Some Completely Underhanded **** by the Register

[Hellbinder]

According to the Register..

Benchmarked at 1024x768, 1280x1024 and 1600x1200 with two detail settings, 2xAA 0xAF (chart 1) and 2xAA 8xAF (chart 2)

In general terms, the game benchmarks are quite clear in their message: the 9800 is undoubtedly an improvement over the previous chip, but not by a great enough margin to currently catch up the FX in current DX8 tests. That could all of course change with the arrival of true DX9-class titles, only the likes of Doom III will be able to shed any true light on the matter.

Unless ATI can manage some major optimisations for the 9800 over coming weeks, before boards become available we're unlikely to be sold on their latest must-have technology. ®

Get Serious... :rolleyes:

They bench at 2x AA adn 0 and 8x AF... Its completely Ridiculous. and then to post a conclusion like that??? Plus i have SERIOUS Doubts about the validity of their game settings. As these results dont line up with any of the other numbers people are posting. To single out 2x AA and claim the 9800pro is inferior to the FX is just as underhanded as it comes. I mean. They HAVE to know that at 4x+8x the 9800pro is 30 FPS faster than the Fx right?? How could you not even mention that? Further i know that the 9800pro does not lose to the FX at 2x+8x in the first place. There is simply NO other explanation that they are either PAID OFF by Nvidia. Or have some personal Agenda. This BS is INEXCUSABLE!!!!

Look at these Rediculous charts...
http://www.theregister.co.uk/media/1015.jpg

http://www.theregister.co.uk/media/1017.jpg

http://www.theregister.co.uk/media/1016.jpg

Can you Fing BELIEVE these underhanded Pieces of ****??? Seriously. Its CRIMINAL.

Look at anandtechs Serious sam numbers
http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.html?i=1794&p=8

Give me a break.. :rolleyes:

[Hellbinder]

here are Toms Serious Sam numbers..
http://www17.tomshardware.com/graphic/20030306/radeon9800pro-17.html

[Moo]

Email the reviewer and enlighten him of the errs of his ways?

[digitalwanderer]

Which drivers were used by who, and they all seemed to use different AA & AF settings which makes it a lot more of an "apples to oranges" kind of comparison.

I'm not arguing as it smells like BS to me and $ome $imple propaganda, but depending on how you test the cards you could show either as the better of the two.

I'm not talking about a FAIR comparison, I'm just mentioning that you can so alter the conditions of the test as to give the result that you want without quite crossing the line of fabricating results or anything....you'd just have to be so biased as to totally invalidate your findings. :(

[ChrisW]

Originally posted by Moo
Email the reviewer and enlighten him of the errs of his ways?
Gee, I wonder what the odds are that his e-mail address is real. :confused: His name is Steve Spence and his e-mail address is steve@spence.com. Go to spence.com and what do you find? Everyone else there has a @theregister.co.uk e-mail address.

I would recommend you contact one of these guys that probably exist:
http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/62/26148.html

[Randell]

He does exist and he's the Hardware reviewer at PCZone mag in the UK. As any reader knows, he has been carrying on an anti-ATI crusade for ages now in that magazine. As an example here's the forum thread giving feedback on his FX review (which is the dogs bollox obviously)

http://www.dearwandy.com/showthread.php?threadid=302

[Randell]

Here's his review of the 8500 under the name Xavier at Barrysworld - he actually taked credit for the quake/quack thing as if he discovered it!

http://www.tecnation.co.uk/reviews.php?section=3&index=51

[Ninja Prime]

What good are Serious Sam numbers? How many games use the SS engine? 3, last I checked, and two of them are SS and SS2. How many people still play SS? I don't know anyone who still plays it, except that I hear a few people here always saying they do, IMO mostly because it's one of the only games where the GeForce FX outshines the 9700/9800. At least without any AA or Aniso anyway...

[Raptorman]

That review is total BS :bs:

[Randell]

Originally posted by Ninja Prime
What good are Serious Sam numbers? How many games use the SS engine? 3, last I checked, and two of them are SS and SS2. How many people still play SS? I don't know anyone who still plays it, except that I hear a few people here always saying they do, IMO mostly because it's one of the only games where the GeForce FX outshines the 9700/9800. At least without any AA or Aniso anyway...

its not about the game per se, it's the fact it has excellent benchmarking tools, probably the best any game has shipped with. A variety of timedemo's, a flexible engine that can look at single and multitexturing performance etc.

How good is any benchmark in relation to other games?. Do QuakeIIIA numbers tell you MOH:AA performance? How about JKII or RtcW numbers? How many games use the Comanche 3 engine or codecreatuers or aquanox?

The FX's good performance is indicative of the continuing excellence of the nVidia OGL ICD. Albeit ata DX7 level not with fragemnt shaders etc.

[Ninja Prime]

I've never heard of this "Extreme detail addon", but I'm guessing thats what has the results so screwed. The addon is probably tweaked for nvidia cards/drivers.

[Randell]

No it just maxes out texture/IQ settings and is built into the game . You just access it via the 'add-on' (ie for mods) section.

[Ninja Prime]

I see. Then I guess the register has some splainin' to do.