Do you understand this graph?

[Easy Rhino]

what would be even better is if you made it so that people could turn the graph in real time and zoom in.

 

[yogurt_21]

what would be even better is if you made it so that people could turn the graph in real time and zoom in.

or if you put chicks on the graph


the graph is readable but I like the hoving over differnet aspects to see more specific scores

 

[Easo]

I do understand it, but its imho not understandable at the first glance.

 

[Nick259]

It's very confusing at the start but it starts to make sense after a few mins of observation. It's probably a bit complicated overall though.

 

[Benetanegia]

Thats still sort of the same thing... Still confusing in the middle since the tilt makes it difficult to judge elevation and the relationships between the bars, especially when two bars are on different rows and columns.

Yeah, but IMO at least this way is better. The ideal thing would be if he could add semi-transparent planes representing every 10 fps jump or something, but I have no idea if there is any program capable of doing that.

 

[somebody]

IMO the 3D is too complex.

afw's method is simple and clear and works much better for me.

 

[n-ster]

If not too much work, a simple chart like afw (increments of 50?) AND the graph? I love the graph

 

[mtosev]

i don't like graphs that require me to think.

had to use 3min of brain power to understand it

 

[naoan]

How about an interactive and rotateable 3d flash graph?

 

[Laurijan]

Yes I get it. Its very informative indeed. My eye just needed to adjust the first time i saw it to see the roster on the colored part.

 

[Chew]

At first glance the Red section looks like it is bad or very hot ( still bad ).
I guess for the people who will read all the information will understand it is not bad. But those which are really the majority, who just look at the pictures, will see it as bad. Maybe a colour change would help. Like traffic lights say, green at the top red bottom, just my thought. Simple to understand as is.

 

[_33]

I think the graph is awesome and should stay.

 

[douglatins]

http://img.techpowerup.org/100704/Capture969.jpg

I've been playing around a bit with ideas for future reviews and wondered if people are able to make sense out of the graph above. (not bad if you don't, just want to get an idea)

Yes? No? What could be done to make it easier?

Thats is quite normal for me since i do that all the time with matlab, to study all sorts of crazy shit. But does the effort pays off? That would increase the workload a lot

 

[Bo_Fox]

tested clocks (basically all combinations of 650/900 to 840/1100 with steps of 20):
650/900, 650/920, 650/940, 650/960, 650/980, 650/1000, 650/1020, 650/1040, 650/1060, 650/1080, 650/1100, 670/900, 670/920, 670/940, 670/960, 670/980, 670/1000, 670/1020, 670/1040, 670/1060, 670/1080, 670/1100, 690/900, 690/920, 690/940, 690/900, 690/920, 690/940, 690/960, 690/980, 690/1000, 690/1020, 690/1040, 690/1060, 690/1080, 690/1100, 710/900, 710/920, 710/940, 710/960, 710/980, 710/1000, 710/1020, 710/1040, 710/1060, 710/1080, 710/1100, 730/900, 730/920, 730/940, 730/960, 730/980, 730/1000, 730/1020, 730/1040, 730/1060, 730/1080, 730/1100, 750/900, 750/920, 750/940, 750/960, 750/980, 750/1000, 750/1020, 750/1040, 750/1060, 750/1080, 750/1100, 770/900, 770/920, 770/940, 770/960, 770/980, 770/1000, 770/1020, 770/1040, 770/1060, 770/1080, 770/1100, 790/900, 790/920, 790/940, 790/960, 790/980, 790/1000, 790/1020, 790/1040, 790/1060, 790/1080, 790/1100, 800/900, 800/920, 800/940, 800/960, 800/980, 800/1000, 800/1020, 800/1040, 800/1060, 800/1080, 800/1100, 820/900, 820/920, 820/940, 820/960, 820/980, 820/1000, 820/1020, 820/1040, 820/1060, 820/1080, 820/1100, 840/900, 840/920, 840/940, 840/960, 840/980, 840/1000, 840/1020, 840/1040, 840/1060, 840/1080, 840/1100

Whoa man! That's insane!

Just do it in 50MHz steps at most--20MHz steps give way too much data and makes it too overwhelming/confusing for the reader.

Most readers would not be interested in anything smaller than 50MHz steps anyways. Unless you have all the time in the world, it's hardly worth your precious time, W1z. But I like how you analyzed this with a GTX 460, if it's the right video card! If you really do have the time, do it with more games instead of using 100's of tiny increments (the job would be less mind-numbing for you at least). Some games are much more dependent on memory bandwidth while others are not, so the "increases" could widely vary. That would make it much more meaningful than spending an eternity on ONE game alone.

It's pretty interesting, though, but rather ugly IMHO.. I would've been happy with just three 2-D graphs: one of core overclock with stock memory, one of memory overclock with stock core, and one of both being overclocked in equal number of intervals.

There should also be "percent overclocked" near the end of the x-axis, showing how much % the maximum overclock is over stock. The same goes for the y-axis, where there should be a bold number showing the % of the increase in fps with the maximum overclock.

Good luck.

 

[v12dock]

It took me a whole 5 seconds to figure out how to read it

 

[n-ster]

meh, I prefer 20mhz increments

I would sacrifice 5 sec of my life to get such valuable info

 

[Bo_Fox]

meh, I prefer 20mhz increments

I would sacrifice 5 sec of my life to get such valuable info

Yeah, all of those increments are probably needed to give this 3-D graph some finesse, after all.. but with due respect, why so valuable if it's only like 0.2 fps increase for each increment if it's already more than playable at 90fps to begin with?

 

[HammerON]

Very interesting. It took me a couple seconds to understand what was being charted, but I am normally kind of slow

I think the colors threw me off as I normally associate "red" with bad (don't know why). So maybe a different color scheme would help...

 

[mdsx1950]

Can understand it but its a pain to understand it lol. ^.^

 

[Laurijan]

Very interesting. It took me a couple seconds to understand what was being charted, but I am normally kind of slow

I think the colors threw me off as I normally associate "red" with bad (don't know why). So maybe a different color scheme would help...

Yeah reverse the colors from red-high FPS to red-low FPS

 

[GENTLEMEN]

Like the graph. It shows directly how much OCing affects FPS. Though maybe a smaller MHz jump closer to the limit to show the max reached, and changing the color scheme.