[H] and nVidia define optimization guidelines?
- Thread starter digitalwanderer
- Start date
Fred da Roza
Newcomer
digitalwanderer said:I am guilty of cruising [H] forums again a bit today, just the thread on the slides & a thread about the best card for HL2. The thread on the slides was ripping my sides reading Kyle's posts in that thread:
Funny thing, their were 2 pages about 15 minutes ago...now there is just one short one...
In my opinion, after nVidia's PR disaster, it seems they want to get a message out, and [H] (Kyle) is always very willing to deliver nVidia's "message". Considering Kyle's silence, his editorial seemed a "little" late and inapproriate. It just smacked me as propaganda and I said so.
Hellbinder
Banned
About Kyle...
I just dont understand how someone can actually think like this guy. I am really really Angry about it. Its the principle..
Its straight up infuriating. I dont understand how you could be such a blantant Hack. Its pathetic. Did he talk to ATi back in the day and get *Their side* before posting his little editorial that Nvidia fed him the information for?? Answer *NO*. Its Blatant Fing Hypocracy. No its Worse.. its Blatant Blind Bias and open unashamed Deception.
How could he post such total Rubbish from Nvidia in the Face of what they are even Currently Doing??? Thats not even getting into the lowering IQ for speed issues in UT2003 which are at *LEAST* as important as 5 *total* blurry textures in Quake 3.
Its totally completely Sickening.
I just dont understand how someone can actually think like this guy. I am really really Angry about it. Its the principle..
How the hell can he say something like this after the Quak crap he pulled?? Then claim talking about it is beating a *dead horse* and implying its only a topic for Fanbois???..
Its straight up infuriating. I dont understand how you could be such a blantant Hack. Its pathetic. Did he talk to ATi back in the day and get *Their side* before posting his little editorial that Nvidia fed him the information for?? Answer *NO*. Its Blatant Fing Hypocracy. No its Worse.. its Blatant Blind Bias and open unashamed Deception.
How could he post such total Rubbish from Nvidia in the Face of what they are even Currently Doing??? Thats not even getting into the lowering IQ for speed issues in UT2003 which are at *LEAST* as important as 5 *total* blurry textures in Quake 3.
Its totally completely Sickening.
Hang on to your hat then HB, 'cause that was just the opening salvo in what I predict is going to be a VERY nauseating little PR soap opera...Hellbinder said:
Hi Hellbinder,
Having that said, I am still not too sure what to make of either the slides or the fact [H] posted them. I think I'll just lean back and wait.
93,
-Sascha.rb
Perhaps he learned his lesson? The average human being is perfectly capable of changing his point of view.Hellbinder said:
Having that said, I am still not too sure what to make of either the slides or the fact [H] posted them. I think I'll just lean back and wait.
93,
-Sascha.rb
Bouncing Zabaglione Bros.
Legend
Hellbinder said:
Some people don't have principles.
digitalwanderer said:Shouldn't really post stuff like that about Kyle here, name-calling isn't called for.japgar said:OMG Kyle is the biggest tool, I'm sorry to start with the name calling but he is. I've been banned twice now at [H] for commenting on his lack of objectivity regarding nVidia's cheating. He also deleted numerous other replys from people who are calling him out on it. I really think its starting to get to him now.
Edit: he just baned me again
After saying that....
I am guilty of cruising [H] forums again a bit today, just the thread on the slides & a thread about the best card for HL2. The thread on the slides was ripping my sides reading Kyle's posts in that thread:
Funny thing, their were 2 pages about 15 minutes ago...now there is just one short one...
Sorry, but one more time:
"If waiting to get NVIDIA's side of the story make any editorial "late", then that is fine by me. Jumping the gun with half-baked conspiracies has done no one any good and quite frankly we did not want to be part of it."
)[/quote]
Actually quite funny that you mentionned that slide thread because I just banned in it! I had a nice post on topic that took me an hour last night and he went and deleted it! Then I posted again concerning this comment made by him and my reply quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by FrgMstr
"They do have cards that are competitors now", means exactly what is says in relation to the statement that it answered. NVIDIA has cards that are competitive to ATI's now.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On the performance front, that is very debatable until new drivers from Nvidia become available without benchmark and application detecting routines, or independent time demos are made available and are reproducible at the end user level, will we really know for certain? ( sorry but Nvidia has to earn it’s trust) As it stands only the fx 5900 competes in performance with the liked priced ATI 9800, and even the 9700 gives the Fx 5900 a hard time at high res and AA and Anti on. http://www.ukgamer.com/article.php4?id=5&page=1,
And the rest of the Fx line is pretty pale compared to it's ATI counterpart at the mainstream level, which granted is slightly higher priced on most ATI cards.
On IQ, sorry ATI takes this 80% of the time especially with AA and Aniso on it’s clearly 100% , plus the performance hit is less severe. Only when turning off everything is IQ comparable which is fine when performance takes to big a hit on lower end cards.
Then when we talk about DX9 compliance only the fx 5900 is where ATI's current lineup has full compliance. That may not seem important now, but for those that want to get the most out of there card because they pay for them , it do’s have merit, but that may end up pushing the card to the limit by then, only time will tell.
I don’t think that many will share your overall assessment of the current Nvidia lineup, not those that do their homework anyway.
Then I post this and in reply to his answer to another post :
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by creedAMD
What did they admit screwing up?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by FrgMstr
Did you not read the slides? Is it not obvious to you? Please go back and read the problem statement and solution slides again.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Since we don't have a date as to when these slides were actually made, by whom, under what context and what the presenter said while making his presentation they carry absolutely no weight in your response to the question “did they admit to screwing up†or benchmark doctoring as I call it. If your asking us to take this at face value, yes it can be perceived as such. Your asking us to take this at face value ? Why should we? Nvidia has admitted to nothing in those slides and furthermore has yet to even openly discuss on this or any other forum or there own web sight for that matter, their current position as it relates to the MULTIPLE instances of flagrant manipulation of current benchmarks used by reviewers and consumer as a basis prior to their decision to purchase a product from said company or affiliate.
To indicate that they have admitted to any benchmark doctoring or screwing up as you indicate is nothing short of putting words in Nvidia’s mouth. So until you can offer proof (as you so often say yourself) in a clearly written format from Nvidia you may want to refrain from misleading your readership into thinking that your opinion is actually fact.
And by the way I certainly don’t appreciate having a post that took me a better part of an hour to compose deleted, especially when we were invited to voice our opinion and followed your own guidelines. If your intent is to discourage me from doing so just indicate it clearly.
Then I get banned, LOL, first time in my life anywhere!
nelg said:Kyle should have only posted a direct response not given Nvidia an open mike.
That is the best statement in this thread! He is letting Nvidia do the talking for him.
I especially liked this quote from Kyle "Well, if we started amending reviews for things that "may" be true or are posted in public forums with bits and pieces of misleading information"
What in the world does Kyle want? Crime scene photos? We have those too! http://www.beyond3d.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=6719&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=0
What does Kyle have so far?
1: Photo Evidence(link above)
2: Documented Evidence(located at any respectible website)
3: DNA evidence(anti detector cheat)
4: Admission of guilt(slides)
Man I would hate to be stuck on Jury duty with him!
Thanks Dean. BTW I posted the exact same thoughts about the "may" comment in [H] fourm.
I will repost it here..
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by FrgMstr
Well, if we started amending reviews for things that "may" be true or are posted in public forums with bits and pieces of misleading information, I would suggest that would not be very responsible of us.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Considering it is more likely to be irrefutable than “mayâ€, do you not think that it is even worth mentioning in the review ? There is a considerable amount of proof here ....http://www.beyond3d.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=6719. That is unless you don’t trust the source.
I will repost it here..
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by FrgMstr
Well, if we started amending reviews for things that "may" be true or are posted in public forums with bits and pieces of misleading information, I would suggest that would not be very responsible of us.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Considering it is more likely to be irrefutable than “mayâ€, do you not think that it is even worth mentioning in the review ? There is a considerable amount of proof here ....http://www.beyond3d.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=6719. That is unless you don’t trust the source.
Similar threads
