Originally Posted by DrFPS
No it did NOT!!! Show me the thread. You just dont get it, do you? Does it say "VALID RESULTS". Look at the date its the very same score you keep whining on. 12-18-2010 3 years ago. Gee. I broke a world record with that score for about 30 min LOl. I might add. Not the first the world record I broke. Its a fact.
Some people you just can't make happy no matter how much proof you bring. What have you brought? Nada, not one thing, other than your poor memory. Just stop OK? This my last post on the subject. At least you didn't call bias this time, so I did make some headway.
I did, above? I linked it, but here
it is again. You're comparing the absolute best GTX 480 score you can find while I was sitting there saying my HD4890s could match a GTX 480 and only proving your bias.
What proof have I bought? Uh...Have you even looked
at my posts or just skimmed them? I've given you Vantage results where the GTX 480 is scoring around or under the HD4890 CFX results, in that other thread there were results showing the HD4890s were faster than a GTX 295 which was around a stock GTX 480 and can find many other results backing up what I said. If I still even had the HD4890s I'd bench them against my GTX 470. (OCed to come as closely to a 480 as I could make it) You on the other hand, have linked a score that is by far an outlier from all other
results and is higher than a stock GTX 590 and nearing a freaking Mars II
in score, without admitting despite plenty of evidence to the contrary that HD4890 CFX can match a GTX 480 at stock/a low OC.
Yes, you are biased and anyone can clearly see that by what you're saying: That a GTX 480, OCed highly enough to get results typical from a GTX 590 (Which, may I remind you, is 2x underclocked GTX 580s) is enough to say that HD4890 CFX cannot beat any GTX 480, despite it having a higher 3DMark Vantage score and cards with similar/lesser performance being around the stock 480.