Sander Sassen replies...

[Keysplayr]

Originally posted by: reever

Originally posted by: keysplayr2003

Originally posted by: crazydingo

Originally posted by: keysplayr2003
I certainly hope you don't go back to lurking after the release. We will have things to discuss.

Thanks for the concern.

Originally posted by: keysplayr2003
I for one will always trust the "little rebelious" guy over a corporation. Corporations are very secretive and deceitful (yes all of them) out of necessity.
Its always one little guy who has enough guts to speak out and expose. I watched a program last night about a guy named Kevin Trudeau. He wrote a book called "Natural Cures "they" don't want you to know about". They being the superhuge drug companies, FDA, FTC and a wealth of other regulatory agencies. He exposes them all and the corruption risking imprisonment to do so. This one little guy.

Good program but fortunately for Sander, he's been trying his best into spinning this "controversy" with that angle to garner the sympathy votes. "My girlfriend and I were ..." wonder why Sander used that detail in his "rebuttal" .. :laugh:

Ahh, is this something you know for a fact? Or just your opinion? Of course it cant be anything else but the latter. You really need to work on your assumption level. See, this is why I'm looking forward to after the release and have a chat with you. You have gone waaaaay overboard on your quest here. Too much to take back if you were wrong. You better not dissappear.

And if you're wrong, what then? I think it's time to get off your high horse

Not going anywhere bud. I'll be here whether I'm right or wrong and take my lumps if its the latter. High horse? LOL. Look who it is I'm talking to. CrazyDingo morphed into a troll in just 6 days time. If I look like I'm on a high horse, then maybe somebody should get up from lying on the ground. Anyone would look high up from down there.

 

[ArchAngel777]

Originally posted by: keysplayr2003

Originally posted by: reever

Originally posted by: keysplayr2003

Originally posted by: crazydingo

Originally posted by: keysplayr2003
I certainly hope you don't go back to lurking after the release. We will have things to discuss.

Thanks for the concern.

Originally posted by: keysplayr2003
I for one will always trust the "little rebelious" guy over a corporation. Corporations are very secretive and deceitful (yes all of them) out of necessity.
Its always one little guy who has enough guts to speak out and expose. I watched a program last night about a guy named Kevin Trudeau. He wrote a book called "Natural Cures "they" don't want you to know about". They being the superhuge drug companies, FDA, FTC and a wealth of other regulatory agencies. He exposes them all and the corruption risking imprisonment to do so. This one little guy.

Good program but fortunately for Sander, he's been trying his best into spinning this "controversy" with that angle to garner the sympathy votes. "My girlfriend and I were ..." wonder why Sander used that detail in his "rebuttal" .. :laugh:

Ahh, is this something you know for a fact? Or just your opinion? Of course it cant be anything else but the latter. You really need to work on your assumption level. See, this is why I'm looking forward to after the release and have a chat with you. You have gone waaaaay overboard on your quest here. Too much to take back if you were wrong. You better not dissappear.

And if you're wrong, what then? I think it's time to get off your high horse

Not going anywhere bud. I'll be here whether I'm right or wrong and take my lumps if its the latter. High horse? LOL. Look who it is I'm talking to. CrazyDingo morphed into a troll in just 6 days time. If I look like I'm on a high horse, then maybe somebody should get up from lying on the ground. Anyone would look high up from down there.

ROFL

 

[M0RPH]

Originally posted by: jam3

If you want to be mad at Sander then ask him for things like,

Could you please post a picture of the hardware you ran this on?
Is there a second source who will backup (even on pre-production hardware) your numbers?
Do you have any evidence to back up your benchamrks besides a single source your obviously not going to expose?
If your not willing to post verifiable evidence will you retract the article?

Don't start by assuming he's wrong cause of some e-mails he wrote, dig into him for the content of the article and demand proof of his assertions, stop with all this ad hominem nonsense.

We all did ask these questions. These were the issues everone had with Sander and his article right from the beginning. It was only after he had no answers for any of these questions that people started questioning the man himself and what his motives might be for publishing such a shoddy report. When it started to become clear that it was done out of spite, then questioned about his character were fair game.

In all honesty I could already slam the article on a rational logical argument, using the core rules of journalism and the content of the article. Its beyond obvious he forgot a few rules about journalism and testing, like have a second source, and verify your results.

Yeah, you and everyone else. You're not breaking any new ground here.

To sum it all up, if ATI would have just been as honest and as transparent as possible, (without giving away to much to NVIDIA), about the entire problem it would benefit them in the press. Or they could simply just not make any statements at all "we choose not to comment at this time". Instead leaked information got out and they choose to spin the press, and now there choosing to smear individuals. This just plainly disgusts me.

Be honest about what? They stated that the benchmarks were innacurate. You can call them liars if you want but you have no proof to support it. I uppose you want them to leak their own benchmarks and break their own NDA just to refute some joker with a website.

As for smearing Sander, all the ATI rep did was state the facts about what occured and about very unprofessional comments and threats made in emails. It's not ATI that is smearing Sander, he did that himself with his words and actions.

 

[jam3]

Be honest about what? They stated that the benchmarks were innacurate. You can call them liars if you want but you have no proof to support it. I uppose you want them to leak their own benchmarks and break their own NDA just to refute some joker with a website.

I was refering to the problems with their stated, re-stated, and re-stated timelines. And not coming forth with the problems they were having on the manufacturing line, this was not a reference to the article.Also they decided to not withdraw from information they themselves had leaked regarding the architecture ( most importantly the "24-32 pipes" ).

And how in the heck can a company "break it's own NDA"? that just makes no-sense at all. If i make people to promise not to tell my secret and then tell it myself, who cares? Its my secret and I can tell it to anyone I choose. Maybe hypocritical but not illegal contractually. In other words you can't take yourself to court for a contract that you made with yourself!

And ATI doesn't have to post specific numbers but they could say something like ,

In those same tests the ATI cards of identical model will score approximatly x to y(lets say 10-20% for the sake of argument) higher on a production release.

And like alot of people have said

Why would reps be saying these things if they dont have numbers!

Well if they have numbers they can post something a little more clear.

 

[crazydingo]

Originally posted by: jam3
And fyi for everyone I could care less about whether or not I put an ATI or Nvidia in my Rig, I choose the best card at the time of my purchase.

Irrelevant information, just like Sander's.

Originally posted by: jam3
I am waiting right now to make some decisions and in an atmosphere where I see nothing but lies, spin, smear, alleged SEC violations, and a product insanely late and nowhere near the specs they said they would be from ATI. And the numbers are going to have to be, to quote the ATI PR machine "Dominating" for me to choose a card that will most likely, due to the manufacturing problems, settling for 16-bit, and clocking really high to compensate; use dual slot cooling, needs a master card for crossfire (I am setting up an SLI or Crossfire rig), consumes more power, generates more heat, and makes more noise. I am leaning towards NVIDIA.

See I did say "irrelevant" above.

Originally posted by: jam3
The ATI loyalist's are also really starting to stick their arses out on this one and it just continues to show. So go ahead and judge Sander for some private e-mails that an ATI PR rep took public in order to smear him, all I can say is that I hope someday all the statements youve ever thought you made in private get used by a PR rep, or a co-worker to smear you in the public forum.

What is even more funny is the "Sander defense group". Is it coincidence that 95% of people in this group own Nvidia cards. :laugh:

Originally posted by: jam3
If you want to be mad at Sander then ask him for things like,

Could you please post a picture of the hardware you ran this on?
Is there a second source who will backup (even on pre-production hardware) your numbers?
Do you have any evidence to back up your benchamrks besides a single source your obviously not going to expose?
If your not willing to post verifiable evidence will you retract the article?

Welcome to [x number of days] ago.

Originally posted by: jam3
In all honesty I could already slam the article on a rational logical argument, using the core rules of journalism and the content of the article. Its beyond obvious he forgot a few rules about journalism and testing, like have a second source, and verify your results.

If he "forgot" a few rules of journalism, he would have taken the article back as it clearly against his own ethics.

Originally posted by: jam3
Oh and dingo since you like to backup personal attacks so much how bout this one:

Good program but fortunately for Sander, he's been trying his best into spinning this "controversy" with that angle to garner the sympathy votes. "My girlfriend and I were ..." wonder why Sander used that detail in his "rebuttal" ..

No, its called empathy, cause unlike you most of us have a significant other and understand they are fairly demanding of our time

&

Wishful thinking on your part, again.

Originally posted by: jam3

Be honest about what? They stated that the benchmarks were innacurate. You can call them liars if you want but you have no proof to support it. I uppose you want them to leak their own benchmarks and break their own NDA just to refute some joker with a website.

Originally posted by: jam3
I was refering to the problems with their stated, re-stated, and re-stated timelines. And not coming forth with the problems they were having on the manufacturing line, this was not a reference to the article.Also they decided to not withdraw from information they themselves had leaked regarding the architecture ( most importantly the "24-32 pipes" ).

And how in the heck can a company "break it's own NDA"? that just makes no-sense at all. If i make people to promise not to tell my secret and then tell it myself, who cares? Its my secret and I can tell it to anyone I choose. Maybe hypocritical but not illegal contractually. In other words you can't take yourself to court for a contract that you made with yourself!

And ATI doesn't have to post specific numbers but they could say something like ,

In those same tests the ATI cards of identical model will score approximatly x to y(lets say 10-20% for the sake of argument) higher on a production release.

And like alot of people have said

Why would reps be saying these things if they dont have numbers!

Well if they have numbers they can post something a little more clear.

You dont have an idea how an NDA works, I'm sure the Anandtech staff (under NDA) is rofl'ing on these posts.

 

[crazydingo]

Originally posted by: keysplayr2003
Not going anywhere bud. I'll be here whether I'm right or wrong and take my lumps if its the latter. High horse? LOL. Look who it is I'm talking to. CrazyDingo morphed into a troll in just 6 days time. If I look like I'm on a high horse, then maybe somebody should get up from lying on the ground. Anyone would look high up from down there.

I morphed into a troll ? For disagreeing with you.

Isnt it ironic that these post whores are so decided on taking me and other lurkers out. Why are they so scared ? :laugh:

 

[sandorski]

Originally posted by: jam3

Be honest about what? They stated that the benchmarks were innacurate. You can call them liars if you want but you have no proof to support it. I uppose you want them to leak their own benchmarks and break their own NDA just to refute some joker with a website.

I was refering to the problems with their stated, re-stated, and re-stated timelines. And not coming forth with the problems they were having on the manufacturing line, this was not a reference to the article.Also they decided to not withdraw from information they themselves had leaked regarding the architecture ( most importantly the "24-32 pipes" ).

And how in the heck can a company "break it's own NDA"? that just makes no-sense at all. If i make people to promise not to tell my secret and then tell it myself, who cares? Its my secret and I can tell it to anyone I choose. Maybe hypocritical but not illegal contractually. In other words you can't take yourself to court for a contract that you made with yourself!

And ATI doesn't have to post specific numbers but they could say something like ,

In those same tests the ATI cards of identical model will score approximatly x to y(lets say 10-20% for the sake of argument) higher on a production release.

And like alot of people have said

Why would reps be saying these things if they dont have numbers!

Well if they have numbers they can post something a little more clear.

If they give a percent, they may as well give actual numbers. Most of us can do some basic Math. ATI probably should have either completely ignored this "review" or simply stated it was wrong without all the extra. They have no reason to publish any results or indicate what the approx performance really is, all that will occur very shortly.

 

[M0RPH]

Originally posted by: crazydingo

Originally posted by: keysplayr2003
Not going anywhere bud. I'll be here whether I'm right or wrong and take my lumps if its the latter. High horse? LOL. Look who it is I'm talking to. CrazyDingo morphed into a troll in just 6 days time. If I look like I'm on a high horse, then maybe somebody should get up from lying on the ground. Anyone would look high up from down there.

I morphed into a troll ? For disagreeing with you.

Isnt it ironic that these post whores are so decided on taking me and other lurkers out. Why are they so scared ? :laugh:

Hey crazydingo,

This is a regular thing with keysplayr2003. If he can't win an argument he'll start attacking you based on your post count and calling you "noob" to discredit what you say.

 

[flexy]

Originally posted by: Duvie

Originally posted by: flexy
>>>
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.
>>>

HOWEVER - he felt the need to post this numbers as first "R520 benchmarks" on his sad website - and AFTERWARDS he admits/states that it was a pre-production board merely brought at XT/PRO speeds - and ADMITS that those number could be "FAR OFF".

This is probably the most important statement (i dont even bother reading all that cr@p besides from what i read on DH/B3D already) - shows how "reliable" this website/guy is.

Let's see: Publish benchmark scores and make a big tata about the first R520 benchmarks and a week later i tell everyone "those numbers could be far off".....

What a tool and fool, incompetent and driven by personal agenda against ATI etc....for sure NOT where i want my personal hardware news from !

I am not sure where you are going with this...Do you have some links to other r520 benchmarks?? NO?? Then be quiet. what he stated was technically true.....Also preproduction or preview benches are just as valid as any since they were done on the r520...Therefo9r they are r520 benches. This is done on taped out silicon so you wont see much of any changes other then software driver support and finalizing speed...So I am not sure how you disregard the benchmarks cause they are on preproduction.

there is legitimacy to disregard ANY benchmark when it's a given that the result does not have ANYTHING to do with real life.

It's not that i test drive a new car and state "IT FVCKING doesnt go faster than 40mph"....and a week later i add a disclaimer that i
either) drove it on some muddy street where it was impossible to even go faster than 40mph
or) that it had the wrong motor/tires etc.

BPosting a benchmark just "to post a benchmark" KNOWING that it wont have any real use is very unprofessional - just for him to get hits at his site and backslash to ATI - but for sure not worth anything for the interested hardware enthusiast.

 

[Pete]

jam3, excuse my occasionally curt and sarcastic tone, but I can get snippy when I have to repeat or defend myself. It's obviously unrealistic for me to think everyone is on the same page, having followed this story since it broke and in all the forums it's involved, but that's where I'm coming from if I'm rude to you. Heck, I'd point you to the Beyond3D thread where Sander and Andrzej went at it, but the important bits were unfortunately deleted by a well-meaning mod and an apparently unintuitive board.

The facts, as I kind of know them, are as follows. Sander posted his article with a rather ranty first page (which included calling other journalists suck ups). ATI's Chris Hook or someone "officially" responded to Guru3D or someone that the numbers Sander posted were fabricated or taken from an OCed X850, and that no one actually had an R520XT board, anyway. Sander said he trusted his contacts, and that some ppl at ATI have it in for him. DriverHeaven (IMO, ATI fansite number one) posts that email snippet where Sander says he wants to drop ATI's stock price in retaliation for being cut off. Sander says people are attacking him b/c they're unsavory characters who spread unsavory rumors about him. Andrzej (I guess the guy who has it in for him) replied in B3D's forum, and then things get really crazy. Sander posts his follow-up article. Cut to the showing of many bellybuttons in <insert 3D forum here>.

In all this time, Sander has not posted his benchmark scripts, as quite a few people have requested.

I think Sander should've posted those numbers--provided they're true--but he should've put some (as opposed to no) thought into his opening page and the overall presentation (i.e., disclaimers on every graph). I think ATI should've kept their trap shut, seeing as R520 was to be released within weeks. I think this is all drama and no substance, but I'm as big a sucker as everyone else for being drawn in (and am packing as big an ego in thinking only I've interpreted the situation correctly, and must let ppl know that).

That said, onto my ego--er, reply.

Originally posted by: jam3
I am waiting right now to make some decisions and in an atmosphere where I see nothing but lies, spin, smear, alleged SEC violations, and a product insanely late and nowhere near the specs they said they would be from ATI. And the numbers are going to have to be, to quote the ATI PR machine "Dominating" for me to choose a card that will most likely, due to the manufacturing problems, settling for 16-bit, and clocking really high to compensate; use dual slot cooling, needs a master card for crossfire (I am setting up an SLI or Crossfire rig), consumes more power, generates more heat, and makes more noise.

I'm going to assume you arrived at those conclusions using the same logic-applied-to-incomplete-information you used for your take on this Sander-ATI situation.

Thats right I am simply leaning that way, if after I see some numbers from my number one trusted journalistic source ( i.e. Anandtech) will I make my decision) and like every good capatilist in this world should, I will buy the best product.

Most of us are waiting for more official word before passing judgement.

If you want to be mad at Sander then ask him for things like,

Could you please post a picture of the hardware you ran this on? (not gonna happen)
Is there a second source who will backup (even on pre-production hardware) your numbers? (obviously not--it's rare enough that one AIB would go behind ATI's back)
Do you have any evidence to back up your benchamrks besides a single source your obviously not going to expose? (again, no)
If your not willing to post verifiable evidence will you retract the article? (yet again, no)

Um, done and done (and I mean done). My answers are in italics. Now you know why people don't quite trust his numbers.

Don't start by assuming he's wrong cause of some e-mails he wrote, dig into him for the content of the article and demand proof of his assertions, stop with all this ad hominem nonsense.

Some of us--in fact, probably most of us rational types--didn't start assuming anything. BTW, with no way to prove his source without exposing it, what can we use to judge his article by? Maybe his character. Thus the "ad hominem" discussion.

In all honesty I could already slam the article on a rational logical argument, using the core rules of journalism and the content of the article. Its beyond obvious he forgot a few rules about journalism and testing, like have a second source, and verify your results.

So you do understand our skepticism?

I am hear saying what I am saying because I read Sanders, "Slander Sander" article and Aderzej's post that prompted it, as well as the e-mails, and Sander wrote that one about 20 times better than the benchmark article. This is where ATI made yet another mistake and instead of attacking the article they used a PR rep to attack Sander as a person.

Wow, then you came away from that article with the complete opposite reaction as me. IMO, the emails posted showed Andrzej had reason to be upset with Sander based on past actions.

Sander most likely wrote that article from a point of anger and retaliation (which is not wrong but his failing to get a second source and verify his facts was).

Yes.

But this appears to have been ATI's fault.

No.

Sander or any journalist has a right to write what they want

As long as it's true, which is the crux of the matter.

and ATI getting mad and , to quote, "Cuttting you[sander]off", is completly ludicrous.

Not, IMO, based on the email communication Sander published. He wasn't very cooperative, which I understand, but he was also a bit of an ass, which I understand to be ATI's reason for "cutting him off." BTW, he's just "cut off" from pre-release hardware. He's free to get cards from one of the myriad AIBs, or just buy one himself to test.

They are obviously and blatantly attempting to control the press ( i.e. spin ) in a time when there have a horrible manufacturing problem with the r520.

Yes, obviously they want to control the press now that they've solved their manufacturing problems. Where'd logic run off to?

Or they could simply just not make any statements at all "we choose not to comment at this time".

In lieu of any statements, this would be implied, no?

Instead leaked information got out and they choose to spin the press, and now there choosing to smear individuals. This just plainly disgusts me.

Many of us don't particularly like ATI's response--they should've just left well enough alone, especially with launch so close--but you continue to absolve Sander of any responsibility. I choose not to.

Edit: That last paragraph may be unclear. I meant to say his responsibility in ATI cutting him off.

 

[flexy]

I have been paying attention just not as fantical and close mided as some...I guess I will just start calling everyone liars with no proof.....ATI fanatics are definitely worth a laugh...maybe I should channel that into pity!!!!

you can make valid satetements without being a fanatic, either camp, ATI or NV.

Also...what's better "being a blind fanatic" or *calling* everyone else (unjustified) a fanatic because he dares to criticize and (at least) demands a HALFWAY non-biased view at things.

 

[M0RPH]

Originally posted by: flexy

BPosting a benchmark just "to post a benchmark" KNOWING that it wont have any real use is very unprofessional - just for him to get hits at his site and backslash to ATI - but for sure not worth anything for the interested hardware enthusiast.

And the kicker is that after all this and all the criticism he's taken, he still hasn't retracted the article. It's obvious that he's more interested in getting hits to his website than he is about responsible journalism.

 

[Pete]

Originally posted by: jam3
I was refering to the problems with their stated, re-stated, and re-stated timelines.

AFAIK, Orton said he expected R520 to breach in summer. That was amended in a later conference call to "end of summer." We're a month out from that, but I don't think there have been further pronouncements.

And not coming forth with the problems they were having on the manufacturing line, this was not a reference to the article.

3D IHVs are a pretty secretive lot, but the delays were pretty obvious in that they were self-evident. I think it was Orton who quite recently said the problems were with R520 and not RV515 or RV530, late in the day as it is.

Also they decided to not withdraw from information they themselves had leaked regarding the architecture ( most importantly the "24-32 pipes" ).

That's news to me! Source, please? The rumors I've been hearing in the B3D forums have been mostly 16 "extreme" or "1.3x performing" pipes. The rumors I read from The Inq and the like have covered every imaginable config.

 

[Keysplayr]

Originally posted by: M0RPH

Originally posted by: crazydingo

Originally posted by: keysplayr2003
Not going anywhere bud. I'll be here whether I'm right or wrong and take my lumps if its the latter. High horse? LOL. Look who it is I'm talking to. CrazyDingo morphed into a troll in just 6 days time. If I look like I'm on a high horse, then maybe somebody should get up from lying on the ground. Anyone would look high up from down there.

I morphed into a troll ? For disagreeing with you.

Isnt it ironic that these post whores are so decided on taking me and other lurkers out. Why are they so scared ? :laugh:

Hey crazydingo,

This is a regular thing with keysplayr2003. If he can't win an argument he'll start attacking you based on your post count and calling you "noob" to discredit what you say.

Incorrect Morph. You know that's not true. Maybe you didn't see my post to crazydingo inquiring why up until 6 days ago, had a 15 post count since joining in May 05. In the last six days, post count is over 80. He/She has been very busy. I asked why the sudden interest and flood of video posts. So it was the dramatic increase in post count I was referring to, not the fact that there were so few posts. Now that you have this fact, what do you have to say to me?

 

[CaiNaM]

Originally posted by: M0RPH
And the kicker is that after all this and all the criticism he's taken, he still hasn't retracted the article. It's obvious that he's more interested in getting hits to his website than he is about responsible journalism.

one could also conclude that he hasn't retracted the story because it is accurate.

Originally posted by: Pete The rumors I've been hearing in the B3D forums have been mostly 16 "extreme" or "1.3x performing" pipes. The rumors I read from The Inq and the like have covered every imaginable config.

wasn't there all kinds of talk of "extreme" pipes on r420? i'm too lazy to look it up, so if anyone remembers...

 

[crazydingo]

Originally posted by: keysplayr2003
Incorrect Morph. You know that's not true. Maybe you didn't see my post to crazydingo inquiring why up until 6 days ago, had a 15 post count since joining in May 05. In the last six days, post count is over 80. He/She has been very busy. I asked why the sudden interest and flood of video posts. So it was the dramatic increase in post count I was referring to, not the fact that there were so few posts. Now that you have this fact, what do you have to say to me?

My post count increased so rapidly because I came out of lurking and was attacked on multiple occasions and had to defend myself. Just like this post, maybe that should ring a bell ... somewhere.

Originally posted by: CaiNaM

Originally posted by: M0RPH
And the kicker is that after all this and all the criticism he's taken, he still hasn't retracted the article. It's obvious that he's more interested in getting hits to his website than he is about responsible journalism.

one could also conclude that he hasn't retracted the story because it is accurate.

Accurate ? Maybe you missed his DISCLAIMER saying it isnt accurate.

 

[Keysplayr]

Originally posted by: crazydingo

Originally posted by: keysplayr2003
Incorrect Morph. You know that's not true. Maybe you didn't see my post to crazydingo inquiring why up until 6 days ago, had a 15 post count since joining in May 05. In the last six days, post count is over 80. He/She has been very busy. I asked why the sudden interest and flood of video posts. So it was the dramatic increase in post count I was referring to, not the fact that there were so few posts. Now that you have this fact, what do you have to say to me?

My post count increased so rapidly because I came out of lurking and was attacked on multiple occasions and had to defend myself. Just like this post, maybe that should ring a bell ... somewhere.

Originally posted by: CaiNaM

Originally posted by: M0RPH
And the kicker is that after all this and all the criticism he's taken, he still hasn't retracted the article. It's obvious that he's more interested in getting hits to his website than he is about responsible journalism.

one could also conclude that he hasn't retracted the story because it is accurate.

Accurate ? Maybe you missed his DISCLAIMER saying it isnt accurate.

Methinks Crazydingo doeth protest too much.

 

[Pete]

Originally posted by: CaiNaM
wasn't there all kinds of talk of "extreme" pipes on r420? i'm too lazy to look it up, so if anyone remembers...

Yep, R420 was eight "extreme" pipes ... which turned out to mean 16. So I was skeptical at first, but quite a lot of people are saying "16" and "pipes" in the same sentence when they refer to R520. It could be 24 pipes and 16 ROPs, as with G70. Heck, maybe even 20 pipes and 16ROPs, which would correspond to the 1.3x rumor. But it seems to me that anything above 16 pipes at the clock speeds we're hearing would simply blow G70 out of the water, and I don't expect that.

 

[kylebisme]

Originally posted by: CaiNaM

Originally posted by: M0RPH
And the kicker is that after all this and all the criticism he's taken, he still hasn't retracted the article. It's obvious that he's more interested in getting hits to his website than he is about responsible journalism.

one could also conclude that he hasn't retracted the story because it is accurate.

Accurate ? Maybe you missed his DISCLAIMER saying it isnt accurate.[/quote]
Not only does the disclaimer say that the acuracy cannot be verfied, but even his own latter comments now claim "pre-production hardware" while the original article still says nothing of the sort. How can anyone defend such shiftyness?

 

[BFG10K]

I really don't see why anyone is getting so worked up about this guy. It's obvious his benchmarks can't be treated with 100% accuracy so let's just wait for October 2, shall we?

 

[jam3]

Pete,

No worries, rational people disagree, and you sound like a competent intelligent person, I just pass over dingo response's after haveing read like 3 of posts. I wish there was an /ignore option in the forums that would just hide certain peoples post.

I'm going to assume you arrived at those conclusions using the same logic-applied-to-incomplete-information you used for your take on this Sander-ATI situation.

I am applying a personal principal to the situation and rationalizing from that point. My main assertion is that an entity who attacks the character of an individual in order to discredit something they have said or published is morally and ethically bankrupt and potentially holds that entity legally responsible on grounds of slander.

This has nothing to do with

Whether or not people have already judged him solely on the article in question.
The credibility of that article, the author (Sander himself), or the publication as a whole ( I assume others work and write for hardwareanalysis)

My GUESS is that ATI looked at the article looked at there numbers, talked to their own legal department, and made a determination that they couldn't sue him for liable. This doesn't mean I believe his numbers are wholly accurate, but from a legal standapoint the article was not going to meet a standard of being "fraudulent". They then proceeded to orchaestrate and launch a smear campaign against Sander himself.

Everything in the above is just a guess on my part, but anyone who read Anderzej post(s) know that he himself, and as an ATI PR person, did in fact launch a series of personal attacks against Sander.

At this point if you are a person who has already read the article found Sander's credibility lacking as well as the information presented then you have made a sound judgement. If you then turn and use the smear provided by ATI/Anderzej to validate your position, then you have "jumped on the smear wagon".Why would anyone do this, the article in and of itself is enough to say " this information is junk", but I have seen enough of you in here then turn and use quotes from those e-mails to say, Paraphrased."and see Sander deserved it and was always an idiot".


And my guess as to how 1800 is going to compare to 7800 is based on Anand's specs he released and other information (dual slot cooling, master card) that I am assuming is correct based on various sources. If its overclocked like it appears to be then its going to be hotter, use more power, and be louder. This isn't logic this is pure personal speculation, I thought that was implied.

Some of us--in fact, probably most of us rational types--didn't start assuming anything. BTW, with no way to prove his source without exposing it, what can we use to judge his article by? Maybe his character. Thus the "ad hominem" discussion.

Which I don't have any problem with but alot of people are using adopting the argument of the smear campaign instead of simply using the article against Sander.

So you do understand our skepticism?

If its all based on the article and not the smear then, absolutly yes I do.

Wow, then you came away from that article with the complete opposite reaction as me. IMO, the emails posted showed Andrzej had reason to be upset with Sander based on past actions.

This is where I think you might be letting your like of ATI, an opinion of "Web Journalists", or some other bias get the better of you. First of all these e-mails can be easily construed in many many ways. In the first place they should have never ever been released by ATI/Anderzej, and secondly its text based communication ( humans actually communicate tone and context by about 80% body language).

And its is completly clear that Anderzej "cutoff" Sander perdominatly for refusing to do an article that ATI wanted him to do This, to me, shows an enormous amount of hubris on the part of ATI. This is essentially ATI saying hey Sander, I am your boss, I tell you what to write, and since you wont write what I want you to I am putting you on suspension. How smart, rational people in this forum can't see that, or somehow justify it because they think Sander is a "jerk" is way beyond me.

But this appears to have been ATI's fault.

No

It absolutly is, ATI kicks out independent media, doesn't work with them to get an NDA signed and is then "shocked" when an expose is written? Please.

Sander or any journalist has a right to write what they want

As long as it's true, which is the crux of the matter.

As soon as ATI sues him or formally asks him to retract the article let me know. And if anyone in here has hard evidence that shows he was being fraudulent with those numbers, again please let me know. This doesn't mean that you can't form an opinion due to the facts you have at hand but to say unequivocally that "he completly fabricated the numbers" is just logically wrong. Just because you can't disprove something doesn't make it true or false, it is an argument simply waiting for more facts. I am guessing that when we start seeing numbers come out in a few weeks from anand and other sources we will be able to tell how far off or close he was and we can make some safe conclusions about the accuracy of the article.


I will cede about the "leaked 24-32 bit" since this is purely from my recollection of an article back in late 2004 where the specs were identified as being from a reliable source within ATI. And I cannot remember the article nor can I find it in a search since r520 information is now flooding the net.

 

[CaiNaM]

Originally posted by: TheSnowman

Originally posted by: CaiNaM

Originally posted by: M0RPH
And the kicker is that after all this and all the criticism he's taken, he still hasn't retracted the article. It's obvious that he's more interested in getting hits to his website than he is about responsible journalism.

one could also conclude that he hasn't retracted the story because it is accurate.

Accurate ? Maybe you missed his DISCLAIMER saying it isnt accurate.

Not only does the disclaimer say that the acuracy cannot be verfied, but even his own latter comments now claim "pre-production hardware" while the original article still says nothing of the sort. How can anyone defend such shiftyness?

[/quote]

that's my entire point...

while I believe in his 'first draft' he didn't mention the world 'pre-production' (he did originally state there weren't shipping drivers, but rc's), he has ALWAYS maintained they weren't necessarily representative of the shipping hardware. what he stated was accurate in that respect, and he's sticking to it.

the main problems here are that there are 2 issues to consider -- how so many ppl from both sides have taken this all as gospel, and the #'s are really a seperate issue from the general tone of his "editorial".

the tone of his article was of an editorial; it was personal. it should never have been written in such a way if it's presented as "news". IMO he went off half-corcked, and that was unprofessional (tho frankly some of the ati personnel haven't shown they were any more grown up than he was). his rant should have been written as an editorial. his benchmarks should have been in a seperate article devoid of all the personal cr@p.

secondly, we all know 2 months prior to a release many things can change such as shipping drivers and clock speeds (ati has stated the XT will ship weeks after the XL/PRO parts), and while the benchmarks gave us some idea (and likely accurate in the context they were given), they were just that -- #'s that hinted at what type of performance. the way i took it was that yea, it was "competitive" with the g70, as ati stated, and i expected improvement by the time it shipped, so i thought things were getting interesting.

then the whole thing just took on a life of its own and blew out of proportion; the ati fanboys all took it as "the #'s are BS, it's gonna be alot better than that!", and the nv fanboys took it as "ahhahahaha... g70 kicks r520's a$$!" -- neither of which was correct.

so yea, i stick by his "right" to publish those numbers, as well as his "right" to write what he wrote. i may not agree with the way he did it... but so what? this IS the internet, where everything is almost instant, opinions are like a$$holes, and not everything should be taken as 'gospel' -- even if it is accurate "at the moment"..

 

[crazydingo]

Originally posted by: CaiNaM
so yea, i stick by his "right" to publish those numbers, as well as his "right" to write what he wrote. i may not agree with the way he did it... but so what? this IS the internet, where everything is almost instant, opinions are like a$$holes, and not everything should be taken as 'gospel' -- even if it is accurate "at the moment"..

Um, it clearly is against how websites do and review products. They do "in house" testing and then publish their findings. That is the way how it works.

What Sander did was something on these lines ... look at Anandtech's article, modify it a little bit and then publish it with a disclaimer that he was using a faulty motherboard or something and the numbers could change.

To give you a more better idea, even the Inquirer does "in house" testing before publishing its reviews.

 

[Pete]

jam3, I'm glad I didn't offend you too much. Reading my quotes in your reply made me wince a bit. Let's just agree to disagree, and leave it at that. We've probably all spent too much time on this sideshow, anyway, only because ATI hasn't given us something significant to chew on (like, say, R520). So I'll save my next post for documented benchmarks.

 

[jam3]

Originally posted by: Pete
jam3, I'm glad I didn't offend you too much. Reading my quotes in your reply made me wince a bit. Let's just agree to disagree, and leave it at that. We've probably all spent too much time on this sideshow, anyway, only because ATI hasn't given us something significant to chew on (like, say, R520). So I'll save my next post for documented benchmarks.

Agreed, shouldn't be much longer now, anyone getting the "shakes"? Anticipation is somehow great and sucky all at the same time.