Originally Posted by Meremoth
Equally valid? Because 60 FPS full of runt and ghost frames is equal to 60 full frames? Wrong. Because the time variance and frame variance is the same between Crossfire and a single GPU? Wrong. You need to do some more research in frame rating and crossfire and SLI technology, then do a history backlog of all the back and forth, and you'll see how it could be very comparative to the arguments displayed here.
They are valid if you understand what the numbers actually mean and use them as such, but I do not see how this has any relevance to what is being discussed here.
I put scientific in quotes when referring to "scientific people". Didn't think I had to do that for each time I said it, but for you, obviously I had to.
The main point I was trying to make was that science is ever changing, and the results of science today might be changed, altered, and sometimes downright disproved by the science of tomorrow. Capiche? Instead of focusing on that, you decide to whine about arbitrary points that are already implied. Of course subjective tests are an important part of science, did you not even read what I wrote?
Sure, science is not static, but that doesn't suddenly make people hear differences they couldn't hear before.
As for "arbitrary" points, I was just commenting on you whining about "scientific curmudgeons" and that you "can't only rely on what graphs show you" and that sort of fallacies.
"Nothing wrong with science, I'm all for science and graphs, but sometimes you just gotta trust your gut, and in the end, science just might prove your gut right! "
After all, subjective experiences is what leads to scientific tests. Talk about talking out of your behind...
The entire point of my post, which went right over your head, was that subjectivity, that couldn't at the time be backed up by science, was eventually proven correct BY SCIENCE!
Where's the mute button?
Gut feeling, sure, science might just prove your gut wrong and I'd argue most of the time does. That's why we have science in the first place.
I agree with experiences leading to tests. No need to get derogatory.
Maybe you should make the actual point you're trying to make instead of raising "arbitrary" points and using analogies. Would lead to less misunderstandings, which I apologize for if it helps.
Edited by xnor - 6/30/13 at 6:11am