Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Technology Stocks : 3DFX -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Patrick Grinsell who wrote (11011)	3/7/1999 11:41:00 PM
From: Jeffrey P	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 16960

Doubt Sharky... sharkyextreme.com Okay... what are the odds of 3dfx messing up royally and sending out TWO cards that were messed up. I seriously doubt it. Now, 3dfx send him a card and sharky stated : We've got a private utility that checks the clock speed and yet again it was originally clocked at 166MHz. Once again we did some registry tweaking and managed to get the board running at 179MHz and no higher So, he altered the card that he was sent and then it was unstable. Furthermore, how accurate is his private utility? Could the board be running at 183 before he "tweaked" it and thus is probably running somewhere in the 196mhz range? I just really find it odd that a tester would overclock a board to get what he feels is the correct clock speed. Furthermore, shouldn't he just be testing the board as it was sent to him? His is the only review where there has been a problem (that I am aware of). Has sharky adjusted the clock speed of any other card he is testing for a benchmark score (besides specifically testing the overclockability of a chipset)? Maybe i'm seeing something that is not there. But Sharky, like Tom before him, is quickly losing credability in my book. I can understand if he was testing a system to check the clock speed of the processor to see if it is bumped up (ex: stating that you are selling a 350 pent II, and bumping the clock a little so you top benchmarks). But to have a product underclocked (supposedly) from the factory, is it prudent or scientific for that matter to adjust to where it is percieved to be stable? Mr. Wong.. I do have one gripe. Pass a note to the tech guys to FIX the ability to alt-tab out of a glide game if not already done in V3 drivers. I know it was fixed (disabled as a function) in the current banshee drivers but that is NOT a fix, it's more of a half-a$$ patch. This is important. If MICROSOFT supports multitasking, 3dfx should too. I am AMAZED that banshee was certified microsoft hardware with this problem. Jeff P. P.S. one stupid thought... don't you think if 3dfx would have shipped an underclocked product, Rivazone would have posted something about it?