Discussion in 'Videocards - NVIDIA GeForce Drivers Section' started by RealNC, Mar 15, 2021.
cool, so you have nothing to back it up either. I'm honestly not surprised.
In the past I wasn't certain whether or not Digital Foundry went easier than other outlets on the earliest versions of DLSS and the early Raytracing implementations (which were honestly quite terrible in my estimation and going off of other reviews at the time) due to genuine excitement for the tech or for a potentially more nefarious reason. Recently I have noticed the amount of sponsored content they do is quite a lot and i've been disappointed by the large amount of "filler" content they've been putting out (10-15 minutes videos covering a small patch update for example -- I mean, I don't mind the video but there's no reason for these to be longer than 5 minutes when the take away is so straight forward as it is in many cases).
I think it was today or yesterday that they released a video that has sort of convinced me they've become (or perhaps always were) unwilling to give valid criticism where its due -- most likely I think they don't want to "bite the hand that feeds them" or perhaps they are focused on being seen by corps as "ad friendly" so won't be as critical as they should be. So, in that video where they're all doing a video call type deal, they cover Intel's 11th gen CPUs which are frankly quite poor in my estimation -- a regression in core count at the high end and actively worse performance than their predecessors (10th gen) in some games/applications, miniscule gains (we're talking like 3 or 4% iirc) when there are actually gains going off of the Gamer's Nexus and HU tests, and you need a beefy cooler too -- all that to say, this is an extremely disappointing launch from Intel unless you can get the chips for cheap and Intel should feel bad about it and largely deserves the flack they're getting seems to me.
So, my point being I wouldn't expect Digital Foundry to be so positive on those CPUs, but ... they were pretty positive. They more or less claimed that the criticism for 11th gen was overblown and used Microsoft Flight Sim to prove that the CPUs didn't suck (that's one of the games where there is a small improvement over last gen/VS Ryzen 5000), but that's not representative of the norm or other use cases -- you need to do full test suites with more games and applications then compile averages like Gamer's Nexus does for example to get to the bigger picture (which DF didn't do in this case hence their weird conclusion). Anyway, all that to say that though I've historically enjoyed DF's content, they've gotten worse over time seems to me and it does seem possible that they're catering to the tech corps and want to be seen as "ad friendly" so they aren't as critical (or even close to it) as they should be for certain hardware launches. They also totally skipped Ryzen 5000 CPU reviews altogether which is just insane -- why would they not cover those CPUs? It was one of if not the biggest release of that 2020 imo and historically they have done reviews for Ryzen. Just seems really weird/maybe fishy.
As for the whole Playstation VS Xbox bias, I could be forgetting something, but my recollection was just that they as a team clearly appear to prefer linear triple buffer V-Sync to Adaptive V-Sync where Playstation typically uses linear triple buffering while Xbox typically uses Adaptive V-sync -- each approach has merit, but the DF team as a whole seems to really really not like Adaptive V-Sync/not like when tearing creeps in at all -- I would agree that they should be more acknowledging towards the benefits Adaptive V-Sync does have VS linear triple buffering than they are. In "some" cases they have acknowledged when the One X has performed better than the PS4 Pro and in other cases the Playstation versions have genuinely had performance advantage (such as the recent Cyberpunk 1.2 patch on PS4 Pro when compared with the One X version) so it's a bit muddled beyond that seems to me.
When I see someone trying to convince me to buy a product, that pretty much is what the definition of "shill" is. DF is doing exactly that.
Of course, you are not free to do otherwise.
Yeah, DF has lost its integrity when it decided to expand its crew passed Richard and it's really sad.
You even have a couple sites censoring negative comments (e.g. NVIDIA's social handlers) about DF's analysis.
What he means is 'what is asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence'.
...and again, "if you didn't catch us or could prove it, It. Never. Happened!"
Also... again... All it takes is to watch a few of DF's videos to witness their very questionable so-called professional analysis.
So again, you're demanding someone else prove your claim for you because you cannot cite specific evidence supporting your claims.
Seems pretty ignorant to be repeating the same ignorant argument. The only question remaining, is will you repeat it again, or did you learn something from your mistakes?
Shorter: One shot left to prove you're not a troll.
So, we've now resulted into immature name-calling, huh, rather than respectfully to agree to disagree?
I'm done with you.
You are now on hush!
So you've resorted to playing victim instead of learning from your mistakes? How is doing that respectful? Further how is you, repeating the exact same mistake to multiple folks, not trolling?
I think you should reflect and learn from your elders. The quality has gone down here markedly from when I was originally a member here nearly 20 years ago.
it's sad what happened.people act like youtube algorythms tell them to.
Someone likes something I don't. It's clear that he's being paid for that!
So if someone really likes something they cannot promote it?
I went into my reasons in my previous "text wall", but yeah -- I used to like DF more and chalked up their leniency to genuine enthusiasm for tech in the past, but given some recent examples I've noticed, I can't really do that reasonably anymore/I see what you mean. Bums me out as I historically enjoyed Rich's CPU reviews (it's so weird they skipped reviewing Ryzen 5000) and some of Alex's videos like the one's on Motion Blur/V-Sync implementations and the Crysis games (personal favorites of mine) for example, but the ratio of sponsored/filler content and their unwillingness to express criticism where it's clearly deserved (early DLSS and RTX for example or more recently their take on the 11th gen Intel CPUs in their round table video) has become apparent over time.
They can and sometimes I think they do -- I agree it can be difficult to prove explicitly, but I went into some examples in my previous comments where there have been clear times that a product launch was poor or frankly deserved criticism (and broadly received it from other outlets like Gamer's Nexus for example or other groups doing extensive testing) and Digital Foundry seems to be very very careful that they don't say anything too negative about hardware launches no matter how poor they might be in actuality. I enjoy some of their content, but they do seem to spend time worrying/considering the corporate POV seems to me.
DF was one of my favorite channels for awhile -- some of Richard's old CPU reviews were some of my favorites. I'd agree personally for the reasons I've already described the channel's "gone downhill" to some extent.
I can see what you mean, but not really in this case -- one could make the same sort of statement for UserBenchmark or some other outlet that disagrees with the standard findings of other comprehensive testing outlets. I bring up UserBench because my point is, some outlets are just "bad" and don't accurately convey the reality of hardware launches/price to performance and all that correctly so there's more to it than just liking something I don't. Now, I don't personally think DF is nearly as bad as UB, but the point is still relevant that there should be objectivity in hardware reviews where liking something personally/something being good enough to an individual for their use cases is fine, but one should try and be objective in their reviews, avoid cherry picking use cases without more thorough testing (like DF did with Flight Simulator in that call for the 11th gen -- that is honestly some UserBenchmark level garbage seems to me), and communicate product shortcomings to viewers which, for example, DF seems unwilling to do for disappointing hardware launches -- it's been my observation they clearly pull punches they shouldn't I mean so it then becomes a question as to "why are they doing that"
If we're talking about the case of RKL not being called "crap" by DF like some other reviewers did then I actually fully agree with them - RKL isn't "crap", not by any stretch of imagination. It's just okay.
Is it something which people generally expect from Intel's new CPUs? No, far from it. But this doesn't make it "crap".
A simple mind experiment for you: let's say that RKL was AMD's CPU launch and it would land where it did compared to Zen3 which would be Intel's current offering. Would there still be as much reviews labeling this new AMD product "crap"? Or would the tune be considerably different - to a point of people saying that, hey, it's not in a leading position but it's up there, almost on par, while being a bit cheaper - which is good and this is actually a good product? Hmmm, where have I heard this before?.. Oh, right, at Zen1, Zen1+ and Zen2 launches.
Internet has a bad tendency of flocking to some simple hot conclusion. This is also what HUB tried to do with the OP test, blanket calling what they see with three words and providing an explanation which doesn't make any sense but is easy to remember for those who don't know much.
Could it be that...
it's you who's cherry picking 2 or 3 cases in which you disagreed with DF. And then using this cherry picking to conclude that they are shills.
Could it be that... it's you who is cherry picking DF being positive about DLSS 1.0, while forgetting that DF has demonstrated far more downsides of both 1.0 and 2.0 than anyone else ON THE PLANET.
Just remember that there isn't a single big reviewer that wasn't called Nvidia's shill at some point.
It basically means your work is getting noticed.
so what you're saying is, and its really hard not to notice:
No Smoking Pistol
(surely this acc. be some elaborate pun or a study in self-sarcasm.)
the only thing we can say is that Nvidia is totally silent about it. 100% MUTE.