- Joined
- Dec 6, 2005
- Messages
- 10,881 (1.62/day)
- Location
- Manchester, NH
System Name | Senile |
---|---|
Processor | I7-4790K@4.8 GHz 24/7 |
Motherboard | MSI Z97-G45 Gaming |
Cooling | Be Quiet Pure Rock Air |
Memory | 16GB 4x4 G.Skill CAS9 2133 Sniper |
Video Card(s) | GIGABYTE Vega 64 |
Storage | Samsung EVO 500GB / 8 Different WDs / QNAP TS-253 8GB NAS with 2x10Tb WD Blue |
Display(s) | 34" LG 34CB88-P 21:9 Curved UltraWide QHD (3440*1440) *FREE_SYNC* |
Case | Rosewill |
Audio Device(s) | Onboard + HD HDMI |
Power Supply | Corsair HX750 |
Mouse | Logitech G5 |
Keyboard | Corsair Strafe RGB & G610 Orion Red |
Software | Win 10 |
Only read a few article from "semiaccurate" and it's obvious they DO exaggerate, but this is interesting none the less:
Headline:
SemiAccurate gets some GTX480 scores
Hot, buggy and far too slow
by Charlie Demerjian
February 20, 2010
http://www.semiaccurate.com/2010/02/20/semiaccurate-gets-some-gtx480-scores/
"The GTX480 with 512 shaders running at full speed, 600Mhz or 625MHz depending on which source, ran on average 5 percent faster than a Cypress HD5870, plus or minus a little bit. The sources were not allowed to test the GTX470, which is likely an admission that it will be slower than the Cypress HD5870."
Headline:
SemiAccurate gets some GTX480 scores
Hot, buggy and far too slow
by Charlie Demerjian
February 20, 2010
http://www.semiaccurate.com/2010/02/20/semiaccurate-gets-some-gtx480-scores/
"The GTX480 with 512 shaders running at full speed, 600Mhz or 625MHz depending on which source, ran on average 5 percent faster than a Cypress HD5870, plus or minus a little bit. The sources were not allowed to test the GTX470, which is likely an admission that it will be slower than the Cypress HD5870."