add arrow-down arrow-left arrow-right arrow-up authorcheckmark clipboard combo comment delete discord dots drag-handle dropdown-arrow errorfacebook history inbox instagram issuelink lock markup-bbcode markup-html markup-pcpp markup-cyclingbuilder markup-plain-text markup-reddit menu pin radio-button save search settings share star-empty star-full star-half switch successtag twitch twitter user warningwattage weight youtube

Misinformation regarding GPUBoss

NanoTechno

65 months ago

Usually I don't care about bias benchmark/websites since no single information is logically bias. But my awareness suddenly increased over how much misinformation a website can have.
Now some of us possibly heard the name GPUBoss before, you'll probably heard it through other forums or you just searched google the first benchmark text on your screen, not that I blame you for being lazy. Now my concern is that most of you don't know which information to trust in that disgustingly biased pathetic excuse for a website and just get along with it. I'll admit the design is very attractive, the format itself is very user friendly, and the numbers from the data they collected seems professional and unbiased

Now before I accuse them of anything let me ask you, do you know what an R9 295X2 is? If yes is the answer you should probably skip this paragraph, however if you don't know what it is, in layman terms it's 2 overclocked R9 290X dipped in an AIO watercooler.
In a more specific term Each of the two 6.2 billion-transistor GPUs has all its 2,816 GCN2 stream processors enabled, along with 176 texture memory units, 64 ROPs, and 512-bit wide GDDR5 memory interfaces that each hold 4 GB of memory for a total of 8 GB on the card, which should be more than enough memory for any display configuration you can try out with this card.
Basically a cheaper, OpenCL, red version of the TITAN-Z.

Most of you would know the baseline for single GPUs performance, it's basically like this: GTX 780ti > R9 290X > GTX 780 > R9 290.
So using common sense an R9 295X2 should perform similarly to two GTX 780ti and obliriate a single GTX 780ti in every single test measurable in Le Système international d'unités right?

But at the end of the day, you should take every information you have with a pinch of salt.
I just want to remind you no information is true, anything can be false, anything can be lies, everything can be lies.
That is all.

edit: Yes I use Opera, u wot m8?

Comments

  • 65 months ago
  • 6 points

this page should be mandatory read by everyone. thank you. i was just saying this exact thing to someone the other day. the classic 780 vs 290 but the site used reference designs. so obviously the gap was big. and they still used the price/performance with the mining craze price at 700.

  • 65 months ago
  • 4 points

I also plan to expose them regarding the CPU benchmark they provide, but the "mainstream" community seems to concern more about graphical performance rather than processing performance.

What concern me is that they decline any acquisition of bias. And when demanded to change the biased information, they ignore us. So the solution to this bullshitry is basically by DDOS boycotting them.

  • 65 months ago
  • 1 point

sign me up

  • 46 months ago
  • 1 point

DDOSing boycotting them. xD

  • 45 months ago
  • 1 point

But wait there's more! Cpu boss is just as bad...

[comment deleted]
  • 43 months ago
  • 1 point

Exactly

  • 65 months ago
  • 3 points

This is so obviously BS. I never really liked the way that they present their results (too vague imo) but this just adds fuel to the fire. The sister site CPUBoss is pretty Intel biased too.

  • 53 months ago
  • 2 points

also on CPUBoss it claims that the G3258 is better than even a fx 8320 octa core processor.

http://cpuboss.com/cpus/Intel-Pentium-G3258-vs-AMD-FX-8320

  • 48 months ago
  • 1 point

They have changed the results to make the Fx 8320 the winner, but they did not change the score

[comment deleted by staff]
  • 48 months ago
  • 2 points

Commented on a 5 month old comment, apparently.

  • 48 months ago
  • 1 point

well you know that PCPartPicker is full of old comments

  • 48 months ago
  • 1 point

Yes. But you still commented on one.

  • 43 months ago
  • 1 point

Thats because the igpu boost's the pentium's score. the fx 8320 is about performance-wise with a i5 4690k https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=20QPpIqo-YY

  • 43 months ago
  • 1 point

the fx 8320 is about performance-wise with a i5 4690k

Not when it comes to gaming, even the FX 9590 loses to the i5 4690K in every game.

http://www.anandtech.com/bench/product/1261?vs=1289

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iehrXA3n39c

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pYtDZ2Q4gpc

  • 43 months ago
  • 1 point

in benchmarks that may be the case and i will admit that the i5 is more powerful, but is a gain in fps that is hardly noticeable with the naked eye in most scenarios. Some people are biased towards intel, and same with amd which means a lot of benchmarks and replies could be misleading. Stop arguing about which is more powerful and get a good gpu, thats the only thing that drastically improves performance.

  • 43 months ago
  • 1 point

in benchmarks that may be the case and i will admit that the i5 is more powerful, but is a gain in fps that is hardly noticeable with the naked eye in most scenarios.

That is all going to depend on the game, in some its quite a difference.

Stop arguing about which is more powerful and get a good gpu, thats the only thing that drastically improves performance.

The cpu plays a major effect on performance, in fact it is what determines the FPS at the end of the day....

  • 43 months ago
  • 1 point

I will agree with you that it can depend on the game and optimisation, but in most cases it's the gpu that decides the fps

  • 43 months ago
  • 1 point

10 months ago

  • 65 months ago
  • 1 point

Is GPUBoss using only one GPU of the R9?

  • 65 months ago
  • 1 point

Possibly, but when protested they insist the benchmarks they provide are correct.

  • 65 months ago
  • 1 point

GpuBoss's Front Page

Best Performance Measured using the G3D Mark benchmark from PassMark GeForce GTX 780 Ti 8,986 GeForce GTX TITAN BLACK 8,750 GeForce GTX 780 8,057 GeForce GTX TITAN 8,001 Radeon R9 295X2 7,616

Wut?

  • 54 months ago
  • 1 point

I've also experienced a lot of bias toward Intel CPU's and Nvidia GPU's. I do not really use the sites unless comparing a couple pieces of hardware from the same manufacturer. I went to GPUBoss earlier to compare a Radeon R9 295X2 to a 980 and the results said that the 980 beats the 295X2. I did also read some reviews and read some graphs with some benchmarks. The results based on the reviews were much different than the benchmarks on GPUBoss.

  • 51 months ago
  • 1 point

Lol the 770 is better than the 290 lol says gpuboss

  • 53 months ago
  • 1 point

Hurrah for pointless necrobumps!

  • 48 months ago
  • 1 point

What if you use it to compare intel vs jntel or nvidia vs nvidia?

[comment deleted]
[comment deleted]
  • 43 months ago
  • 1 point

To be fair it does in singlethreaded tasks in certain applications.

[comment deleted by staff]

Sort

add arrow-down arrow-left arrow-right arrow-up authorcheckmark clipboard combo comment delete discord dots drag-handle dropdown-arrow errorfacebook history inbox instagram issuelink lock markup-bbcode markup-html markup-pcpp markup-cyclingbuilder markup-plain-text markup-reddit menu pin radio-button save search settings share star-empty star-full star-half switch successtag twitch twitter user warningwattage weight youtube