Go Back   nV News Forums > Hardware Forums > Benchmarking And Overclocking

Newegg Daily Deals

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old 07-28-02, 10:25 AM   #1
PCarr78
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: San Diego, CA
Posts: 505
Default The state of online reviews.

<rant>
Nowadays, more and more reviewers are becoming Corpo*****s(TM). There is always a slant. What I miss is the days when reviews were informative, and completely realistic. Nowadays a review can be broken down in the following way:


Introduction - Some history behind the product. Legacy of performance or whatnot.
Specs (ripped straight off the corporate website)
Computer specs (Typically a P4 at 3.5 Ghz with 20GB of Ram... completely unrealistic..)
Quake3 benchies
-640x460x16
-1024x768x16
-1024x768x32
-1600x1200x32
3dmark benchies
Overclocking results
Conclusion. Usually with a positive rating...


Let us begin.

640x480x16? I mean wtf. I used to play that res on my p100+voodoo2 combo. Who the bloody hell still uses that?

About 1600x1200? I bought a state-of-the art NEC 19" AG monitor last year... Oh, it can handle 16x12.... but only at 60Hz refresh. Instant Headache in a plastic box... I don't know who can afford those Sony 24"ers that can do it at 85+, but it certainly isn't me.... A poor, struggling student working part-time. For the longest time, I've been using 1024x768. There aren't really any games besides GLQUAKE or Q2 that run well on my computer at 12x10... let alone 16x12. Blame it on my GeForce2... Perhaps the $600 R300 will save me from my low-res hell *rolls eyes*

Overclocking results. I have had it with people buying cards based upon A SINGLE REVIEWER'S RESULTS, and bitching about not being able to achieve the results... People were telling me that their GF2s couldn't OC that high. I personally got it to 250/410 with no additionnal cooling. People also told me that the P3-700e overclocked like a mofo... easily hitting 933 at default voltage with stock cooling... esp. with the cB0 stepping. Imagine my surprise when MY SL45y chip could barely hold 890MHz at 1.85 Volts. Instabilities Galore. Buying anything based upon OC results is ridiculous. A product should be bought for it's speed and features at default clocks... Any gains made by OCing are just a nice little bonus... OCing should not take such an important place in reviews.

And has anyone ever noticed that there are almost NO BAD REVIEWS out there? There are 2 types of reviews. Good reviews and no reviews. If a product is a POS, it won' t get reviewed anywhere. Or if it does, the reviewers will downplay the suckage. If the product is even the least bit good, it will get a glowing review. Blah....

*sigh*

What I wish people would do is review stuff properly. that is, on multiple systems (if possible) and using the settings REAL PEOPLE would use. Do you know anyone who plays games with sound disabled? Maybe deaf people do, but not the rest of the gaming community. Enough with the wack-ass resolutions. Enough with all the settings turned off. I am also Sick&Tired of reviewers pimping their 3dmark2001 scores. That is the most biased, unrealistic benchmarking suite I have ever seen. Not to mention the meaningless results. Is a card that hits 12 000 pts that much behind a card that hits 13 000? It's a synthetic benchmark. It doesn't represent a realistic gaming environment. What should be done is more tests on games rather than these BS benchmarks...

</Rant>
PCarr78 is offline  
Old 07-28-02, 11:00 AM   #2
vampireuk
**** Holster
 
vampireuk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: The armoury
Posts: 2,813
Send a message via AIM to vampireuk
Default

The Quake III benchmarks make me laugh now, theres no point who wants to see it running at 10000+ fps? that impresses no one anymore. Well apart from Intel suits

I dont pay any attention to most benchmarks in fact its been a while since I've read any reviews its always the same and you know what the outcome will be
vampireuk is offline  
Old 07-28-02, 11:17 AM   #3
PCarr78
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: San Diego, CA
Posts: 505
Default

10/10 best product ever?

yea. most reviews end like that.
PCarr78 is offline  
Old 07-28-02, 11:24 AM   #4
vampireuk
**** Holster
 
vampireuk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: The armoury
Posts: 2,813
Send a message via AIM to vampireuk
Default

Quote:
10/10 best product ever?
But only if it runs Quake III at 100000 fps
vampireuk is offline  
Old 07-28-02, 11:28 AM   #5
PCarr78
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: San Diego, CA
Posts: 505
Default

Naturally

a product that runs q3 1.17 @ 640x480x16 FASTEST at 99999 fps is a bif, fat POS!
PCarr78 is offline  
Old 07-28-02, 05:22 PM   #6
Kruno
TypeDef's assistant
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Australia
Posts: 1,641
Send a message via ICQ to Kruno Send a message via AIM to Kruno
Default

It must be doing that frame rate internally. There is no way your monitor could comprehend that type of frame rate lolz.
__________________
"Never before has any voice dared to utter the words of that tongue in Imladris, Mr. Anderson" - Elrond LOTR
Kruno is offline  
Old 07-28-02, 05:28 PM   #7
PCarr78
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: San Diego, CA
Posts: 505
Default

Just one more reason why reviews nowadays are absurd...
PCarr78 is offline  
Old 07-28-02, 10:42 PM   #8
Lou Natic
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

The only real reason why all these lame old benchmarks are still in use is because there really haven't been any new games using new engines introduced this year that really tax the newer systems. All the more recent FPS games of this year are all Q3-based, so there is no real benefit from trying to use them as a benchmark. Serious Sam 2 benchmarks are in a similar boat, considering that engine is pretty much the same engine as the original. And then there is the biggest waste of time of them all, the 3dmark test, which can be faked and hacked numerous ways.

I totally agree with the need for the removing of 640x480 from any review of newer hardware, the lowest resolution should probably be raised to atleast 1024x768. For people insisting on playing their games at 640x480 resolution, they hardly need a Ti4600 (or a Ti200 for that matter). I want to see more emphasis on high resolution gaming: my monitor 19" KDS can do 85hz at 1600x1200-32 which is alot better than the average 60hz that most 19"ers on the market sport at the moment.
 

Old 07-28-02, 11:46 PM   #9
Kruno
TypeDef's assistant
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Australia
Posts: 1,641
Send a message via ICQ to Kruno Send a message via AIM to Kruno
Default

bleh! I review my own things and then make a self conclusion. I don't need reviews giving me info.
__________________
"Never before has any voice dared to utter the words of that tongue in Imladris, Mr. Anderson" - Elrond LOTR
Kruno is offline  
Old 07-29-02, 05:25 AM   #10
Smokey
Team Rainbow
 
Smokey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: FRANCE
Posts: 2,273
Default

I alsoi just wanted to let Corp know that his "state of the art NEC" isnt that state of the art if it can only handle 1600*1200@60Hz My Iiyama Vision Master Pro 450 ( which is getting old) can handle 1600*1200@85Hz just like Lou Natics KDS.

About benchmarks, as I have a good 19" montitor with a GF3 I play all my games at 1280*1024@100Hz no less, also 1600*1200@85Hz if I dont want to use any FSAA and lower the anisoptic filtering. As for Q3 benches, I bought that game when I had my Celeron 433 + TNT1 I think using games that are 6-12months old max.


Smokey
Smokey is offline  
Old 07-29-02, 05:49 AM   #11
vampireuk
**** Holster
 
vampireuk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: The armoury
Posts: 2,813
Send a message via AIM to vampireuk
Default

They should use Shogun Total War as a test, if it can run 4000 troops at once its good!
vampireuk is offline  
Old 07-29-02, 07:59 AM   #12
PCarr78
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: San Diego, CA
Posts: 505
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by Smokey
I alsoi just wanted to let Corp know that his "state of the art NEC" isnt that state of the art if it can only handle 1600*1200@60Hz My Iiyama Vision Master Pro 450 ( which is getting old) can handle 1600*1200@85Hz just like Lou Natics KDS.

About benchmarks, as I have a good 19" montitor with a GF3 I play all my games at 1280*1024@100Hz no less, also 1600*1200@85Hz if I dont want to use any FSAA and lower the anisoptic filtering. As for Q3 benches, I bought that game when I had my Celeron 433 + TNT1 I think using games that are 6-12months old max.


Smokey
Two years and $800 ago, buddy.

Back when most monitors couldnt do 12x10 @ more than 60hz
PCarr78 is offline  
Closed Thread


Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Inside the Business of Online Reviews For Hire News Archived News Items 0 08-26-12 06:30 PM
What your Internet behavior says about your mental state News Archived News Items 0 06-17-12 09:00 PM
EFF files legal motion to halt Washington state online sex ad law News Archived News Items 0 06-15-12 08:30 PM
U.S. State Department chooses Amazon's Kindle over Apple's iPad News Archived News Items 0 06-11-12 10:10 PM
How Skyrim and Oblivion influenced The Elder Scrolls Online News Archived News Items 0 05-25-12 12:20 PM

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:22 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 1998 - 2014, nV News.