Probably the **DUMBEST** THG I've ever seen...

Status
Not open for further replies.
I

imzjustplayin

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jan 24, 2006
Messages
1,171
http://www.tomshardware.com/2007/01/10/agp-platform-analysis/page4.html#test_system_and_methodology

I swear to god when people were ranting about how bad toms hardware has gotten, I hadn't realized until I stumbled upon this review...


:mad:

Processor(s) AMD Athlon XP 2500+ (Barton)
1.83 GHz, 166 FSB, 512 kB L2 cache
Platform Asus A7N8X-Deluxe (Socket A)
Nvidia Nforce2 Chipset, BIOS 1008
RAM PATRIOT EP
1 x 1024 MB PC3500 (CL2.0-3-2-5)
Hard Drive Western Digital WD1200JB
120 GB, 7,200 RPM, 8 MB cache, UltraATA/100
Networking On-board 100 Mbit Ethernet
Graphics Cards ATI Radeon 9700 PRO (AGP)
128 MB DDR2
Sapphire Radeon X1950 PRO (AGP)
512 MB GDDR3
Powercolor Radeon X1950 PRO (AGP)
256 MB GDDR3
Leadtek Geforce 7600 GT (AGP)
256 MB GDDR3
BFG Geforce 7800 GS (AGP)
256 MB GDDR3
Power Supply Raidmax , ATX, 450 W
System Software & Drivers
OS Microsoft Windows XP Professional 5.10.2600, Service Pack 2
DirectX Version 9.0c (4.09.0000.0904)
Graphics Driver ATI Catalyst 6.12, Nvidia Forceware 93.71



Then his comment about the scores in oblivion:
"Wow. The X1950 PRO cards don't even budge, and maintain the same frame rates with HDR enabled. Obviously there is some serious CPU bottlenecking going on here.

The Geforce cards remain neck and neck, but lose a tiny bit of ground to the X1950 PROs with HDR enabled.

The 9700 PRO is not capable of the method of HDR used in Oblivion, so it is not included in these results."


WOW, no shit dumbass, maybe if you weren't so stupid as to include a 9700pro and Athlon XP in your review, maybe we'd see some more meaningful benchmarks.


So the problems I see are...
1. He uses a fucking Athlon XP, 2500, not even overclocked or anything, DOESN'T EVEN USE DUAL CHANNEL, sure not absolutely necessary on this platform but considering how old it is, you aught to do everything you can to improve performance...
2. He doesn't bring the gainward 7800gs+ into the review but instead a 9700pro, WTF? What happened to the 9800pro? What about a 6800gt?
3. He uses crappy games to review the cards with the only decent ones being Oblivion and Fear, the rest games I'll never play.
4. And finally the best part of it is that he uses a generic 450watt PSU, stupid idiot, even my 9800pro gave me shitty scores when I had that exact same PSU, what do you expect an X1950pro to do??? This review made the X1950pro look like a direct competitor to the 7800GS and 7600GT... :roll; Maybe if you didn't use a severely dated platform and choose a better power supply + games, we'd have garnered something more meaningful from your review assbag....
 
Well it would apply to a few people remember. Alot of people who still use AGP have older system's remember.
 
^^^ Hehehe. I have one system running on the mobo's video set. Of course, it's my Dimension 2400 boxen (FOLDING FOR THE [H]ORDE!) that my grandma uses for e-mail. But yeah, there's absolutely NO reason to benchamark new hardware unless you're going to use a top-of-the-line platform to run it on. If he wanted to use the mid-sub range system as a comparison for ppl that upgrade a part at a time, I can accept that, but not as a baseline platform.
 
I was thinking along the lines of trying to justify his actions since he must have a reason to it.
 
Dude... The whole point of the article is to see how these new AGP cards work on older systems. What the hell are you ranting about again? /bored
 
Eshelon said:
Dude... The whole point of the article is to see how these new AGP cards work on older systems. What the hell are you ranting about again? /bored
Click to expand...

My p4 2.8C is an "old system", there are sckt 754 and 939 based systems with AGP in there that are 'old systems' as well because they've got AGP, wth didn't he benchmark it on those systems???
 
Maybe he missed the title of the article.

AGP Platform Analysis, Part 1: New Cards, Old System
 
Socket A is beyond old....Youd be a fool to buy anything higher than a 9xxx series card with that setup. It would just be wasted money. You could get such a better return on your money by picking up a dirt cheap 939 system that could actually support a X1950pro, etc, to its max.
 
I like when places run benchmarks like this -

I have a socket 939 and socket 478.

Both have AGP.

Both systems are 3.2GHZ

It's important to me to be able to see how the new vid cards stack in my aging setups.

I haven't run into a game yet that isn't playable at 1024x768 with most settings on high (cept shadows) with my P4 3.2 o/ced to 3.6 Ghz.

I don't plan to upgrade my proc yet and something like this would let me know to save my money on a vid card that is bottlenecked by my CPU. I do plan to get one more AGP upgrade before I let go of these systems. Cause the 3.2-3.6 processor at this point is not a limitation to me. My computer sure is fast enough for surfing/word processing etc, and as long as games play smooth at 1024x768 with settings on mid/high I'm golden, and don't want to spend 1000 to overhall my and my wife's setup.
 
Dude, you have so utterly and completely missed the point of the article! Besides that, your language is entirely inappropriate.
 
Yeah why didn't he use MY system, yeah ok I have an XP 2500+ barton chipset, but damnit I have a GeForce 4 ti4200 video card, why not use that as a comparitive result!? I also hvae 2x256mb & 1x512mb of ram too, why not compare it to this?! huh huh huh.

But yeah... you TOTALLY missed the point of the article dude, yes your 2.8Ghz P4 is old, but geeze, they took one particular system to get a comparison, it's not like he took a P3 system or anything.

In this first article, we're going to start by benchmarking all the newest, most powerful AGP cards on an Athlon XP 2500+. This system should be representative of many older Athlon XP systems out there, and would probably give a fair approximation of older Pentium 4 2.5 GHz performance as well.
Click to expand...

TADA!
 
We run into the same problem around here. People do not read the title of the article or the explanation about its format. Sad but true....
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top