Discussion in 'Article Discussion' started by arcticstoat, 24 Mar 2011.
Well after reading Bit tech's decision I found it a little weird so I did a bit of research.
I looked at there older reviews of the GTX 295 and 4870 x2, I have to say that he two cards were close but the x2 was much cheaper (almost £100 at time of print). Even then the 295 was only marginally better yet it scored EXACTLY the same as the 295.
Although the x2 was Custom PC's "Crazy But Cool" buy for quite a while, it was only trumped by the HD 5990. So although I do prefer an AMD card I feel that this is a winner as 590's seam to spontaneously combust while being used, for this fact alone the 590 is a steer clear card.
So I think that Bit Tech have a tricky job and they most certainly do write a good review, but even though I sit in both camps as I have computer's with both Nvidia and AMD, I personally feel that the AMD is the clear winner.
HD 6990: £538
Pros: doesn't combust
Cons: Slightly slower minimum FPS
GTX 590: £575
Pros: Slightly Faster (8.6 frames average, these frames cost £37 more)
Cons: Turns computer in to BBQ, Cost's more.
Fair enough, everyone's entitled to an opinion. Just wanted to keep everyone up to date about the GTX 590 kerpolding issue though:
@Pot of Jam
Unfortunately, as of late, it seems BT is more predisposed to liking Nvidia products, whilst barely recommending their AMD alternatives. How this got a recommendation and the 6990 didn't, completely baffles me. But meh.....
It's their opinion.
Why do the fanboys not see that different sites test differently. Take BFBC2 for example at 2560x1600:
Bit-tech test says: We take a 60-second sample of us playing through a section of the Heart of Darkness level with FRAPs, always following the same path and performing the same actions AND they use 16xAF
Whilst Anandtech says: we take a FRAPS run of the jeep chase in the first act, which as an on-rails portion of the game provides very consistent results and a spectacle of explosions, trees, and more AND dont make any mention of AF used
In this test Bit-Tech scored the 590 43fps/70fps (min/avg) and the 6990 42fps/75fps (min/avg)
Anandtech scored the 590 79fps and the 6990 89.7fps although I cannot see if this is a minimum, average or maximum frame rate.
On that evidence comparing the two test you cannot conclusively say which card is better as not only do the benchmarks and testing methodologies differ but Anandtech AFAIK dont mention if AF was applied and more importantly what the minimum framerates were.
Well this is there opinion, and after all that's what Bit Tech, as a reviewing media, are there to give. I brought my 4870 x2 based on there review and recommendation, if I was in a market for a beast of a card then I would still buy a 6990 because I think there much nicer looking cards and from there review I can see that I will save nearly £40 buying the AMD.
Also I had a Sapphire x2 for 18 months, when it went poof they replaced it with a 6970. If Sapphire had changed camps and started selling Nvidia cards I would have had one of them instead.
I do feel that these cards are wasted on lower end monitors though, so I automatically skip the 1050 and 1080 "HD" monitors and go to the real resolutions that these cards will be used on. I personally have 2 x 6870's on a 24" 1920x1200 monitor, and they were never recommended (by anyone!) but for me 2 cards running in Crossfire for (at the time) £175 ponds each was a better deal.
It all comes down to Bang for Buck for me, which in this case is the 6990.
You're not alone in this. It seems a number of reviewers prefer the 6990, though the 590 is quieter. Varied opinions though.
Quite a few reviewers preffered the 590.
The benchmarks don't lie...
It's amazing though. I've been buying custom PC since it's inception and the magazine has always had its thumb up Nvidia's arse. Even when ATI had developed a stonking card, the plebs from the mag would never give it the accreditation it deserved, always comparing it downardly to the green side. I think this lot at custom PC must be on some sort of retainer from Nvidia. They must twist up inside when the reds develop something better than the greens, only to breathe a sigh of relief again when the greens release something to compete with. Don't get me wrong though, I'm not only for the red team, I've had cards from both. It's just this lot from custom PC that piss me off, I'm sick of reading their biased reviews of Nvidia products... Like the chap pointed out earlier, other reviewers have swung the balance around to the red side so it just proves to me how biased this lot of armpits are for Nvidia!!!!!
And you're right, I guess I should stop buying the mag, if they wind me up that much.
More importantly 60 seconds is no where near enough "play time" to get a accurate representation of game performance in either scenario.
5 minutes should be an absolute minimum for doing a proper "gaming" run through. Yes it would take longer but if you only include cards relevant to the target market the overall time to test should be similar.
So now that the flagships are out and a lot of the cards have been released, what's everyone's opinion on who's ahead this generation?
well this coming from an AMD fanboy is odd i know but:
Single GPU High end - Nvidia
mid range - ATI (6950)
low end.. anyones guess... new cards come out every week.
It's weird how the 580 has absolutely no competition.
Then you are either blind, ignorant or stupid, or a combination of the lot.
The way you seem to be so in love with nVidia is just bizarre, haven't you got anything better to do than to love up to a face-less corporation that couldn't care less about your love for them?
2 x 560's or 2 x 6950's for around the same price?
The 580 is definitely the fastest single GPU option though.
Looks like AMD aren't impressed by Nvidia's claim that it now has the fastest card in the world http://blogs.amd.com/play/2011/03/25/2056/
LMAO, and AMD cares for yours? HAHAHAHAHAHAHA
I think you're all three matey
When did I mention AMD?
Are you so deluded that you think anyone who isn't in love with nVidia is automatically an AMD fanboy? Wow...
and when did Snips mention nVidia?
stop with all those fanboy comments. it just shows how low the commenter's IQ can get.
This isn't about being a fanboy, seriously, stop pretending you can't tell what he's up to. He's calling people AMD fanboys for criticising bit-tech's review, and saying they're "leg humping" other websites that show the 6990 being the faster card.
It's extremely obvious that he's all over bit-tech's review simply because they've been overly positive about the GTX590. It's pretty much the only site that suggests the GTX590 is faster than the 6990. He's the one being a fanboy, then calling anyone who questions him an AMD fanboy.
I couldn't care less which card is faster, they're both terribly overpriced, it's just worse for the GTX590, it's slower but more expensive, which just makes it fail, but I'm completely uninterested in either card. I don't understand why bit-tech recommended this while not the 6990, not because I'm some sort of AMD fanboy, but because the 6990 is clearly the better card as nearly every other site shows.
I really can't get my head around the poor selection of games chosen for this review, which isn't doing any favours for them, as it really does just make them looked biased. What ever reasons and excuses they use because of it, my opinion is that the review is substandard and looks biased.
Pointing this out isn't by any means an indication of low intelligence, the fact that you're suggesting that I'm a fanboy for pointing out the crap he's coming out with just makes you ignorant. So really, it's very obvious what snips is up to and other people seem able to see it as well, it has nothing to do on my part with some sort of love for AMD. You see a lot of people who act like this over nVidia, like a certain type of person is attracted to being an nVidia fanboy, and it doesn't make me a fanboy to point this out and call Snips on it.
lol, i got tired of readying the word fanboy the 2nd time on your first line of post.
it's always like this. Bit-tech slate 480 for its heat issues, people were unhappy; when they promote 590 over 6990 for the same reason, other group of people were unhappy.
at the end of the day, there's no point arguing on the internet.
and also, at the end of the day, these multi-GPU setups are also pointless.
Separate names with a comma.