Opinions - AMD vs. NVIDIA - who really won in HD 6850 and GTX 460 battle

[Terbinator]

Reviewers can't be expected to rebench every time a new card comes out, that's absurd to expect that. Or do you two just think it should happen when AMD releases a card, so it can be new drivers vs mature nVidia ones?

Considering what nVidia got this time around - overclocked cards included in reviews (tomshardware even overclocked STOCK cards without mentioning it on the graphs), some idiot reviewers including HAWX 2 and nVidia bought "Stone Giant" and even Anandtech couldn't stick to their reviewing guns, I think they've got more than AMD has ever had in any review. If you think poor little nVidia is hard done to you need to take a long hard look at yourself.

And having a look around, there appears to now be a decent selection of 6850's and 6870's everywhere.

When there are such significant performance differences, yes they should - evident by the fact everyone else was up to scratch.

The furore surrounding the inclusion of a O/C'd GTX 460 is beyond me TBH. These are cards that are known to O/C and is somewhat a feature, not to mention the prices of O/C'd models now being consistent with stock 6850 (add to this the fact reviews OC'd 68xx cards) prices.

[Jimbo75]

But he will... im pretty sure hexus always do (on the specs grid the driver version is always listed) which is why they are my pretty much my number one trusted reviewer.
It doesnt matter how stupid it may sound it doesnt change the FACT that comparing cards running an older driver version again a newer card with a newer driver version is all but worthless UNLESS its explicitely obvious that the driver update contained no changes for the cards/benchmarks you are reviewing.
In this situation that isnt the case is it.

Im pretty sure this is fundementals learned in GCSE science about controlled experiments.

I'm sure most of them just put the driver version so people don't complain

Most drivers give 1% improvement, and that's just the good ones. A lot of the time they'll be flops, and some might even lower performance. I'm telling ya no reviewer rebenches every release with new drivers, its just far too time consuming to do so, not to mention tedious as hell.

If you checked out Anands Sandy Bridge article, he even used year old benchmarks to compare SB's graphics to the 4550.

[Terbinator]

I'm sure most of them just put the driver version so people don't complain

Most drivers give 1% improvement, and that's just the good ones. A lot of the time they'll be flops, and some might even lower performance. I'm telling ya no reviewer rebenches every release with new drivers, its just far too time consuming to do so, not to mention tedious as hell.

If you checked out Anands Sandy Bridge article, he even used year old benchmarks to compare SB's graphics to the 4550.

But the 4550 is effectively a year/generation old card anyway.

[Jimbo75]

The furore surrounding the inclusion of a O/C'd GTX 460 is beyond me TBH. These are cards that are known to O/C and is somewhat a feature, not to mention the prices of O/C'd models now being consistent with stock 6850 (add to this the fact reviews OC'd 68xx cards) prices.

Toms hardware increased the stock clocks on their 460 by 36mhz, using the excuse that most of the cards on Newegg came pre-overclocked.

Most of the 5850's on Newegg are pre-overclocked too, but they didn't and never have benchmarked them with higher clocks.

It's simple pressure and/or bribery from nVidia. They wanted reviewers to bench Hawx 2 because they've fiddled with the settings - have you seen that benchmark btw? They sent cherry picked EVGA 460 FTW's to reviewers and harrassed them until they agreed to use them, then there is all the CUDA/PhysX nonsense that has to be mentioned as a negative point for AMD cards, lets not even mention their "reviewers guide". A couple of weeks ago it was ATI's "cheat" that had to be mentioned for the release of their 450 gts. They are desperate.

I don't know why all of the reviewers don't band together and give them the finger frankly.

But the 4550 is effectively a year/generation old card anyway.

Sorry i meant the 5450. Anyway I'm not sure why that would mean it couldn't be rebenched (other than the fact that it would be pretty pointless).

[Terbinator]

Toms hardware...

Your post died there. I really don't see why your getting so worked up about it. The only review I've seen that has suggested an Nvidia card is still an option was in the 68xx review on Anandtech where they said it was a viable alternative, which it is (if your into CUDA, PhysX, decent Linux support etc) not to mention GTX 460's (pre-overclocked) are now cheaper than 6850's on Scan.

As the article originally points out the only winner is us.

Edit: If he did use year old drivers for the 5450 that is a bit naughty - but then i wonder if year old drivers have any performance effect on a 5450 considering the target market.

[Jimbo75]

Your post died there. I really don't see why your getting so worked up about it. The only review I've seen that has suggested an Nvidia card is still an option was in the 68xx review on Anandtech where they said it was a viable alternative, which it is (if your into CUDA, PhysX, decent Linux support etc) not to mention GTX 460's (pre-overclocked) are now cheaper than 6850's on Scan.

"only" Anandtech, one of the premier sites on the web?

The problem I have with it is, where does it stop? What happens next time because you know Cayman is going to blow GF100 out of the water and I can't see anything except more desperation from nVidia.

Maybe they'll want water-cooled, overclocked 480's included? Or if they can convince reviewers to overclock their cards for free, perhaps they can convince them to underclock the AMD ones instead next time?

[Terbinator]

"only" Anandtech, one of the premier sites on the web?

The problem I have with it is, where does it stop? What happens next time because you know Cayman is going to blow GF100 out of the water and I can't see anything except more desperation from nVidia.

Maybe they'll want water-cooled, overclocked 480's included? Or if they can convince reviewers to overclock their cards for free, perhaps they can convince them to underclock the AMD ones instead next time?

If you only go to one review site, your a chump.

Again, the GTX 460 is a tried and tested overclockable card its inclusion was fair IMO. The situation will not crop up in the 69xx review because the competitions ability to O/C isn't a big enough sticking point - not to mention the already massive TDP.

[Jimbo75]

If you only go to one review site, your a chump.

Again, the GTX 460 is a tried and tested overclockable card its inclusion was fair IMO. The situation will not crop up in the 69xx review because the competitions ability to O/C isn't a big enough sticking point - not to mention the already massive TDP.

Well you think it was fair, I don't personally. Fair to me would be something that was done both ways, not wholly in favour of one company. But the biggest issue for me is the lack of clarity.

The EVGA 460 FTW is no ordinary gtx 460, yet it's inclusion makes others believe that "most" or "any" 460's will have similar overclockability when it's just not the case.

If so many cards are so overclockable, why doesn't nVidia just make it a 460 gtx+? They did it with the 9800 in order to compete with the 4850. Why not this time? Simply put, they don't have the parts they are pretending to have.

[Terbinator]

Well you think it was fair, I don't personally. Fair to me would be something that was done both ways, not wholly in favour of one company. But the biggest issue for me is the lack of clarity.

The EVGA 460 FTW is no ordinary gtx 460, yet it's inclusion makes others believe that "most" or "any" 460's will have similar overclockability when it's just not the case.

If so many cards are so overclockable, why doesn't nVidia just make it a 460 gtx+? They did it with the 9800 in order to compete with the 4850. Why not this time? Simply put, they don't have the parts they are pretending to have.

The same reason AMD still release 'single/dual/trie/quad core' CPU's.

What parts do you think they're pretending to have ?

[dangel]

This is all getting very weird gents - can't you just agree to disagree n'all?

Personally, i've got the upgrade itch and i'd certainly consider two 460s as a viable choice - and i'd probably go for overclocked parts at that. I'd prefer a single card solution though as nVidia saw fit to disable SLI for my chipset which means i have to 'hack' things to get it to work. I'm waiting though, too see what the 6970 turns out to be like (or maybe even the 6990). The 460 is the first time i'd considered SLI/Crossfire though - simply because the scaling looks very good compared to previous generations.

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

Well you think it was fair, I don't personally. Fair to me would be something that was done both ways, not wholly in favour of one company. But the biggest issue for me is the lack of clarity.

The EVGA 460 FTW is no ordinary gtx 460, yet it's inclusion makes others believe that "most" or "any" 460's will have similar overclockability when it's just not the case.

I agree. It is not only the GPU which is important but the PCB and stock cooler too. Also it is quite possible that the highest binned GF104 GPUs make it into the overclocked cards.

If so many cards are so overclockable, why doesn't nVidia just make it a 460 gtx+? They did it with the 9800 in order to compete with the 4850. Why not this time? Simply put, they don't have the parts they are pretending to have.

It could be down to the fact that a more expensive PCB and cooler are required. On top of this power consumption of the overclocked cards would be much higher too.

[HalloweenJack]

considering the depths AMD went to with this release - sending downclocked 6870`s diguised as 6850`s out for review , then having the rabid fanbois screaming of a `win` and how dirty nvidia are with pre-overclocked cards (which can be bought tight now on scan) , hypocrisy at its best.


edit:


and lets look at the amazing driver from AMD - 3 releases in 10 days so far for bug fixes and AF correction

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

considering the depths AMD went to with this release - sending downclocked 6870`s diguised as 6850`s out for review , then having the rabid fanbois screaming of a `win` and how dirty nvidia are with pre-overclocked cards (which can be bought tight now on scan) , hypocrisy at its best.


edit:


and lets look at the amazing driver from AMD - 3 releases in 10 days so far for bug fixes and AF correction

Considering that a few of the HD4830 review samples only had 560 stream processors it is not that first time that AMD have made a blunder like that.

[TooNice]

The furore surrounding the inclusion of a O/C'd GTX 460 is beyond me TBH.

+1. More data, better for the buyer. Unless the EVGA 460 FTW only exist on paper, there is no reason to exclude it. Typically, a higher binned card would be priced higher (not unusually coming worse from a bang for buck perspective), and but if that wasn't the case, then surely the EVGA 460 FTW should be on the list of anyone in the market for a GFX card in this price range? And given that enthusiasts go as far as caring about CPU stepping when assessing overclockability, it would surprise me if people would see those figure and go for another brand.

Granted, having some good OC'ed 6850/6870 would be better (more data). It used to be the case that reviewers would have an "Overclockability" section in their reviews, I am not sure whether that trend has reversed, or a failure on Anandtech's part. But it's really not that hard for an enthusiast to read the review, and come with the conclusion that yes, the EVGA 460 FTW is/may be a better buy than a stock 6850/6870 for their requirements, but how overclockable are the new AMD? After all, last time I checked, it is not uncommon for enthusiasts to speculate the sort of performance they can get once they tweak the cards.

Had they used the EVGA 460 FTW to represent all 460, I could understand the furore. As it is, it may warrant some constructive criticism (OC the stock card being tested if you can't get hold of pre-overclocked ones), but nothing beyond that.

[TheWizard]

Lets look at it from another angle when was the last time NVIDIA released a card that was available on preorder and in the hands of consumers within the week? Lets look at the time frames, my friend preordered a Sapphire 6850 on Friday and it arrived today that is within 1 week and this includes high demand. For my part, I preordred the XFX 6850 on Sunday and it should arrive tomorrow.

So from my personal experience that is products in the hands of consumers within 1 week of release. Can NVIDIA boast a similar feat in recent times? If my memory does not fail me, the answer is an emphatic NO.

[Terbinator]

GTX 460 was available right away wasn't it?