- Joined
- May 22, 2015
- Messages
- 13,718 (3.97/day)
Processor | Intel i5-12600k |
---|---|
Motherboard | Asus H670 TUF |
Cooling | Arctic Freezer 34 |
Memory | 2x16GB DDR4 3600 G.Skill Ripjaws V |
Video Card(s) | EVGA GTX 1060 SC |
Storage | 500GB Samsung 970 EVO, 500GB Samsung 850 EVO, 1TB Crucial MX300 and 2TB Crucial MX500 |
Display(s) | Dell U3219Q + HP ZR24w |
Case | Raijintek Thetis |
Audio Device(s) | Audioquest Dragonfly Red :D |
Power Supply | Seasonic 620W M12 |
Mouse | Logitech G502 Proteus Core |
Keyboard | G.Skill KM780R |
Software | Arch Linux + Win10 |
Well, they ran one specific test out of one specific suite. You just can draw a generic conclusion from that.If you read these results, you'd think driver stability was actually a big problem, and it really isn't. It makes you think crashes are happening constantly, and I can say, using cards from both camps on a daily basis, that the reality is crashing is really uncommon. I can't even remember the last crash I had, that's how long ago it happened.
And stability is only part of the picture of a good driver, annoying bugs and how quickly they are fixed, how often they are updated(it can be too often as well as not often enough), etc. And again, as someone that uses drivers from both sides daily, I'm going to say right now they are both about even. I can not honestly say I prefer one over the other as they are today.
On top of that, the test they picked doesn't seem to be marked as very relevant by Microsoft: "To qualify for the Windows Hardware Compatibility Program, your product must pass certain tests using the Windows HLK." All the tested cards qualify (they have WHQL drivers), but all of them fail that test from time to time. So this test isn't one of the tests needed to qualify.
Long story short: "independent" test between two competitors, paid by one of them, looking at one specific aspect - the very definition of throwaway data.