- Joined
- Aug 22, 2008
- Messages
- 2,304 (0.39/day)
- Location
- Edmonton, Alberta
System Name | AMD | Intel | Chumpy |
---|---|
Processor | PHII 955BE Stock | i7 920 D0 4.01 GHz | i7 920 D0 4.01 GHz |
Motherboard | MSI 790FX-GD70 | EX58 - UD5 | E760 4 Way SLI |
Cooling | Zalman 9700 CNPS | Water Loop | Water Loop |
Memory | 4 GB XMS3 1600 MHz | 6 GB Dominators 1600 MHz | 6 GB Dominators 1866 MHz |
Video Card(s) | 3 x 9600GSO, GTX260 216 | 2 x GTX 260 216 | GTX 260 216, 9600 GSO |
Storage | WD 640GB | Couple o' 5400RPMs | WD 1TB |
Case | Cosmos S | Lancool K62 Dragonlord | Lian Li PC-P80 Armor |
Power Supply | TX850 | HX 1000 | HX 1000 |
Software | Win 7 Home Premium | Win 7 Ultimate | Vista Home Premium |
Darkmatter, don't worry yourself too much. He did the same thing over 'Mojave' a little bit back.
Look East, benchmarks are set up like a movie. They are made to make a standard that should apply across all cards and runthroughs. Screenshots taken in the same place should have the same FPS within 1 or 2 frames because the same elements are being rendered every time. It's set to be exact same camera movements. With yours you proved that at different locations, FPS varies. They are showing FPS varied at the same location. This shows that there is a difference in the way that location was rendered. They have provided screenshots that attempt to explain the variances, specifically in this case these rocks. In doing so they show missing textures of said rocks. Your screenshots don't refute the evidence because its a completely different location in your examples.
Whether or not it was a mistake or underhanded tactics, I don't know. However I do know your arguement is slightly flawed.
Look East, benchmarks are set up like a movie. They are made to make a standard that should apply across all cards and runthroughs. Screenshots taken in the same place should have the same FPS within 1 or 2 frames because the same elements are being rendered every time. It's set to be exact same camera movements. With yours you proved that at different locations, FPS varies. They are showing FPS varied at the same location. This shows that there is a difference in the way that location was rendered. They have provided screenshots that attempt to explain the variances, specifically in this case these rocks. In doing so they show missing textures of said rocks. Your screenshots don't refute the evidence because its a completely different location in your examples.
Whether or not it was a mistake or underhanded tactics, I don't know. However I do know your arguement is slightly flawed.