This poll is about ASUS' Mars Dual GTX285 graphics card and where should it be ranked on HWBOT.

This poll was made following the discussion here

 

tl;dr:

Product Page

 

Specs:

 

The GTX 295 and the ASUS MARS do not share the same specifications.

 

The question is where should it be ranked? Because apparently it is not evident and a "big deal". Following are the possible answers:

- Under GTX 295

- Under it's own category (GTX 285 x2)

- Under GTX 285 SLI (2x GTX 285)

Edited March 28, 20178 yr by Christian Ney

if GTX295 = GTX295 then MARS = GTX285x2

if GTX295 = 2x GTX275 then MARS = 2x GTX285

9800GX2 = 9800 GTX SLI (apart from clock speed differences), GTX 295 = GTX 275 SLI, GTX 590 = GTX 580 SLI, GTX 690 = GTX 680 SLI (and so on). yet none of these have been merged. Mars dual 285 should have it's own category, by the same argument that allows splitting of the ones above. Memory size does not matter, however.

 

For the record: I own none of the Ares/Mars cards.

People will moan if we decide to assign it to 285 GTX SLI, where it belongs spec wise. People will also moan if we create an extra category for it. So however we decide, we will do it wrong.

That said, Im kind in favor creating an extra category for it, mainly for honoring the special hardware configuration it has. And like knut said, GTX 295 = GTX 275 SLI, so actually we need to merge those too. Because of the expected riot, we wont do that and instead have to think about a policy for all Dual Cards, too threat them the same. There will be expected problems with detection which we have somehow to deal with.

Pretty sure this Poll's options should be either, its own class, or 285sli, personally it should have its own class.

 

Says it all.

 

Its not important how the GPU look like, its important how the specs are under the hood. If we honor every special pcb design on the planet (so everything different as factory), we really would have a plethora of categories.

9800GX2 = 9800 GTX SLI (apart from clock speed differences), GTX 295 = GTX 275 SLI, GTX 590 = GTX 580 SLI, GTX 690 = GTX 680 SLI (and so on). yet none of these have been merged. Mars dual 285 should have it's own category, by the same argument that allows splitting of the ones above. Memory size does not matter, however.

 

For the record: I own none of the Ares/Mars cards.

 

Lol if you ever benched a dual GPU card, especially on LN2, you would know that it's not the same as 2 seperate cards. Especially when it comes to cooling.... Surely 1 PCIe Slot vs. 2 also makes a difference.

 

I'm amazed in which direction hwbot is heading here. I won't bother to bench for the rankings anymore. If we can't even have stability over these years - where is the point

https://rog.asus.com/articles/overclocking/rog-mars-gtx-295-and-maximus-viii-extreme-gfp-on-3dmark2001-se/

Lol if you ever benched a dual GPU card, especially on LN2, you would know that it's not the same as 2 seperate cards. Especially when it comes to cooling.... Surely 1 PCIe Slot vs. 2 also makes a difference.

 

I'm amazed in which direction hwbot is heading here. I won't bother to bench for the rankings anymore. If we can't even have stability over these years - where is the point

 

You completely missed my point. I was referring to specs, only (apart from clock speeds), and did that to show that putting it with the 285 SLI cards makes no sense (as little sense as tossing it into the 295 category does, as shown per polcy of the GTX 260 192 SP vs 216 SP - if anything this Mars card is a 480sp 295).

Lol if you ever benched a dual GPU card, especially on LN2, you would know that it's not the same as 2 seperate cards. Especially when it comes to cooling.... Surely 1 PCIe Slot vs. 2 also makes a difference.

 

I'm amazed in which direction hwbot is heading here. I won't bother to bench for the rankings anymore. If we can't even have stability over these years - where is the point

 

I don't see the problem, other than lack of points if it were to have its own class but the same applies to cards such as the GTX 590.

And your comment about not benching in rankings anymore, why, because of this??? How do you think others feel when some of the elite have access to the top 1% cpu's and you/they compete technically in the same league. No wonder the extreme overclock scene is in a bad place, you either need to be in a fortunate position within the industry or need to have a large disposable income to compete.

I don't see the problem, other than lack of points if it were to have its own class but the same applies to cards such as the GTX 590.

And your comment about not benching in rankings anymore, why, because of this??? How do you think others feel when some of the elite have access to the top 1% cpu's and you/they compete technically in the same league. No wonder the extreme overclock scene is in a bad place, you either need to be in a fortunate position within the industry or need to have a large disposable income to compete.

 

 

Have access? I bought 4 of those cards over the years because it was ranked here for years in the same category and even made my own LN2 cooler for it.

If you waste your own money and time on something like this you would maybe understand it.

And it's not like you are "born as elite". You have to work your way up by investing a lot of time and money.

The point is, who said we made it right in the first place? The issue simply wasnt spotted for a long time and the question has never been raised. Now people do claim the moderators want to take out the fun of hwbot because they do arbitrary decisions.

So I have to say that things would be way simpler for us by ignoring any issue and just follow GPU-Z exactly. A lot less categories, much less time to moderate for all. Perfect solution?

Well not really, we would just raise again some issues. Like AMD stuff would be completely out than, also some nvidia OEM stuff. On the other hand we would have to create categories for some cards just because someone used an older driver or some special vendor made. Even just looking at deviceID would be not enough for some cards. And actually has again the problem that we depend on how the vendor program their bios. Good example here is GTX 260 192 & 216 Shaders. If we just rely on deviceID, those cards will have to get merged than too (and yes, there are also a1 variants of the 216 shaders chip) and maybe some others as well, because nvidia just didnt feel like to hand out a new deviceID.

Now some have a very good point, and say we get too diverse too many categories, everything gets complicated.

The thing is we have over 4500 CPUs in the db -nobody does complain, but we have just slightly over 1900 GPUs and everyone freaks out for adding 10-20 categories because of hardware which has really different specs (and no, I dont mean we should add things because of a fancy pcb)

Depending on DeviceID, GPU-Z will hinder us from creating a common guideline. Actually we would just do an exception here and exception there, leading to incomprehensible decisions.

 

Actually we have a nice example here:

Thx to picture we see above, Asus says its a Dual GTX 285. Yet their deviceID says GTX 295 (and this is what GPU-Z reports) but why does Asus than tell us its a GTX 285?

Asus really wont let the people believe its a 295 because a 295 was actually a GTX 275 sandwich. So we have exactly the situation mentioned above. Asus engineers recycled the DeviceID, matched it to GTX 295 because it was the best fit. But never mentioned it is a GTX 295. Not in the name not in the specs. But yet GPU-Z tells us its a GTX 295, which is apparently not. So if Roman says the difference between GTX 285 SLI and GTX 295 is measurable than it qualifies for an extra category. (I just doubt, he will be happier)

So, it seems to me that the community have decided to keep these cards in the original category (if by a small margin).

 

In my opinion the "correct" category would be in a category of its own, BUT ONLY IF the card was released today. Since that is not the case and no one has voiced any concern for ten years, it should remain where it has always been. You can't change history!

I agree that if this card was new it should be in its own category, but due to its age, and the nature of how hwbot points work, it doesn't seem like a great idea to move it now in my opinion.

@ Roman, I totally get all your points and I fully understand the commitment involved to potentionally reach the elite, you have and continue to do a great job with regards to the overclocking community. It does not alter the fact that the card in question is in the wrong catagory.

 

Is it possible for the VGA to remain in the same class but separate the points, so you can have a #1 295 and a #1 mars, both being 50 pointers?????

Forget timeframe etc, simple question, is the mars exactly the same as a GTX 295????

is the mars exactly the same as a GTX 295????

 

This is the question, nothing more

A couple of thoughts on this.

For this important questions voting must be set on the main page. And in general, everything regarding the changes to the rules is also on the Main. Why? Because the site is attended by overclockers from different countries and speakers of different languages.

The language of the forum is English, but not all understand it perfectly, so many do not have the ability to constantly read hundreds of changed topics on the forum and besides there is a language barrier. On the main page the chance to read the news or see the voting is many times higher. I accidentally see this topic, but I also consider it important. Overclockers a thousand but just had voted a few dozen. This means that the majority did not notice this topic, and it is impossible to make conclusions on the basis of this vote. There must also be logic.

So, it seems to me that the community have decided to keep these cards in the original category (if by a small margin).

 

In my opinion the "correct" category would be in a category of its own, BUT ONLY IF the card was released today. Since that is not the case and no one has voiced any concern for ten years, it should remain where it has always been. You can't change history!

 

As of right now it's a draw:p

Forget timeframe etc, simple question, is the mars exactly the same as a GTX 295????

 

 

Is a 55nm 9800GT same as 65nm 9800GT? Isn´t a 8800GTX same as 8800Ultra? Isn´t a 7900GTX same as 7900GTO? The difference of a 980TI with hynix mems against Samsung mems ist huge, why are they at same category? We have cards of same name with zero, one or two power plugs, why don´t we divide them, same on reference against custom pcb? If I follow your question I would have to make hundreds of new categories on hardware 10 or 15 years old, because there is always a difference. When we talk about stock performance of cards with same device ID each oc model would have to get its own category, we had discussions like this 10 years ago on 8800GTS G80 already because there were cards with 96 and 112 shaders.

Decisions like this one have to be made at release, and not a decade after cards are used and silent consent already had them accepted for the device id they are listed under.

What is most funny is that we can make poll next year again, because decisions made are obviously only temporarily here..

well, I am quite new about oc and hwbot but it doesn't seem to me that recently have been so many polls about those arguments

 

About GTX 295 I no check so much and long (just first 20 positions of legacy 3d), but I see only one Mars benched...... IMO no one in 10 years had noticed that mars is different to GTX 295 (apart another italian user that wrote about this here der8auer`s 3DMark2001 SE score: 182593 marks with a GeForce GTX 285 x2 11 months ago )

 

if I have to assume that a MARS is a GTX 295 well, life goes on, no war on it... but IMO timeframe is not the key

 

hope my english isn't so bad

I knew i should of made that question more clear! Didn't think it would be long before someone pulled it up what i meant was, the basic specs of the card should be pretty much equivelant, ROPS, shaders, bus width etc. End of the day the Asus site says its a dual 285 and the 295gtx is not that. TBH not fussed where it goes, pretty sure it will stay like it has done for the last 10 years or so.

End of the day you put the card on your rig, power it on and device ID and driver recognition aka Nvidia as well as GPUZ tell you it is a GTX 295. So what is more valid? There will be a decision soon, but one way or the other it is wrong anyway

The same thing goes for the 260's, but because they really aren't the same models despite having the same name, a new category was made when the 216sp edition was released.

 

Lets now dominate the GTX 260 ranking