crackdawg Posted October 29, 2010 Share Posted October 29, 2010 That's not a credible source, your TFR theory has been debunked many times in this thread. Yeah..good luck quoting where and/or even presenting numbers yourself. Saying you're wrong isn't debunking pablo.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stinky12 Posted October 29, 2010 Author Share Posted October 29, 2010 (edited) And while he's at it, he can go bang his head on the pavement for spreading false info and tried desperately to say he's right by going deeper than what he originally said in the first place. GTA IV only needs TFR and VRAM Saying it's false info is saying the OP and all the other benchmarks don't show how this formula is true for GTA: Texture Fill Rate = (# of TMUs) x (Core Clock). There is actually a major technical inconsistency in OP, especially where they under-clock core and TFR stays the same thus defying architectural standards.. Yet another credible source that proves my side and reveals yours to be noob wannabes: http://www.overclock.net/faqs/28489-info-w...-pipelines.html I'll keep proving my side till the mods ban me. I have no problem going other places, I'm not the talentless lurker. Your side presents nothing except repetitive trolling and one liners doing nothing but stating I'm wrong..what little you did I used to show how you are so obviously(even using basic math and well established standards in abstract) that your side should of known long ago you were wrong.. next pointless bitter post please.. From a person who does not know computers, they don't give a f*cking damn about other parts to a video card when you have stated "TFR and VRAM" is all you need when playing GTA IV. Now you go and still claim your right by adding other aspects of the card to prove your point? It's like you telling everyone when buying a car all you need to look at is horse power. People who believe in you goes out and buys a car with the most horse power. So they're all happy and all of a sudden start sh*tting bricks when they're beaten by a car with much less horse power. So that person comes up to you and say "you tell me to buy a car with the most horse power, then why am I getting beaten by that toaster on 4 wheels?!" Now you go on and try to stand by your point by providing a bunch of info which was never mention in the first place. The person says, if horse power isn't the whole factor when getting a fast car, why didn't you just mention the whole thing? Yet you still continue to stand by your points horse power is all you need when buying a fast car. Congratulations on being one of the most misleading members on this forum. As how you become a "software engineer" is still a mystery even Einstein will never figure out. Edited October 30, 2010 by Stinky12 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
viometrix Posted October 30, 2010 Share Posted October 30, 2010 (edited) That's not a credible source, your TFR theory has been debunked many times in this thread. Yeah..good luck quoting where and/or even presenting numbers yourself. Saying you're wrong isn't debunking pablo.. finally someone the people can like even less than me. but to note, every thread you post in you are an expert and right at everything. even im not that good and have been at this 30 years.but seeing you use little names like pablo on someone that isnt even being mean shows who you are. dont be an asshole man, you suck at it and i already own the position. Edited October 30, 2010 by viometrix Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lodis Posted October 30, 2010 Share Posted October 30, 2010 When some one has knowledge and wisdom, they are able to share it with others in order to grow and help others grow. They can challenge others without attacking or name calling. As soon as you do any name calling or insults, it really does not matter what you have to say anymore because no one will be listening after that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
crackdawg Posted October 30, 2010 Share Posted October 30, 2010 (edited) That's not a credible source, your TFR theory has been debunked many times in this thread. Yeah..good luck quoting where and/or even presenting numbers yourself. Saying you're wrong isn't debunking pablo.. finally someone the people can like even less than me. but to note, every thread you post in you are an expert and right at everything. even im not that good and have been at this 30 years.but seeing you use little names like pablo on someone that isnt even being mean shows who you are. dont be an asshole man, you suck at it and i already own the position. Actually in all 3 threads this is fragmented in, it wasn't me who started social based attacks. I made one statement and now it's me who is the social slanderer, when anyone can look through the threads and see literally page after page of social insults aimed directly at me where this is the only one where I responded with a non-technical retort. The only thing that was presented besides slander and trolling I used to help prove it works in my other thread...thanks for that by the way. You've been at this 3 decades and you don't know what a TMU is and why I can use it to prove this..nice going ace...maybe radio shack is hiring. I once met a guy who fixed my gutters who claimed to be a IBM engineer in the seventies. I can be a know it all, cause I bothered to learn stuff.. Edited October 30, 2010 by crackdawg Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mkey82 Posted October 30, 2010 Share Posted October 30, 2010 finally someone the people can like even less than me. lol we hand a bunch of people we liked a lot less then you, don't worry . Hey does anyone remember chngdman? He was awesome, with his claims and scientific explanations of PS3 dominance over any PC. I can be a know it all, cause I bothered to learn stuff.. lol no. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
crackdawg Posted October 30, 2010 Share Posted October 30, 2010 finally someone the people can like even less than me. lol we hand a bunch of people we liked a lot less then you, don't worry . Hey does anyone remember chngdman? He was awesome, with his claims and scientific explanations of PS3 dominance over any PC. I can be a know it all, cause I bothered to learn stuff.. lol no. PS3 is an embedded system with almost no software overhead, and a bus for GPU and XDR RAM that is faster than the latest and announced QPI and HT rates both in specs and in application, ingoing and outgoing. Even ignoring the hardware you're comparing an embedded system to a application system. 360 and ps3 are also both RISC instead of CISC, and PS3 has 8 SIMD cores, 1 software locked one DRM, except in game mode. x360 has 3 cores and a decent bus, plus new ones have on die links. Looks like you and you're pseudo-educated friends made about as much sense on that one as you did this one. I'm still waiting on a response that isn't just some mouth breather telling me I'm stupid for no apparent reason than social slander. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mkey82 Posted October 30, 2010 Share Posted October 30, 2010 Nobody is name calling here but you, crackdawg so try and give it a rest. And it's "your" not "you're", my educated friend. When you insult at least take the time to weed out spelling mistakes. Do keep talking about PS3 performance, it gives me something to laugh about. While you discuss that with yourself, I'll just go on and find the GTAIV PS3 output level details... oh, here they are Playstation 3 settings Resolution 1280 x 720 @ 20 -30 fps Texture Quality Medium Reflection Resolution Medium Water Quality Medium Shadow Quality High Render Quality Low View Distance 21 Detail Distance 10 Vehicle Density 33 Shadow Density does not exist on the PS3 Definition off Vsync off This is only an estimate and IMO the stated draw distance is at least two times too high. Other then that, its gaming performance is very nice indeed. That cell thingy sure kicks ass. 8 SIMD cores you say? Impressive. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
crackdawg Posted October 30, 2010 Share Posted October 30, 2010 Nobody is name calling here but you, crackdawg so try and give it a rest. And it's "your" not "you're", my educated friend. When you insult at least take the time to weed out spelling mistakes. Do keep talking about PS3 performance, it gives me something to laugh about. While you discuss that with yourself, I'll just go on and find the GTAIV PS3 output level details... oh, here they are Playstation 3 settings Resolution 1280 x 720 @ 20 -30 fps Texture Quality Medium Reflection Resolution Medium Water Quality Medium Shadow Quality High Render Quality Low View Distance 21 Detail Distance 10 Vehicle Density 33 Shadow Density does not exist on the PS3 Definition off Vsync off This is only an estimate and IMO the stated draw distance is at least two times too high. Other then that, its gaming performance is very nice indeed. That cell thingy sure kicks ass. 8 SIMD cores you say? Impressive. If I recap it's about 40FPS at 1080p..nice try again..even if I'm off 10FPS. Also you might want to check the ratio of spelling and grammar mistakes in my and your posts before you go grabbing for yet another straw...friend. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mkey82 Posted October 30, 2010 Share Posted October 30, 2010 If I recap it's about 40FPS at 1080p..nice try again..even if I'm off 10FPS. Do you understand what "upscaled" means lol Here is another source to debunk http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/gta-iv-f...-faq-blog-entry Also you might want to check the ratio of spelling and grammar mistakes in my and your posts before you go grabbing for yet another straw...friend. By all means, do check the ratios and post the results, I shall be awaiting them eagerly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
viometrix Posted October 30, 2010 Share Posted October 30, 2010 crackdawgs avatar looks like a hustler on a streetcorner looking to suck guys for cash Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stinky12 Posted November 1, 2010 Author Share Posted November 1, 2010 Got way too much time on my hands... A update to benchmarks that was presented before. This time the graphic driver is updated to Catalyst 10.10 All setting are the exact same as the previous tests Note: AMD has two versions of Catalyst 10.10: the regular and APP edition APP edition just adds support for OpenCL. The benchmarks below uses the regular 10.10 How to read legend? TFR/GPU/RAM e.g. 39.6/550/500 The test runs Total average Catalyst 10.9 to Catalyst 10.10 comparison Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now