Go Back   Hardware Canucks > NEWS & REVIEWS > Reviews & Articles from the Web

    
Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11 (permalink)  
Old May 24, 2010, 06:40 PM
Silvgearx's Avatar
Hall Of Fame
F@H
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Toronto
Posts: 2,105

My System Specs

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SKYMTL View Post
Basically, XBit has effectively destroyed their relationship with NVIDIA for a scoop with drivers that are already outdated (256 was released today) while using a limited number of benchmarks. IMO they did their readers a huge injustice considering NVIDIA has already stated to NOT use the 197 series with upcoming cards.

What we are seeing is pageview mongering taking precedence over proper journalism.
Such harsh harsh words.

So journalism must be pretty easy if they can whip up a preview in a few hours. Time for this n00b to apply. How long do you figure it takes you to do such a review such as xbit? Or did nvidia tell reviewers before hand that a beta driver is coming on at certain dates?

Do correct me if I am wrong.

Lets show these guys some justice, awaiting HWC's review.

For some odd reason it reminds me of that unpleasant TPU April Fool's prank.
Reply With Quote
  #12 (permalink)  
Old May 24, 2010, 07:06 PM
Delavan's Avatar
Hall Of Fame
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Mtl
Posts: 1,149
Default

Quote:
i always wondered how they come up with lower parts...do they do the math and see theres 50k chips that are 80% operational and from there they create a 'new' card?
It always depends...if the chips is the exact same chip, but with disabled clusters/cores/whatever, there is a good chance that it's defective chips with disabled cores. It's explained by the high price of making such high performance chips. So if the chips fail to work at 100% of their capabilities, they're will be sold as less-capable cards.

If the chips are based on totally different sillicon, then it's a different case. Then, it's just another chip in the lineup with less capabilities, but part of the same family as the higher performing parts.
__________________
i7 4770K @ 4.5GHz / Corsair H100i / Maximus VI HERO / 8GB Corsair Vengeance Red LP 1.5V 1866 / N560GTX Ti Twin FROZR II OC / Corsair Performance Pro 128GB SSD / Intel 520 120GB SSD / WD Black 640 GB storage

ROG G53SX laptop: i7 2630QM / 12GB DDR3 / GTX560m 2GB / 750GB 7200rpm (14 000 3Dmarks06)

Last edited by Delavan; May 25, 2010 at 03:04 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #13 (permalink)  
Old May 24, 2010, 07:21 PM
MpG's Avatar
MpG MpG is offline
Hall Of Fame
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Kitchener, ON
Posts: 3,143
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by _dangtx_ View Post
i always wondered how they come up with lower parts...do they do the math and see theres 50k chips that are 80% operational and from there they create a 'new' card?
It's a common practice, whether they test for a certain clock speed, or a certain number of operational cores/clusters. One of the high points for Fermi was that Nvidia expected/claimed that it would be easier to do just this than with previous architectures, so this may the result of such a claim. Power/performance/cost are the issue - if it happens on a large die that's half disabled, I don't particularly see a problem with it, in and of itself. Although I'm sure Nvidia would prefer to deliberately make smaller cores, and get more of them out of a single wafer of silicon.
__________________
i7 2600K | ASUS Maximus IV GENE-Z | 580GTX | Corsair DDR3-2133
Reply With Quote
  #14 (permalink)  
Old May 24, 2010, 07:57 PM
SKYMTL's Avatar
HardwareCanuck Review Editor
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Montreal
Posts: 11,627
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by 5ILVgeARX View Post
So journalism must be pretty easy if they can whip up a preview in a few hours. Time for this n00b to apply. How long do you figure it takes you to do such a review such as xbit?
2-4 days. We PROPERLY benchmark each game with runs of more than 30 seconds.

Quote:
Or did nvidia tell reviewers before hand that a beta driver is coming on at certain dates?
Huh? New drivers are ALWAYS released prior to a new GPU. This is because previous drivers don't properly support upcoming GPUs for secrecy reasons.


__________________
Reply With Quote
  #15 (permalink)  
Old May 24, 2010, 08:40 PM
Banned
F@H
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: mtl
Posts: 12,694
Default

cool.

thats quite the average improvement, brother sky :)
Reply With Quote
  #16 (permalink)  
Old May 24, 2010, 09:32 PM
DkRk's Avatar
MVP
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: VanCity, B.C.
Posts: 426

My System Specs

Default

Perusing through the article, you can either tell they don't like nVidia already, or they're just trying to sound cool by being snide; it ruins the read.
__________________
Protect your chicken from Dokken.
Reply With Quote
  #17 (permalink)  
Old May 25, 2010, 06:11 AM
martin_metal_88's Avatar
Hall Of Fame
F@H
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Quebec City
Posts: 4,175

My System Specs

Default

Xbit haven't been so much ATI fan these day. Normally they are pretty correct. Seems that some one have a little rage to cut out in their office I am pretty sure they will update the review ( well hope so ) or we will be abble to not give a F*** because HWC, anand, guru, techreport and all great other reviewer will have their own well done and proffessional review.
__________________
Ask for more

Martin_metal_88
Colenzo : See system spec!

Odysseus : I7 860 @ 3.6Ghz || GA P55-UD5 || G.skill Ripjaws F3-16000 2000Mhz 2X2GB || Coolermaster ATCS 840 || Silverstone Strider plus 850W || WD 640 black - WD 1TB green - Samsung F3 2TB || MSI 5670 1GB Cyclone ||Coolermaster Hyper 212 + ||

Reply With Quote
  #18 (permalink)  
Old May 25, 2010, 09:26 AM
Delavan's Avatar
Hall Of Fame
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Mtl
Posts: 1,149
Default

Well,

Whether XBITlab's staff is BIASED or not is beyond me. I find interesting that people reading their (PRE)review are stating XBITs is BIASED. To me, gamers favor ATI and gamers/folders like nVIDIA anyway.

People were stomping on the first FERMIs for missing a few clusters compared to the originally announced 512. Now, they present a card, probably made out of failing FERMI chips (with disabled clusters) and nVIDIA fans are p1ssed when a review site calls BS on the card.

I agree that we have to wait for REAL 100% full fledged reviews. I don't like the half-a55ed previews like that...let's see what the real reviews say:

On another note: Am I dreaming, or the non-reference cards are coming out a whole lot faster than usual in the case of the GTX400-series? If it's the case, it basically states that the reference cards are way to warm and that NVIDIA let the board partners loose on non-reference coolers to aleviate FERMI thermal issues.
__________________
i7 4770K @ 4.5GHz / Corsair H100i / Maximus VI HERO / 8GB Corsair Vengeance Red LP 1.5V 1866 / N560GTX Ti Twin FROZR II OC / Corsair Performance Pro 128GB SSD / Intel 520 120GB SSD / WD Black 640 GB storage

ROG G53SX laptop: i7 2630QM / 12GB DDR3 / GTX560m 2GB / 750GB 7200rpm (14 000 3Dmarks06)

Last edited by Delavan; May 25, 2010 at 01:57 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #19 (permalink)  
Old May 26, 2010, 06:23 AM
HaDeS
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by 5ILVgeARX View Post
Such harsh harsh words.

So journalism must be pretty easy if they can whip up a preview in a few hours. Time for this n00b to apply. How long do you figure it takes you to do such a review such as xbit? Or did nvidia tell reviewers before hand that a beta driver is coming on at certain dates?

Do correct me if I am wrong.

Lets show these guys some justice, awaiting HWC's review.

For some odd reason it reminds me of that unpleasant TPU April Fool's prank.
Harsh words? After all the bullshit Nvidia has dumped on people who spend their hard earned money supporting Nvidia products? From drivers that can't turn on the fan to magically bricked cards why should anyone have anything good to say about Nvidia right now? Lets not forget the piece of wood with drywall screws they used to represent the fermi to begin with.

Now they've given people a new card that probably has a negligiable profit margin for the card makers which runs at 95c under load with stock cooling. Now theres a card I want under my desk this summer when its 35+ outside. In the winter time when its -20 or -40 out its gonna be fantastic. I will have warm feet and the animals will curl up around the leaf blower to keep warm while I frag bots in the newest release of Modern Warfare2 "Black Ops" Lets not forget the new PSU you need along with the inflated power bill.

I can only imagine the RMA situation when Nvidia scrambles to make a profit on our backs. The fermi is just another Beta product we are being asked to test on a large scale for around 500 dollars IF you can find one. Or you can purchase a rather nice 5000 series card from ATI that has more than 6 months of refining and by years end costs WAY less to run.

So I ask again... how the hell do you give something JUSTICE and escape a bias review. I respect the reviewers here and their honesty but don't cross the line for free hardware and don't powder the babies ass because it's butt is a little sore.
Reply With Quote
  #20 (permalink)  
Old May 26, 2010, 06:32 AM
Arinoth's Avatar
Moderator
F@H
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Halifax
Posts: 8,579

My System Specs

Default

Don't forget how FERMI probably put the nail in the coffin for BFG as a graphics card company as well.
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Rumored GTX 465! Silvgearx Rumor Mill 41 July 10, 2010 02:09 PM
ATI H2 2010 "New Generation Graphics Processors" [Xbitlabs] Bond007 Reviews & Articles from the Web 13 January 25, 2010 09:18 PM
ThermalRight HR-03 GTX Review Eagle Eye Member Reviews 25 August 17, 2009 03:35 AM
GTX 280 vs. GTX 260 vs. 8800 GTX review -n7- Member Reviews 11 September 27, 2008 10:00 AM
9800 GTX early review! belgolas Reviews & Articles from the Web 15 March 27, 2008 06:44 PM