Notebookcheck ratings not to be taken seriously?

Not looking good lads. It seems that they've shifted the list around a bit, and now it's really ridiculous.

The class 4 and 3 section in particular. Lots and lots of errors here. See if you can spot them all. A lot of slower cards are being positioned above faster equivalents. For example, a 7950 go being positioned above a 9700m gts. We all know the 9700m is much faster. They are not taking account into memory either. The 6770m and other slower cards are being positioned above a Mobility 5850. That doesn't sound quite right.

Is this list to be taken seriously? What do you all think? I honestly think it's a wreck and is not to be trusted.

 

Firstly it was previously discussed numerous times. Secondly - you can safely open such thread for horsepower rating of car's engines and pretty much everything that can be compared. There are TONS of parameters to be taken into account, other than the raw output and in most cases synthetic benchmarks. Since the manpower required (for exact classification) is ridiculous, you have to go the other way around - general guidance. You can make a raw conclusion whether or not thing A is better than thing B. If you want a detailed answer on what is better and what not, that's the reason to have search engines and multiple tabs in first place.

 

All of the cards you've listed should be moved to a 'Not in production' list, or something similar. They are all outdated and don't really matter except for reference points anymore.
Only the last 3-4 generations should be on the up to date list. It's only a baseline anyway, so the order doesn't really matter as long as the info on the specific card you are looking for is correct.

 

@Templesa I actually agree with you. It's quite a good idea. Still, they probably won't implement it though. The older cards that nobody cares about are flooding the list and making it hard to read. Like you said, only recent cards should be on the list.

 

There's such thing implemented - they are lighter colored in the list.

 

There could be two lists. Old cards and new cards

Every year old card list gets updated with last years cards...included a single amd and NVidia modern card for reference within the old lists in each class and jobs done.

 

They do list the data points that lead them to rank each graphics card where they do. So while there may be some mistakes in ranking, you can see the data they use and draw your own conclusions. Personally, I find it useful that they compare older and newer graphics together, because so few places actually do. I update computers rarely, and it's useful for me to compare my current system with the most recent graphics to determine optimal times to update.

And you can filter Notebook Check's ratings by release date or production status if you only want to see recent graphics.

 

No, there aren't two lists. There is one list with a bunch of grayed out out of production video cards that don't usually matter to the end user when searching for a new PC. There's very little chance that I'm searching for a GT 540m but there's a high chance I'd recently search for an Iris 540 that was recently released... see what I mean? It's not that big a deal now, but Intel's new GPU naming scheme is the same as nVidia's old one. It can't be that hard to make two lists.

 

I find them pretty reliable for newer cards. For older cards, the problem is that their testing doesn't account for driver updates that make a GPU perform better over a course of time.
When i bough my G73JH with mobility 5870, they were more or less correct in their testing and ratings. But now this card is rated far below then what it can actually do. This is because they consider is this card is performing same as what it did 6 years ago while in reality my card performance has increased alot due to newer drivers.

 

You can't expect them to re-run all their tests on out of production hardware or even current hardware just because AMD or nVidia made driver optimizations though, that's a bit ridiculous. Besides that, their review units would have long been sent back to the manufacturer. Blame AMD and nVidia for not knowing how their own hardware works well enough to make decent drivers out or the gate.

 

Oh yes I totally agree. I never said that they should do that. I just wanted to make it clear why their ratings for older cards are off the mark.

I dont think think it is possible for Nvidia/AMD to have 100% optimized drivers that never needs tweaking for future games out of the box. I think they do a fine job. AMD has picked up its games in last few years regarding drivers, but their is still room to improve. I dont blame anybody.

Actually I think nowadays it has become a fashion to blame. People some times try too hard to blame others for their issue instead of focusing on the solution. It is becoming more and more common. Thinking of either its black or it is white. I believe in alot of grey. I believe in circumstances.

I feel that some people think that the only goal of other people is try to find ways to screw them while they themselves just want to survive. I believe that others are also in the same boat and trying to survive. I believe in "agreeing to disagree",

Note: I didnt realize when this reply turned into rant. But i feel i can let it slide this time. If somebody thinks it needs to be taken out, please inform, I will edit it.

 

No you make some good points. I guess I'm a bit tired of AMD performance getting massive gains as time goes on while nVidia comes out of the gate with decent performance, does a few optimizations, and then breaks them when the new generation comes out.

 

I like notebook checks list but can't seem to locate my old nvidia gtx880 desktop card. I had two in sli. I always wondered how those would perform on current gen games.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

You mean the 8800 GTX? Because it wouldn't hold up well at all...

http://gpu.userbenchmark.com/Compare/Nvidia-GTX-970-vs-Nvidia-GeForce-8800-GTX/2577vsm9271

I had an 8800 GTS myself and the Radeon HD 5830 stomped it...