For those who want some closed source numbers. I have benchmarked my R7 250X with xonotic. Will post Heaven and Valley numbers soon. Bear in mind that my rig is way less powerful than Michael's http://openbenchmarking.org/result/1...ZAKH-161026972
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
NVIDIA 375.10 vs. Linux 4.8 + Mesa 13.1-dev AMD GPU Benchmarks
Collapse
X
-
Originally posted by duby229 View Post
Dude, I can post a dozen more links proving it -again- and the truth still wouldn't matter one tiny little bit to you. So keep up the bliss.
Comment
-
Originally posted by zakhrov View PostFor those who want some closed source numbers. I have benchmarked my R7 250X with xonotic. Will post Heaven and Valley numbers soon. Bear in mind that my rig is way less powerful than Michael's http://openbenchmarking.org/result/1...ZAKH-161026972
Comment
-
Originally posted by johnc View Post
Not sure what you're getting at here.
He has a Fury in the benchmarking results.
So everyone sees results for a card that they think is 10% faster than it really is, and assume the driver is worse than it really is.
It's like when a marketing team releases a bunch of slides with charts in it that aren't to scale. Anyone who takes a real look will clearly see what they did and roll their eyes a bit. But those marketing teams are doing it for a reason - a large chunk of people just glance at the charts and fall for it.
Smart marketing by Nvidia. Poor decision by AMD. There's a reason they sent out Fury X hardware to all the windows sites. It's because they didn't want to see charts like the one Michael is showing with the non-X going against higher-end competition.Last edited by smitty3268; 28 October 2016, 03:17 AM.
- Likes 2
Comment
-
Originally posted by fuzz View Post
Except when it comes to benchmarking and reviews what matters is how fast each GPU produces the same image with the same settings. Thus these differences lead to skewed results.
Comment
-
If someone can't see a difference or some people just don't notice a difference it doesn't make it the same image. There are people in the world that would hardly decide between a 20- times re-encoded 96kbit/s MP3 played on their cellphone and lossless 5.1 audio played on a 100.000$ Burmester sound system. It's the same for food, fashion and of course visual fidelity.
Do you really think that many people notice they are playing mainly on low textures in CoD:BO3 when they excessively exceed the VRAM on their GTX 970?
No! They just say: "It just stuttered a bit but now I have a nice framerate and I can play on Ultra."
They just assume that Ultra is Ultra cause they don't even know that Ultra is just variable without someone notifying you when the quality has been reduced because of your deficient hardware.
- Likes 1
Comment
-
Originally posted by Passso View Post
If most people cannot see the difference it cannot be considered as "cheating", but more "optimization", and those who do not make it are "brute forcers"
This is how the IT world improves!
Comment
-
Originally posted by artivision View Post
You understand that we can do the same cheating with Mesa and some dozens linens of code right? But we don't want to. NV is not that superior as you think. So for NV goes like this: smells like shit, tastes like shit, looks like shit, feels like shit - what is it?
Comment
Comment