Originally Posted by Penryn
Wow so a bunch of games which rely on physx. Everyone can cherrypick benchmarks. Like I said though, if someone wants to actually give me some real benchmarks, i'd be happy to share.
Oh, heres some from an OCN member: http://www.overclock.net/nvidia/9124...-vs-580-a.html
Well since most of us buy the video cards for games
, why would we buy such high end cards otherwise. I'm still right.
Those specs were Eyefinity vs Surround benchmarks, 90%
or more of us have single
monitors. The rest maybe two or three and about a 1% have six. LOL. That OCN member used an older Nvidia driver vs AMD's current at the time. Not a fair benchmark technically, but that would be a very marginal difference I'm sure anyway in Nvidia's favor. Each driver update brings better gaming results as well as stability and or compatibility. Again marginal so I'd give you that.
Now if your argument would have been running multiple monitors (three or more) the 6970 vs 580 traded wins I would have agreed. AMD's one card runs three monitors vs Nvidia's two per card and AMD does that well. I would not have responded.
Your right on one hand but you used those benchmarks to make a point without being fully honest. ALL those game benchmarks I posted are what most of us are playing on single monitors and the very small percent have six monitors. So most of us don't care otherwise. Also they are real benchmarks.
Finally it's not Nvidia's fault that more and more games are using Physx. It's up to AMD to come out with a way to render those graphics better and push FPS for us better than Nvidia. Just like it's Nvidia's job to find a way to run even three monitors per card and try to do it better.
I did like talking this out with you because I love a good debate so no hard feelings.