Quote:
Originally Posted by Diamondsleeper
I think I need to pull up a couple of those articles and read them to my computer and tell it to stop performing noticeably better in SLI and in RAID 0 so it will stop doing that. Its going against what is being written.
But regardless of that I think you are missing the point. Bascially, if you are able to affored SLI, then sure, do it.
It's like a car. Does a Porche cost 2 or 3 times what a mustang GT cost? Yes. Is the porche faster? Yes. Is it two or three times as fast? Course not.
Is SLI faster than a single card? Yes. Is it two times faster? Course not.
Why do people buy a Porche when they could buy a Mustang? Cause they CAN.
Btw, it's not "minute" gains. Lot of the newer games really benifit from SLI. You don't have to have SLI to run them, but that eye candy sure looks sweet.
|
You are correct and I agree with you. Because if you want a high end car it is going to cost you, just like a high end computer. My issue is that people just think its better when it comes to computers and it really isn't. Bench marks do not really show real world performance in any rate, where a test drive with a car does. I am not saying you shouldn't have bought it, I am just saying I think it is a waste of money. Then again even if I could afford a Porsche I probably wouldn't have one. I would much rather buy more property, but that is a personal preference.
I just think that a lot of marketing and tech jargin is thrown out that really confuses consumers and it really bothers me. The average person and even the average gamer doesn't quite understand them. I am just trying to set a few facts that a lot of companies have skewed with marketing is all.
Quote:
|
Because the users are stubborn and too damn lazy to get used to a new interface and also b/c of ppl like you that blow it's performance issues out of proportion and attack forums with that BS. Bad thing is some ppl are gullible enough to believe you guys instead of learn with good, old-fashioned, first-hand experience. Just my opinion..
|
I am old enough to have been alive and using computers on a regular basis for the release of 3.11, 95 a, 95 b, 95 c, 98, 98se, 2k, ME, XP. Out of all of those releases no company has allowed downgrades back to the earlier version, and with the exception of windows ME, Microsoft has never put out a more buggy OS that is so convoluted and feature stripped that is confuses the consumer into buy the Ultimate edition. We can sit here and argue facts all day long. It is a milestone of vista's stability that companies are allowing users to opt out of Vista installs and get XP.
You're average user, sure may like vista, those on the fence are on the fence, your more advanced user who has used other OSes, will see its flaws and not want to touch it. I have it on a test system, been running it since release. I still have issues with it. I mean it still breaks basic networking, which is completely lame.
I also never blow anything out of proportion, I typically have very straight forward answers with something to at least back it up.