased hardware. The results at Hardwareanalysis are scores ive achieved with an overclocked X850XT PE and not a R520 graphics card. I can't help feel with the context of the editorial is it merely a "stab" at ATI for being kept out of the loop.

 

[Keysplayr]

Originally posted by: ronnn

Originally posted by: keysplayr2003

Originally posted by: Tanclearas

Originally posted by: Rollo
That is the point exactly. Since we have no proof to the contrary at this point, we have to consider the possibility that HAs benches are what they say they are: Accurate information posted to spite ATI.

You are doing far more than considering the possibility. You are trying to convince people in these forums that they are real. I am the one asking you to consider the possibility that they are fake, which obviously you will not do. Let me be clear. It is possible that those numbers are real. However, I believe that it is equally possible that the numbers are fake. I looked at them, but for the moment I am still going to stick with my "wait and see" attitude.

Originally posted by: Rollo
You capitalizing the word "actually" does no more to disprove the veracity of these benchmarks than Ackmed and Biatche saying anyone who believes them is "stupid". You have no proof to back your claims, so the HA findings have at least as much weight as your suppositions. To me they look possible, ATI has said their product will be "competitive" which is not "dominating".

My capitalization of the word was to stress that the only absolute fact is that we have no way of knowing how those benchmark figures were ACTUALLY generated. That is fact. That is the reason for the capitalization. The numbers might have been generated on the real thing, or they might not have been. We do not know how they were ACTUALLY generated. Clear?

Originally posted by: Rollo
You're right. I chose my words very carefully to convey my meaning that I feel X8XX Crossfire sucks in comparison to SLI. If you still think I'm "hinting": "To me X8XX Crossfire looks like it blows goats and borders on being a fraudulent attempt to separate unwary consumers from their hard earned cash." Clear?

Crystal. As long as everyone knows that this is opinion and not fact, fine.

Originally posted by: Rollo
Pretty much works too, doesn't it? The nVidia engineers are long gone, the ATI profiteers keep on bilking the public.

Once again, you have assigned guilt where none has been proven. You are prejudging people because others in their company were found guilty in the past. You are also assigning an "evil" tag to the entire company for the wrong-doings of individuals within the campany. Even if the current accused are found guilty, it doesn't mean that ATI is an evil company. At most it shows that ATI probably needs an Ethics Officer (or a more effective one).

Originally posted by: Rollo
The point was that ATI has a history of trying to scam the public that they don't always admit, even when caught. (e.g. instead they re-define "trilinear")

It is possible that ATI was trying to "scam the public", but I don't think so. I freely admit that this is my opinion (much like what you are providing is your opinion). I believe ATI was trying to explain why they made the optimizations they did. I also believe they made a mistake in not immediately releasing patches to permit people to remove the optimizations. I believe both ATI and Nvidia need to give the end-user the option of enabling/disabling such optimizations. Neither company has been particularly good at giving end-users that option. Does this make either company evil? No.

Originally posted by: Rollo
Vague allegations of agenda don't disprove anything I've said. What's your agenda?

No agenda. Sorry for being vague. Let me be clear again. You, Rollo, are intentionally trying to misinform and mislead readers of this forum by expressing "possibilities" and "accusations" as facts, and highlighting the failures of one company while ignoring those same failures by the other company.

And you, are trying to convince the very same people, that they are not true. How is that different than your accusation? I don't understand.

Get away from the keyboard and read or something. Really not enough time to go into detail on the differences between discussing a possibility as a fact and discussing a possibility as a possibility. So really stfu, until you do your homework.

STFU.

 

[Keysplayr]

Sander's article posted on Sep 16, 2005, 09:30 AM

Look at the stock for the 16th for ATI. Linky

If Sander did not post factual benches, he is in deep you know what. It seems to have effected the stock a bit as the release of the article does coincide with the time the drop took place. If it's not true, can Sander be held liable for messing with stock prices by defamation? Interesting.

 

[Corporate Thug]

Originally posted by: keysplayr2003
Sander's article posted on Sep 16, 2005, 09:30 AM

Look at the stock for the 16th for ATI. Linky

If Sander did not post factual benches, he is in deep you know what. It seems to have effected the stock a bit as the release of the article does coincide with the time the drop took place. If it's not true, can Sander be held liable for messing with stock prices by defamation? Interesting.

he can most definately be held liable

 

[ronnn]

Originally posted by: keysplayr2003
Sander's article posted on Sep 16, 2005, 09:30 AM

Look at the stock for the 16th for ATI. Linky

If Sander did not post factual benches, he is in deep you know what. It seems to have effected the stock a bit as the release of the article does coincide with the time the drop took place. If it's not true, can Sander be held liable for messing with stock prices by defamation? Interesting.

I am surprised at Ati releasing those emails. Either they are personally very mad at this guy and lost sight of reason or Ati really wants his numbers to get big play. Pr is a complex art and Ati tends to be quite good at it - so it does leave one to wonder. It is an exceptionly ugly thing to run this poor Sander guy through the guantlet like this. :thumbsdown: