Published on 21st October 2005 by
Originally Posted by MeanmotionDude, i wasn't really suggesting you put 3dmark scores on there, it was demonstrative. I meant having a set of easy to run timedemos or single levels (so you're not there for hours) of the games of the moment - and a few older ones - so that you can quickly compare any number of cards. However, for the full review you can go more indepth. Something along those lines.
Originally Posted by bigzAll that I asked in what you're referring to as a 'trumpet blowing session' is that motherboard manufacturers make the distinction between shipping products and pre-release hardware before it gets in to our hands. Pre release hardware shouldn't be shipped to a journalist in retail packaging, simple as.
Originally Posted by K-manGreat article. Finally someone realized what's important. I mean, who wants to play a game without sound? OK...you don't have a choice with Solitaire. :D
For the high-end system testing. I think it's absolutely ok to do so. It schows what the GPU is really capable of in "real world gaming". And if your own rig isn't that fast, then you must accept that you won't get the same results.
Originally Posted by Ang3lFir3Well I don't post much on BT but I read a lot. And I must say as a mid-range afterwork and weekend gamer with a budget that I appreciate the new testing methods (they actually tell me something). I normally don't even look to upgrade until a title I REALLY want to play comes out that my card can't handle very well.......
However I would like to comment on a few things.... As bigz (i think it was) said AGP and Athlons are dead... but this isn't true.... I game on my email@example.com w/512pc4000 just fine and often.....now since i have a now hard to find Epox 8rda6+pro (i kno you don't care but im telling you anyways) I get the pleasure of having AGP.... and you know what it still works..... and I can even buy some newer mid range cards in the AGP flavor.....and the real shocker...I'm not alone... I hear a lot of modest gamers who's real world concerns are "I gotta buy a new cpu and mobo just to go to PCI-E? screw that!"
So what does all that ranting have to do with midrange systems? Well I gotta say when I see reviews run on fx-57's I generally go look for something else...Its not at all representative of most people's "real world" (we are talking over $1,000 for a cpu..... I pay less than that a month in rent and car insurance combined). A decent mid range system say a 3000 at most would be an excellent comparision....nothing wrong with knowing once i OC i'll get better performance...i'd rather know that than know i'll get less performance and be less satisified....
Originally Posted by Ang3lFir3and another thing i think would be of use to gamers that i think you can and may already infer from the data you are already collecting may be things like "average fps drop" (i know you don't want to count frames but it matters sometimes) ..... what i mean is that I as a mostly FPS (shooter) gamer sometimes suffer from FPS lagg (when the framerate drops drasticly and even a half sec of lagg can mean the difference between killing or being killed)... I would like to know how likely this is to occur since this definetly is part of my definition of "playable"....... also testing online games like BF2 and CSS etc online helps to determine the amount of playability i will really get when my machine is not just rendering the game but sending and recieving packets....
Originally Posted by bigzFor example, to this day, I still play Counter-Strike 1.6 at 640x480 -- I always have and always will, no matter what video card I'm playing the game on. Yes, before you ask, I've played at 640x480 on 7800 GTX SLI...
You are not logged in, please login with your forum account below. If you don't already have an account please register to start contributing.
28th November 2014
26th November 2014
24th November 2014
© Copyright bit-tech