Originally Posted by Slink3Slyde
Please suggest a site thats results are more accurate then?
If I'm understanding what you are saying correctly, youre suggesting they disable features that do not suit one side or the other.
I would say it's more accurate to leave all features enabled in order to give a fairer average of how the cards perform across a wide range of all games and settings. It would be unfair to compare one side with higher settings then another and present a graph of FPS as equal or closer when the image quality is not the same.
Anandtech, Tom's, Guru3d, Hardwarecanucks, etc. They're by no means perfect, but for the majority of time run benchmarks that make sense. Many other sites do great job from time to time.
Features like that shouldn't be disabled, as long as the game is actually playable with them. If it isn't
, you should start disabling or lowering them
to make the game playable, which will often change how the cards stack up, and that's my entire point.
And absolutely, apples-to-apples comparisons are still the most relevant for most people and because of that the cards tested shouldn't be massively apart in performance. Comparing a 750 ti to a, say, 390 is rarely worthwhile as you would usually turn the settings up on the latter as the framerate would typically be well over the refresh rate if the 750 ti was benchmarked at settings that were playable. The same also applies the other way around when the slower cards could be chocked to death by a whole number of things. Due to that comparing cards at entirely different performance ranges is utterly pointless if the other one isn't capable of running the benchmark properly, it is useless information.Edited by Tojara - 1/31/16 at 7:27am