deathjester

Behold the glory that is the Thrustmaster FL16 FLCS. It shall rise again in Star Citizen (if it even still works). To it's left is a duo core e8400 box and a BFG 6800 and a EVGA 8800, but who cares about those. Look at dat joystick. So many buttons. I had good times in Falcon 4.0, flight unlimited, retailiator, jetfighter, with this bad boy.
 

Behold the glory that is the Thrustmaster FL16 FLCS. It shall rise again in Star Citizen (if it even still works). To it's left is a duo core e8400 box and a BFG 6800 and a EVGA 8800, but who cares about those. Look at dat joystick. So many buttons. I had good times in Falcon 4.0, flight unlimited, retailiator, jetfighter, with this bad boy.
 

http://www.dsogaming.com/news/rumor-the-division-has-already-been-downgraded-visually/
 
http://whatifgaming.com/the-division-developer-insider-we-already-downgraded-a-few-things
 
"We really loved the reception to the demo we showed on the PC version at E3. Currently as it stands, there is definitely a lot of push coming from publishers to not make the experience so different on consoles as to alienate people into thinking that next generation is not as powerful as PC. This is probably what happened at Ubisoft Montreal. I think that while making stability changes is definitely important, it does not completely obliterate a lot of enhanced rendering applications.
  Right now we already took out quite a lot of screen space reflections from the game and are working on asset management the best we can given consoles have that great unified memory. Naturally we will also be using online servers and have to produce a synchronization that higher graphics add to the latency so it had to be turned down. To me it still looks good, but not as good as the original reveal. I am sure as we get closer to launch and the actual console versions of the game featuring SD (Snowdrop) that it will start to seem all too obvious to people especially those on PCs. I just wanted to write and let you know that it definitely is not just stability but marketing politics plays into this a lot as well."   UPDATED 2nd Response from The Division Developer: "Truth be told in regards to your question that while ‘Yes’ the lead platform is the PC, we simply cannot have such a big gap. As you know when the first WATCH DOGS Review was published by that one site, Ubisoft called it a “false review” and I am sure everyone can see how bad that sounded when they saw the game did look marginally better than something that was a last generation GTA IV. But no, they will not admit that they practice this or actively downgrade a game. It is much easier to say they removed things for stability which is often a lie as you can tell by the post-issues which are expected in any production we do.   Also to answer your 3rd question, no…they will never fully disclose what was removed from what build as no laws ask them to do so in terms of consumer rights. If we as developers published that information in very real terms for the consumer such as “Replaced particle fog simulation with 2d layer simulation in 3d space, removed particles from all explosions, lowered explosion volume multiplier by 20x, removed X # of trees and civilians, etc.” we would be out of a lot of sales and probably it would actually require too much time to deliver on the current hype that a lot of downgraded games see which look incredible with a vertical slice. I do share this in the hope’s that my colleagues and publishers and a lot of people who make false promises and do demonstrations which wrongfully create too much hype that they cannot deliver on ultimately stop doing such things. I want to see the industry actually move forward and not be so full of itself by promising too much and delivering too little. Regards."   Welp least someone who worked there was honest. Another game I have no interest in purchasing.   

Edited cus I am a dumb ass, regarding mesh quality.
 
Played with this for a few hours now, played with the Ultra texture pack. 4k is perfectly playable and has higher FPS averages than the console port on a R9 290/GTX 970 and possibly a equally powered 3GB card. Will a r9 290 beat a 970 at stock due to memory bandwidth? Maybe, but my r9 290 is stock and you can overclock the 970 quite a bit.
 
Important things.
 
Run the game in windowed borderless (gives you triple buffering). Turn off Vsync, unlock FPS. This increases the smoothness of the game BIG TIME. Locked FPS sucks at this game, vsync sucks in this game as well.
 
Do not run Ultra textures unless you have a 6 GB card, because if you have the GPU power to run at 1440p Ultra, you should be running at 4k anyways through the in game downsampling (put the resolution option to 4k). It simply looks better. Unless you have a 6GB Titan Black simply ignore the Ultra texture pack all together. 4k high > 1440p Ultra. 1440p downsampling probably looks better than 1080p ultra as well.Just pretend this thing doesn't exist unless you have a Titan/Black. You will save yourself a ton of headaches.
 
My Graphics options.
 
Lighting Quality. Maxed.
Mesh Quality. Ultra.            I saw little performance difference on this with high textures. This absolutely killed performance with Ultra Textures.
Motion Blur. Off.
Shadow Quality High, With an OC you might be able to push this.
Texture Filtering Ultra
Texture Quality High
Ambient Occlusion High. Same as Shadow Quality. Might be able to push this with a OC.
Vegetation  Range Ultra
Depth of Field On
Order Independent Transparency on.
Tessellation. On.
 
Game runs like butter on my stock R9 290. A native 4k monitor will of course look better. This game is NOT badly optimized. If Batman is this optimized I will do freakin cartwheels. I did not think it would be smooth under 60 fps but it is. A locked 30/Vsync was a mess though.
 
Screenshot of 4k at 1080p. This is what the game looks like while running around. This is not a depth of field glory shot. Some detail is lost in the pic. 
http://imgur.com/whbV7d6
 
4k Benchmark with these settings. Updated since I changed mesh back to Ultra.
http://imgur.com/WV8dyJB
 
 
Hope it helps. Now that I am done playing with settings I can enjoy the game. If you are running a lower end card, maybe you can use these settings to downsample from 1440p (150 percent in the menu under resolution). Give it a shot and see if you like the image quality more.

You disagree with FPU benchmarks and single core performance in favor of CPU BOSS made up numbers? Cool. Now do me a favor and take a 8350 and an I5 and put them side by side in Lion's arch in Guild Wars 2, or a 25 man raid in WoW. When one gets less then half the FPS? Maybe you will "agree" on real benchmarks and not made up numbers. Better yet? Download the latest Dolphin emulator which tests single core performance about as well as anything out there. Put a I5 at stock and a 8350 at 5ghz side by side. Now tell me why one looks like a slide show and which runs at 60 fps.
 
There is one 8 thread game that people even play (BF4) and it is currently broke as hell and they just delayed Mantle because of it. 1 game out of all the games on PC doesn't = an accurate score, or tell you anything about single core performance. My Haswell can manage most single core performance down clocked and undervolted through management. No one cares about farmville and Chrome. 
 
Here is some proof how utterly ridiculous cpuboss is. An 8350 has about the same core performance as an I7-920 which many people have clocked over 4 ghz (and they started at 2.6). That is a MASSIVE OC. An OC I7-920 matches up damn near exactly with a stock 8350.They rate it a 6.5 OC (LOL).They have the the 8350 which starts at 4ghz and usually ends up around 4.6 which some getting up to a max stable of 5 at a 9.9 overclock. All the while failing to mention the insane amount of power draw you will have at 5.0 ghz which should make the OC value LOW. 
 
http://cpuboss.com/cpus/Intel-Core-i7-920-vs-AMD-FX-8350
 
This one is even funnier. They have the e8400 which is one of the best OC chips of all time at a 5.9 OC. Anyone who had or worked with E's knows most of them did 3.6ghz on STOCK voltage from 3.0. Many did past 4ghz on STOCK voltage. Some e7xxx which were cheap as hell overclocked to 4ghz.
http://cpuboss.com/cpu/Intel-Core2-Duo-E8400
 
CPUboss is owned by a media company who has no reason to want to tell you accurate scores. The scores seem heavily biased in AMD's favor and are downright laughable. At one time they had a 4770 higher rated then a 4770k. You don't put a chip with half the single core performance anywhere near the score of a chip with double the performance in that category. That is a blatant lie and would only be approved by Logan from Tek Syndicate LOL.

Behold the glory that is the Thrustmaster FL16 FLCS. It shall rise again in Star Citizen (if it even still works). To it's left is a duo core e8400 box and a BFG 6800 and a EVGA 8800, but who cares about those. Look at dat joystick. So many buttons. I had good times in Falcon 4.0, flight unlimited, retailiator, jetfighter, with this bad boy.
 

ME 3. Omega DLC. 4k Tex Mod's, 4k downsample Gedosato at 1080. In game AA. 4 k is as high as you can go because UI becomes unreadable past 4k as it is too small.
 

Citadel DLC. 
ME 2. 5.2 k downsample (the one past 4k in Gedosato). No AA. 4k Tex Mod's. UI is completely fine past 4k in 1/2.
 

Mass Effect 1 at 6k bi-cubic downsamle with M.E.U.I.T.M mod and Gedosato. Plays like butter. Mod is seamless. Changed minimum texture settings in the bioengine.ini and shadow settings (can be done with notepad on first game). Located in x:\Users\xxx\Documents\BioWare\Mass Effect\Config (You have to run the game for it to appear). Ini changes further down.
 
Used large address aware on the masseffect.exe before installation.
http://www.techpowerup.com/forums/attachment.php?s=c8cee3b4b64c5e6db630775da1b15062&attachmentid=34392&d=1269231650
 
Downloaded the mod all in one package. Here.
http://www.moddb.com/mods/mass-effect-1-new-texture-updatesimprovements-mod/downloads/meuitm-torrent-link
 
After patching the masseffect.exe with the memory address program, and changing the ini, Installed it, with his installer (which is idiot proof, after you have used large address aware and edited the ini). Works like a charm. Playing through the series again, and I love whoever made this mod. It is like a new game. The ini changes in make every NPC in game use cutscene texture quality. Highly suggest people use this mod, even if they aren't downsampling. Game looks SOO much better and may be the most quality, seamless mod I have ever seen in a game. No long boot time, install was fairly easy. 
 
Ini changes. Us F3 (search) in notepad to find them. You are just going to be changing min, max or value, not entering new lines so this looks harder than it is.
 
TEXTUREGROUP_Character_Diff=(MinLODSize=512,MaxLODSize=512,LODBias=0) TEXTUREGROUP_Character_Norm=(MinLODSize=512,MaxLODSize=512,LODBias=0) TEXTUREGROUP_Character_Spec=(MinLODSize=256,MaxLODSize=256,LODBias=0)   [TextureLODSettings] //TEXTUREGROUP_Character=(MinLODSize=1024,MaxLODSize =4096,LODBias=0) //TEXTUREGROUP_CharacterNormalMap=(MinLODSize=1024,M axLODSize=4096,LODBias=0) //TEXTUREGROUP_Effects=(MinLODSize=1024,MaxLODSize=4 096,LODBias=0) TEXTUREGROUP_LightAndShadowMap=(MinLODSize=1024,Ma xLODSize=4096,LODBias=0) TEXTUREGROUP_RenderTarget=(MinLODSize=8,MaxLODSize =4096,LODBias=0) //TEXTUREGROUP_Skybox=(MinLODSize=1024,MaxLODSize=4096,LODBias=0) //TEXTUREGROUP_UI=(MinLODSize=1024,MaxLODSize=4096,LODBias=0) //TEXTUREGROUP_Vehicle=(MinLODSize=1024,MaxLODSize=4 096,LODBias=0) //TEXTUREGROUP_VehicleNormalMap=(MinLODSize=1024,Max LODSize=4096,LODBias=0) //TEXTUREGROUP_Weapon=(MinLODSize=1024,MaxLODSize=40 96,LODBias=0) //TEXTUREGROUP_WeaponNormalMap=(MinLODSize=1024,MaxL ODSize=4096,LODBias=0)   ShadowFilterRadius=5.000000
DepthBias=0.006000
MinShadowResolution=32
MaxShadowResolution=4096   save in notepad.  
 

You can search some of these people as far as past posts. They literally admitted to being shareholders LOL. 
 
 
 
1) Sites like Tom's Hardware are owned by media groups. "Tom" was a real person. He sold the site a long time ago.
2) Evolve is a massive title which you would expect to see benchmarks everywhere. You don't. You also did not see Ryse benchmarks. Why? AMD killed Nvidia in performance.
3) If someone like Linus called out Game Works he would lose sponsorship money, advertising money, no longer be invited to events where he is given privileged information which he has TALKED ABOUT on his own WAN show, including a recent one. He would also not be given hardware to benchmark which hurts ad revenue, views and profits. That is just the facts. It doesn't make Linus an "evil person", it means he is limited to the criticism he can give and how honest he can be. 
 
It is the same problem that exists in the video game industry and why there is no such thing as a "non biased" tech journalist. The big companies can also blacklist "game journalism" sites if they are over critical. That means those sites fold or lose revenue if they no longer get looks at games for reviews.
 
 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ubisoft
 
Ubisoft as an example. "In the February 2008 issue of Electronic Gaming Monthly, editor-in-chief Dan "Shoe" Hsu asserted that Ubisoft had ceased to provide Ubisoft titles to EGM for coverage purposes as a result of prior critical previews and negative reviews." These companies now have the ability to kill a review site who does not review how they want to review.
 
There is no such thing as honesty or an honest opinion in review industries anymore. If I owned a site like LTT and slammed Game Works and ran benchmarks with tessellation on/off/lowered and provided screenshots compared to downsampling etc? I would never be given early access to Nvidia GPU's again (which would kill my revenue and interest in my site), never be invited to closed door tech demos where I get a nice vacation. They could cripple my business any time they wanted.

You can search some of these people as far as past posts. They literally admitted to being shareholders LOL. 
 
 
 
1) Sites like Tom's Hardware are owned by media groups. "Tom" was a real person. He sold the site a long time ago.
2) Evolve is a massive title which you would expect to see benchmarks everywhere. You don't. You also did not see Ryse benchmarks. Why? AMD killed Nvidia in performance.
3) If someone like Linus called out Game Works he would lose sponsorship money, advertising money, no longer be invited to events where he is given privileged information which he has TALKED ABOUT on his own WAN show, including a recent one. He would also not be given hardware to benchmark which hurts ad revenue, views and profits. That is just the facts. It doesn't make Linus an "evil person", it means he is limited to the criticism he can give and how honest he can be. 
 
It is the same problem that exists in the video game industry and why there is no such thing as a "non biased" tech journalist. The big companies can also blacklist "game journalism" sites if they are over critical. That means those sites fold or lose revenue if they no longer get looks at games for reviews.
 
 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ubisoft
 
Ubisoft as an example. "In the February 2008 issue of Electronic Gaming Monthly, editor-in-chief Dan "Shoe" Hsu asserted that Ubisoft had ceased to provide Ubisoft titles to EGM for coverage purposes as a result of prior critical previews and negative reviews." These companies now have the ability to kill a review site who does not review how they want to review.
 
There is no such thing as honesty or an honest opinion in review industries anymore. If I owned a site like LTT and slammed Game Works and ran benchmarks with tessellation on/off/lowered and provided screenshots compared to downsampling etc? I would never be given early access to Nvidia GPU's again (which would kill my revenue and interest in my site), never be invited to closed door tech demos where I get a nice vacation. They could cripple my business any time they wanted.

Why, because Nvidia is god's gift to PC Gaming? PC Gaming got along fine before Nvidia, and at one time Nvidia was considered the crappy, budget option that fanboys of 3DFX LAUGHED at. PC Gaming could get along fine after, just like they did when 3DFX folded, who was the ONLY option for high end gaming. Nvidia skyrocketed forward after they inherited 3DFX tech, and that was a company that did some really stupid things with their money and also deserved it's fall.
 
We have multiple companies who want to get involved with GPU's. I would rather have some of them involved than Nvidia who is refereed to as the "video card mafia" by people who worked on Steam OS and who does shady crap like Game Works and changing game libraries which can screw over their own past customers not on their newest card series.
 
http://richg42.blogspot.com/2014/05/the-truth-on-opengl-driver-quality.html
 
If Nvidia folded tomorrow, which is NOT going to happen because they are making money like crazy, I would dance on their graves. Why? Because they are one of the most anti consumer, anti competitive companies I have ever seen. Who says they would cut employees from R & D? Maybe they would cut BS buyouts of Game Works titles where they pressure or pay devs to tessellate the hell out of a game for no visual payoff to win benchmarks. Tree tessellation looks WORSE than bump mapping in Far Cry 4 and just screws up the shadows. It was added literally the last day of release and is literally a sucker setting that robs people of performance so they could win benchmarks. Maybe they would stop working on proprietary tech in R & D and instead push forward industry standards. All that would be a good thing.
 
Also Nvidia is holding themselves back, and they are doing that because they can get money for a budget bus on a good GPU core, and then sell a good core on a good bus later to the same people.
 
The new Maxwell's are already good. Their bus however is cheap garbage. Nvidia will just slap that GPU on a decent bus and compete with AMD's next card. 
 
 Who is to say what will happen in 20 years. AMD could be gone, Intel could be gone. Nvidia could be gone. We may be running ARM CPU's with Samsung GPU's or a company may come out of nowhere (like Nvidia did) and be the new "premium video card company". Hopefully they are not as anti consumer and anti competitive...
 
People want to act as if MS and Nvidia ARE PC Gaming. They are both new comers. Their monopolies and idiocy are both new comers. If they both left the PC Gaming industry I would not care one bit. If a trial like this gets Nvidia negative press, along with Game Works (which Nvidia thinks they can control as far as backlash with ad revenue on websites and the ability to blacklist anyone that bad mouths them). GOOD. I literally have zero respect for any "tech journalist" who refused to slam Game Works due to ad revenue, partnerships with Nvidia, being given hardware from Nvidia, taking vacations to demos for Nvidia. All they were doing was protecting their own interests and they are not looking out for the consumer. When I had a GTX 770 I said Game Works was stupid. I had to turn down Tessellation in games with it, because of Nvidia BS.
 
If Nvidia stops their BS, I will be glad to buy another Nvidia card. ATM? I refuse to support this company. I put a GTX 970 in a mini itx I build for my sister and it looks like it will be gimped for 1440 DSR downsampling in future titles (which is why I bought the card in the first place, when I could have bought a 150 dollar R9 280 to run games at 1080p), when I already did not like the companies policies and BS. That is the last Nvidia product I will ever purchase until they change some things. 
 
To put it simply? Nvidia is way too powerful as far as the ability to control press, limit anything negative said about them. Find me Evolve benchmarks. Where are they? Why don't they exist on the big sites like Tom's Hardware? Non existing because a 290x beat a GTX 980 and the GTX 970 performed mediocre.  Same reason Tom's Hardware refused to run an article on the ROPs/Cache/VRAM/Bandwidth until their readers slammed them for a week over it. Our "tech media" is a joke with no balls that only looks out for themselves. Sweclockers (whom I respect) ran benchmarks. Where are the other ones? Some false benchmark from RussianGPU that has inconsistencies like this? Who paid for this benchmark? Those results are literally impossible lol. This entire "benchmark" is a paid for fantasy and was the only "bigger site" to show Nvidia winning on the GPU front. Time to throw away my I7 and go grab a I3...Also I better grab one of those original Bulldozer chips. L O L.
 
http://gamegpu.ru/action-/-fps-/-tps/evolve-test-gpu.html
 

 
 
We would benefit by Nvidia being taken down a notch, just like we benefited by MS having a true challenger with the new OpenGL/Steam OS. Do you think MS would have made Win 10 free, or allowed everyone to be on the same API without competition? Yeah right. To be honest we need Steam OS/next OpenGL to be great just so MS doesn't do something shady like add a subscription fee to Windows 10... 
 
Have fun selling that refusing to give into anti consumer crap from Nvidia will "hurt the consumer" Nvidia shareholders, astroturfers or people that stand to lose personal income due to this. This thread is comedy gold. You are probably looking at about 50 percent shareholders in this thread protecting their investments, and the funny thing is some of these people admitted to owning Nvidia stock in the past and or posted jubilation at Nvidia profit calls.

ME 3. Omega DLC. 4k Tex Mod's, 4k downsample Gedosato at 1080. In game AA. 4 k is as high as you can go because UI becomes unreadable past 4k as it is too small.
 

Citadel DLC. 
ME 2. 5.2 k downsample (the one past 4k in Gedosato). No AA. 4k Tex Mod's. UI is completely fine past 4k in 1/2.
 

That is an "opinion" based on fact and false Nvidia statements about their hardware. If you want a passionate argument on why people should not sue based on opinion? Listen to someone who does promotions for Nvidia, is sponsored by Nvidia or has advertising on their sites from Nvidia, and does not want to lose Nvidia previews on tech (which generate ad revenue), promotional deal revenue, direct ad revenue, vacations/trips/gifts to see things in closed events, free hardware to test and benchmark things.  You know...damn near the entire tech journalism industry. That is why I could care less what any of these people have to say, or care to hear an "opinion" that is nothing more than someone protecting their own interests and a business partner.
 
Now what I can also tell you is that there was communications of these "miscommunications" and these media outlets could also be sued. These media outlets would not withhold information that could vindicate them in that case. There are emails, documents with those specifications from Nvidia employees and that is why the media outlets posted the FALSE specifications on ROP's/Cache to begin with. 
 
Anyways have a nice day.  I see no rational reason, why anyone would protect a company that flat out lied to it's customers about multiple specifications on a product unless they stand to lose something and I really don't feel like arguing with someone who calls facts opinion. 
 
Nvidia lied about specifications. Press and opinion mean nothing in this matter. Lawyers see a bullet proof case and a landslide of money (for them). There WILL be lawsuits. They are simply inevitable. You are asking lawyers to turn down free money and customers who rightly feel slighted to bend over. Not going to happen.

/thread. When you have press correct a lie on two specifications on the card that you gave to press to sell a product? You lied. You can argue ram/bandwidth all you want, but in the end that is now what the lawyers will go after. Why would they bother. Nvidia flat out lied about ROPs/cache and gave that lie to press. That is called false advertising. Book em Danno. 

That is an "opinion" based on fact and false Nvidia statements about their hardware. If you want a passionate argument on why people should not sue based on opinion? Listen to someone who does promotions for Nvidia, is sponsored by Nvidia or has advertising on their sites from Nvidia, and does not want to lose Nvidia previews on tech (which generate ad revenue), promotional deal revenue, direct ad revenue, vacations/trips/gifts to see things in closed events, free hardware to test and benchmark things.  You know...damn near the entire tech journalism industry. That is why I could care less what any of these people have to say, or care to hear an "opinion" that is nothing more than someone protecting their own interests and a business partner.
 
Now what I can also tell you is that there was communications of these "miscommunications" and these media outlets could also be sued. These media outlets would not withhold information that could vindicate them in that case. There are emails, documents with those specifications from Nvidia employees and that is why the media outlets posted the FALSE specifications on ROP's/Cache to begin with. 
 
Anyways have a nice day.  I see no rational reason, why anyone would protect a company that flat out lied to it's customers about multiple specifications on a product unless they stand to lose something and I really don't feel like arguing with someone who calls facts opinion. 
 
Nvidia lied about specifications. Press and opinion mean nothing in this matter. Lawyers see a bullet proof case and a landslide of money (for them). There WILL be lawsuits. They are simply inevitable. You are asking lawyers to turn down free money and customers who rightly feel slighted to bend over. Not going to happen.

A "miscommunication" is not press releases of false specifications. Nvidia is responsible for those statements and provided specifications, and people bought products based on those statements. Just because you CLAIM to have "screwed up" doesn't mean you are not guilty of false advertising.
 
Nvidia claimed two false specifications on the GTX 970 that are not RAM. That is in addition to any statements made where they claimed bandwidth and it being a 4 Gig card which would also be false.
 
If Nvidia wants to blame a low level secretary, and claim stupidity on oversight they can. Doesn't matter. Being incompetent does not absolve guilt. 

/thread. When you have press correct a lie on two specifications on the card that you gave to press to sell a product? You lied. You can argue ram/bandwidth all you want, but in the end that is now what the lawyers will go after. Why would they bother. Nvidia flat out lied about ROPs/cache and gave that lie to press. That is called false advertising. Book em Danno. 

Probably not even that. Maybe a coupon for AC Unity Definitive Edition remake for next, next gen consoles and PC. Now with TXAA 2. Even more blur. Requires Tri SLI GTX 1080's to run at 1080p 30 FPS.

Nvidia sent press specs to press which published them. The ROPs and Cache size were false. 
 
Nvidia claims this was an oversight. Doesn't matter. Still was posted in articles and press that advertised the cards and promoted them. That is false advertising.
 
Ram size could be argued (even though it is shady). False statements about specifications on the cards that was not true cannot. 

A "miscommunication" is not press releases of false specifications. Nvidia is responsible for those statements and provided specifications, and people bought products based on those statements. Just because you CLAIM to have "screwed up" doesn't mean you are not guilty of false advertising.
 
Nvidia claimed two false specifications on the GTX 970 that are not RAM. That is in addition to any statements made where they claimed bandwidth and it being a 4 Gig card which would also be false.
 
If Nvidia wants to blame a low level secretary, and claim stupidity on oversight they can. Doesn't matter. Being incompetent does not absolve guilt. 

Good. Not that the people will ever see a dime for a decade and it will prob be like a shiny nickle, and the only people that will get money is lawyers, but at least it might humble them a bit. Nvidia has some fun in court awaiting them. First Samsung and now this.
 
 
Better to make a company hurt (and bad press will hurt them more than anything) than to keep bending over and saying please sir may I have another. It is more of a middle finger to Nvidia than a "get rich scheme". We all know how this works. The end user will get nothing.
 
 
 
ROP's/Cache size given to press which they posted were false.  Nvidia has also said they "designed the card to work that way" and has so many BS, conflicting statements that this case will win. It will just take a half a decade...

/thread. When you have press correct a lie on two specifications on the card that you gave to press to sell a product? You lied. You can argue ram/bandwidth all you want, but in the end that is now what the lawyers will go after. Why would they bother. Nvidia flat out lied about ROPs/cache and gave that lie to press. That is called false advertising. Book em Danno. 

Probably not even that. Maybe a coupon for AC Unity Definitive Edition remake for next, next gen consoles and PC. Now with TXAA 2. Even more blur. Requires Tri SLI GTX 1080's to run at 1080p 30 FPS.

Probably not even that. Maybe a coupon for AC Unity Definitive Edition remake for next, next gen consoles and PC. Now with TXAA 2. Even more blur. Requires Tri SLI GTX 1080's to run at 1080p 30 FPS.