(06-20-2012, 03:35 PM)gjfklhg Wrote:(06-20-2012, 02:31 PM)lionheart5656 Wrote:(06-19-2012, 10:22 AM)AnyOldName3 Wrote: In theory it means that they are faster. In practice, it's probably barely noticeable, but the placebo effect gives a good impression.
I disagree.
Disagree all you want, but it doesn't really mean anything. Every single benchmark that has been posted has shown them to be almost exactly the same. You would think if so many people are getting as large speedups as they claim, at least one of them would be able to post a benchmark proving it. Apparently not though.
You may want to read over http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confirmation_bias to see why any results you observe without measuring them are completely meaningless.
To be fair I've not seen any definitive benchmarks on either side of the argument. At the end of the day, these are unofficial builds and clearly marked as such. If they work better for some people in some games under some circumstances, why shouldn't they use them? And why is the onus on them to prove it?
If these builds work for some people, do you think that they would really want to spend time and effort to produce a serious benchmark up to your standards given the hostility shown in this thread? I don't think so.
And just for the record, I do occasionally use these builds but I am currently not. I just don't think the atmosphere is very becoming in this thread.
Windows 7 x64
i5 2500K @4.6Ghz
8GB DDR3 1600
Nvidia GTX 660Ti
i5 2500K @4.6Ghz
8GB DDR3 1600
Nvidia GTX 660Ti