And yet again, you have managed to repeat yourself and ignore the reason behind these tests. Until you wake up and realize why the chosen tests are done and why Michael doesn't choose what you desire, you're never going to stop complaining, so you might as well save yourself the effort and stop making your requests. They're not going to happen no matter how much you personally think they should.His reviews are terrible, the only relevant test he's even running is Unigine. Everything else is as crap as a site that runs just crap synthetic benchmarks. It's as stupid as running every test on default settings then wondering where all of those performance enhancements he's reported on for the last few months have gone when he does a review.
....what? Plenty of games with built-in benchmarks are randomized..... I'm sure if you took any of the PTS game tests and did a time-based performance graph, you'd get something pretty bumpy (as long as the test isn't CPU limited). While I personally think FRAPS makes a decent (but not great) performance monitor when you aren't recording, YOU are the one going into irrelevancy here since to my knowledge, something like that doesn't exist for linux. I'd like to be proven wrong. But even if it did exist, it'd still be utterly useless in most games. The average game doesn't have an easily repeatable automated scene that uses in-game graphics. Some games could take as much as 10 minutes just for 1 test.Games with a built in benchmark aren't randomized, FRAPS is used for end users to grab video while they are gaming and see what their current framerate as they are playing. It is not used for benchmarking. Due to the overhead of FRAPS it isn't even useful for settings tweaking.
I would really like to see you spend the time to write ONE article involving all the tests you want to see on phoronix. Prove that you can accurately benchmark everything that you request within a timely manner, with a useful conclusion, and I think you'll have every right to bash the GPU articles on this website. Until you realize the time and effort it takes, you REALLY need to stop whining.
AGAIN, you don't understand the point of the tests. They're not about "perspective buyers" - how have you not understood that yet? How the hell is an article like the one we're posting on supposed to appeal to perspective buyers when it's not even about an individual product? The article is about a milestone in the progression of gallium for AMD GPUs - it has NOTHING to do with buying a new GPU, recommending a GPU, telling users how to tweak their system, and so on. If it was about those things then I would wholeheartedly agree that the article would be a piece of irrelevant crap, plus some additional things that it would need that you didn't mention.Perspective buyers don't care about how a half assed modified decades old game that nobody plays does. They want to know what the software they are actually going to run does. We've al seen Larabel's office setup, would it really kill him to hit start once every 5 mins grab the other mouse and click "Start" on the HL2:LC torture test then take a screenshot of the framerate that it spits out at the end, rinse and repeat a few times and plug the numbers into PTS's spreadsheet so it can make him a graph?
On a side note, unless it's an average, taking a screenshot of the framerate at the end is a painfully inaccurate and nonrepresentational "benchmark". That's like eating a pie and judging how it tastes based on the edge crust.
Yes, we are linux users and hardware geeks. But I would summarize this particular article as a driver review. Linux graphics are not up to par and never have been. Even Nvidia has it's issues. Benchmarking something for the purpose of letting linux users know what to buy is a stupid campaign for obvious reasons. On the other hand, if that was what the articles were about, Michael would probably get a LOT more free hardware. Anyway, Michael has to use default setups because if he uses something too obscure, he has to cover everything that is obscure (which he doesn't have the time for), so, using a more generic setup is easier for people to compare to.We're Linux users and hardware geeks, most of us that are interested in building our own systems don't give 2 shits about the default settings as we know how to change them to get what we want out of our setups, this is the mindset of the vast majority of people that read hardware review sites. If we where going for the default we'd have bought a fucking Dell.
I figured you were going to mention that - of course Google has to test their competitors, but that wasn't my point. I worked for IBM I've seen Dell, HP, and Sun servers in a room dedicated to IBM. You're a little too arrogant for me to get into detail. As for the "beers", I'm not denying those brands are complete crap, but they're still very successful, so I wouldn't say they failed.You're an idiot if you don't think that Google devs don't check their results against the competition for every single product that they make. If they worked in a complete vacuum they'd have failed as badly as "beer" like Miller, Coors and Bud.