Hi, impar. Welcome to B3D. New members aren't able to edit their posts as an incentive to think through any contributions. (This isn't a commentary on your posts, just the reason for the posting system.)
First, keep in mind that Brit meant to say Xbit's numbers are not cumulative. They're just using overlapping graphs to save space.
I'm not sure what doesn't add up for either site. There'll be differences because they don't use the same load test and mayyybe Xbit's i7 isn't as limiting as HwC's 3.8GHz C2Q (OK, that's a huge stretch). If you're focusing on HwC's individual game power draw figures, which don't show a lot of separation, I guess I'm with you on that.
neliz, why does that Hardspell page look like they just ripped off Anandtech's pics?
First, keep in mind that Brit meant to say Xbit's numbers are not cumulative. They're just using overlapping graphs to save space.
I'm not sure what doesn't add up for either site. There'll be differences because they don't use the same load test and mayyybe Xbit's i7 isn't as limiting as HwC's 3.8GHz C2Q (OK, that's a huge stretch). If you're focusing on HwC's individual game power draw figures, which don't show a lot of separation, I guess I'm with you on that.
neliz, why does that Hardspell page look like they just ripped off Anandtech's pics?