R520 benchmarks - Hardware Analysis

[N00b]

CrossFire: Sander left this email out :smile: He specifcially told me that 'mainboards are B-O-R-I-N-G' and that he was absolutely not interested in working with us on it. He also told me that Xpress 200 did not exist and that we had shipped them all to a landfill site. At this point I decided that I would prioritise press who were interested in engaging with us on all roadmaps (this bit he has left in - now you can see why it makes sense)

Thank you very much for your answer. You are mistaken however in the point I quoted above. The specific mail you mention is included in this PDF as part of a communication trail: http://hardwareanalysis.com/images/articles/large/11595.pdf
I will not quote the whole PDF here as it is too long. I anybody is interested, click and read.

 

[neliz]

NVITALIA ?

I was hoping it was nvnews so that, like at r3d, the top page will only include the other side's cards for review.. and a good review at that..

 

[Razor1]

I took that threat in regards to the shimmering article. (If you bothered to note the "time" in the email and the time the shimmering article was posted)

I wouldnt go out on a limb to say they were lies.

EDIT: I feel its also important to mention ATI have stated Sander sent the following email after he wasnt invited to editors day, it might be an insight into his state of mind.

> From: Sander Sassen - Hardware Analysis
> [mailto:ssassen@hardwareanalysis.com]
> Sent: 08 September 2005 09:39
> To: Andrzej Bania
> Subject: Re: Editors Day

>
> So you're telling me I'm not invited is that it? I feel an ATI column
> coming
> up, lets see if we can drop the stock price shall we?
>
> Sander Sassen
> http://www.hardwareanalysis.com <http://www.hardwareanalysis.com/>

__________________
Opera 8 - The best damn browser on the internet

This was not his state of mind when he wrote that review. So what ATi did was use an email that was sent before the "final call" from both sides and tell eveyone that Sanders wanted to drop thier stock prices with an email that didn't have anything to do with the r520 launch.

 

[Andrzej]

...nvnews...

Now wouldn't that be a cool turn up for the books

 

[Mayhem]

my prediction - what is going to come out of all of this?

1 - journos/hacks being much more carefull what they write to ATI and how they behave in order not to rock the boat & keep the privileges

2 - ATI being more carefull (and I assume not leak e-mails in the future), I'd expect somebody is bound to get a big slap for that one in the organization (unless the sense of "how good marketing move that was" prevails in the org)

3 - overall, bleh, as long as R520 comes out right for ATI all will be fine

4 - Hardware Analysis will be remembered as THAT site that leaked (wrong/right) R520 info

5 - this will be remembered as the most exciting launch ever, even beating NV30 by small margin

Druga,

Join us in reality here for a moment. The email ATI released contained a threat against the company. Do you really think that anyone has any obligation to keep a threat secret? Whether it goes to a courtroom, or a forum, public is public and releasing the email was fair ball.

If Sander had an issue with this, he wouldn't be cc'ing Nvidia on all of ATI's emails.

Mayhem

 

[Andrzej]

...mistaken...

Missed that !

You are correct, he did leave in the part about Radeon Xpress boards not existing in the real world

Can I ask a question - there is something that has been bothering me - what 'shimmering article' is everyone refering to ?

 

[Arty]

This was not his state of mind when he wrote that review.

Ofcourse you can say that how ?
I'm not asking you to switch sides but the new "article" of his proves nothing for me and the majority of the people judging from their comments.

My guess is also Nvitalia. :|

 

[N00b]

Missed that !

You are correct, he did leave in the part about Radeon Xpress boards not existing in the real world

Can I ask a question - there is something that has been bothering me - what 'shimmering article' is everyone refering to ?

Here you go: http://www.hardwareanalysis.com/content/article/1812/
Is think that's the one you mean.

 

[wireframe]

Can I ask a question - there is something that has been bothering me - what 'shimmering article' is everyone refering to ?

I would assume it is this one: http://www.hardwareanalysis.com/content/article/1812/

Unless you mean the shimmering on Nvidia hardware. Lots of fuss and then a reverse fuss with the basic "ATI shimmers too!" after it was discovered that Catalyst 5.8 have some problems in this regard. It's basically been a fanatical slugfest back and forth. The only good thing to come out of it was Nvidia's swift release of a fix, although beta.

PS. As I was beaten to the punch I might as well inject some craziness here and point out the paranormal connection with the article number... where's my tinfoil hat when I need it most?

 

[Razor1]

Ofcourse you can say that how ?
I'm not asking you to switch sides but the new "article" of his proves nothing for me and the majority of the people judging from their comments.

My guess is also Nvitalia. :|

Its not that it is or isn't, unless ATi knew what he was really fealing at the time of the article was written or released, by him telling them or them being told by some else, they can't tell the world that this is what he was thinking, because its out of context. Knowingly or unknowingly taking somthing out of context and hurting someones reputation like this is basis for Liable.

 

[Big Bertha EA]

I was hoping it was nvnews so that, like at r3d, the top page will only include the other side's cards for review.. and a good review at that..

Actually, I am relieved that it is not nvnews. I don't believe I need to divulge further...

Back on topic.....

 

[Geo]

Missed that !

You are correct, he did leave in the part about Radeon Xpress boards not existing in the real world

Can I ask a question - there is something that has been bothering me - what 'shimmering article' is everyone refering to ?

Someone else provided the link, but I'll just add that Sander is saying (and in his .pdf) that this is the article he meant with his "drop the stock price" email, and not the article that showed up on the 16th with R520 benchies. He does some calcs on time difference on the email servers to show (he says) that he immediately went and wrote and posted it after telling you he "felt one coming up" (or words to that effect). So his argument seems to be, yes, he retaliated, but you've got the wrong article as retaliation --with the implication being you knew which one he intended and are purposefully misrepresenting. Which is rather like an alibi that says I can't be guilty of this rape over here, because I was busy on this other rape over there. . . and then blaming the authorities for confusing the two.

 

[xGL]

So his argument seems to be, yes, he retaliated, but you've got the wrong article as retaliation --with the implication being you knew which one he intended and are purposefully misrepresenting. Which is rather like an alibi that says I can't be guilty of this rape over here, because I was busy on this other rape over there. . . and then blaming the authorities for confusing the two.

I believe this is actually a valid defense in court, the person cannot be sued for both acts or for the wrong one, only the one he actually did.

In the same way, a crook may use his friends as an alibi to prove he didn't mug someone at midnight, even though he actually did the mugging at 3 am and the victim got mistaken with the time of the mugging.

 

[Arty]

Which is rather like an alibi that says I can't be guilty of this rape over here, because I was busy on this other rape over there. . . and then blaming the authorities for confusing the two.

That was one crude example but still very funny. Go geo !

 

[digitalwanderer]

Actually, I am relieved that it is not nvnews. I don't believe I need to divulge further...

Agreed, albeit for probably slightly different reasons although they both involve MikeC I'll wager.

 

[Geo]

That was one crude example but still very funny. Go geo !

Well, just no one miss the "rather like" --I'm not calling him a rapist!

 

[Geo]

I believe this is actually a valid defense in court, the person cannot be sued for both acts or for the wrong one, only the one he actually did.

Then perhaps if they get to court, he'll use it again. In the court of public opinion, the community is generally more concerned with getting those folks off the street.

 

[Nite_Hawk]

You know, I think the only really valuable lesson that has come out of all of this is that hardware review sites need to start publishing their testing methodologies. Benchmarks are pretty useless otherwise. The rest of this discussion is pretty much a pissing match over who is more "right", and just tarnishes both ATIs and Sander's reputation.

Nite_Hawk

 

[John Reynolds]

You know, I think the only really valuable lesson that has come out of all of this is that hardware review sites need to start publishing their testing methodologies. Benchmarks are pretty useless otherwise. The rest of this discussion is pretty much a pissing match over who is more "right", and just tarnishes both ATIs and Sander's reputation.

Nite_Hawk

The tracks or demos I use for testing are available for d/l from SimHQ if they're not included in the game/sim itself. I also try to detail in-game settings used when benchmarking to avoid reader confusion.

 

[Druga Runda]

Druga,

Join us in reality here for a moment. The email ATI released contained a threat against the company. Do you really think that anyone has any obligation to keep a threat secret? Whether it goes to a courtroom, or a forum, public is public and releasing the email was fair ball.

If Sander had an issue with this, he wouldn't be cc'ing Nvidia on all of ATI's emails.

Mayhem

Reality leaves a lot to the imagination

From my point of view it looks like the e-mail leak was taken out of original context. "The Threat" was revealed in order to prove a malicious intent on the behalf of the person posting the alleged "review". IMO a fair and square PR department wouldn't go that far, as they know the real results, to be shown in few weeks, will vindicate their product and this is all just the usual pre-launch hype. (they surely have better things to do with "real" world product launch preparation etc... besides of the point: Can an internet publication really "threaten" IHV with some questionable review ) In reality :smile: even "fake" bad scores had no chance of hurting the product, as the real numbers will speak for themselves when they are finally released.

That I why I said "someone will get a slap" as it distracts from the product launch and it sends the wrong message to the other industry contacts: "All your correspondance with us is fair game when you cross our path" which might take some effort to repair despite the statements to the contrary. Besides that I am sure the PR team are more than full-time busy to set everything up for the major event of the year. A typical and simple "this does not represent the results of a real product blah blah blah" to the community would have been more than enough.

However if anything the leak of this "threat" gave us the drama factor and much better publicity to new product launch. If this was premeditated it was a shrewd move.

Perhaps without that leak there would be no drama, the hype machine wouldn't go into stratoshpere, so maybe this will be a part of college marketing 101 textbooks in 10 years as a case study. "How to best utilize the fanbase in order to maximize the product visibility at launch. "