- Sep 2, 2005
- 62
- 0
- 0
http://www.hardwareanalysis.com/content/article/1814/
Terra - This is better than reality shows! *L*
Terra - This is better than reality shows! *L*
Originally posted by: StrangerGuy
Why should we care what this guy says anyway?
Originally posted by: g3pro
Originally posted by: StrangerGuy
Why should we care what this guy says anyway?
Because it shows a company in distress when it comes to balanced coverage in the media. If ATi doesn't like the results it sees for benchmarks, it will not let those benchmarks get published/let the journalists get the ability to benchmark.
It's a good thing I sold all of my ATi stock in mid-march.
Originally posted by: g3pro
The hostility came from ATi when Sasser published an ATi IQ article which was critical of ATi.
You sure know how to win the press over, excellent strategy! I guess I now know why NVIDIA is eating your lunch, or breakfast for that matter, at every level.
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?
Have I been in touch with a few of the AIBs prior to talking to him about the launch event? Well, yes. The condesending tone of his emails however are what motivated one of the AIBs to get me some early scores of the R520 architecture. The article wasn?t meant to smythe ATI, although the introduction outlines why I feel ATI has been rather difficult to work with, that is another story though.
The benchmarks provided are not knowingly false or meant to put ATI?s new architecture in a negative light, but provided AS-IS as they are run on a pre-production sample. In all honesty I?m glad that my article has attracted such massive attention, and that a lot of people, that includes me, are now eagerly awaiting the introduction of this new architecture and are curious as to how it performs. As mentioned the benchmarks we?ve posted were run on pre-production hardware and thus they could be far off from the actual performance of the R520 architecture.
Originally posted by: apoppin
Have I been in touch with a few of the AIBs prior to talking to him about the launch event? Well, yes. The condesending tone of his emails however are what motivated one of the AIBs to get me some early scores of the R520 architecture. The article wasn?t meant to smythe ATI, although the introduction outlines why I feel ATI has been rather difficult to work with, that is another story though.
The benchmarks provided are not knowingly false or meant to put ATI?s new architecture in a negative light, but provided AS-IS as they are run on a pre-production sample. In all honesty I?m glad that my article has attracted such massive attention, and that a lot of people, that includes me, are now eagerly awaiting the introduction of this new architecture and are curious as to how it performs. As mentioned the benchmarks we?ve posted were run on pre-production hardware and thus they could be far off from the actual performance of the R520 architecture.
What a load of BS . . . the numbers are less than USELESS.
:roll:
:thumbsdown:
Originally posted by: sandorski
Originally posted by: apoppin
Have I been in touch with a few of the AIBs prior to talking to him about the launch event? Well, yes. The condesending tone of his emails however are what motivated one of the AIBs to get me some early scores of the R520 architecture. The article wasn?t meant to smythe ATI, although the introduction outlines why I feel ATI has been rather difficult to work with, that is another story though.
The benchmarks provided are not knowingly false or meant to put ATI?s new architecture in a negative light, but provided AS-IS as they are run on a pre-production sample. In all honesty I?m glad that my article has attracted such massive attention, and that a lot of people, that includes me, are now eagerly awaiting the introduction of this new architecture and are curious as to how it performs. As mentioned the benchmarks we?ve posted were run on pre-production hardware and thus they could be far off from the actual performance of the R520 architecture.
What a load of BS . . . the numbers are less than USELESS.
:roll:
:thumbsdown:
Did he mention pre-production in his first article?
and his conclusion is worse:So without further ado, let?s take a look at what the R520 architecture is capable of.
NO mention of PREproduction.The benchmarks were run on release candidate drivers for the Radeon X1800 Pro and XT, hence performance is not likely to change much before launch, but final clockspeeds have yet to be determined we've learned, hence it could go either way.
Originally posted by: M0RPH
Originally posted by: g3pro
The hostility came from ATi when Sasser published an ATi IQ article which was critical of ATi.
Oh please. There were no "hostilities", besides ATI not having room for him at their R520 launch party. It's only Sander that perceives it as hostility and tries to portray himself as a martyr.
Originally posted by: g3pro
How can you defend such tactics? You use your excuses and accusations to slander Sander, but what you're doing is railing against a free and balanced press. :thumbsdown:
That is one crystal clear example of Sander's back tracking or should I say covering his bases.Originally posted by: apoppin
Originally posted by: sandorski
Originally posted by: apoppin
Have I been in touch with a few of the AIBs prior to talking to him about the launch event? Well, yes. The condesending tone of his emails however are what motivated one of the AIBs to get me some early scores of the R520 architecture. The article wasn?t meant to smythe ATI, although the introduction outlines why I feel ATI has been rather difficult to work with, that is another story though.
The benchmarks provided are not knowingly false or meant to put ATI?s new architecture in a negative light, but provided AS-IS as they are run on a pre-production sample. In all honesty I?m glad that my article has attracted such massive attention, and that a lot of people, that includes me, are now eagerly awaiting the introduction of this new architecture and are curious as to how it performs. As mentioned the benchmarks we?ve posted were run on pre-production hardware and thus they could be far off from the actual performance of the R520 architecture.
What a load of BS . . . the numbers are less than USELESS.
:roll:
:thumbsdown:
Did he mention pre-production in his first article?
no
uness it is well-hidden, he merely statesand his conclusion is worse:So without further ado, let?s take a look at what the R520 architecture is capable of.NO mention of PREproduction.The benchmarks were run on release candidate drivers for the Radeon X1800 Pro and XT, hence performance is not likely to change much before launch, but final clockspeeds have yet to be determined we've learned, hence it could go either way.
snipped
ATI Friendly Press: This is positiely laughable. We will have a massive cross-section of press at our Tech Day + loads more publications getting briefed before the launch itself. One of the largest nVidia fan sites in the world is being brought over to the briefing - all expenses paid - because that is how much confidence we have in the product.
Originally posted by: M0RPH
Here's the latest from Bania, from here. Now maybe you can start to understand why he decided to exclude Sander from the R520 thing.
Edit: There are some smiley faces in his post that didn't come out here, so go read the original. I don't want to change his tone or meaning in any way.
snipped