Originally Posted by Nevcairiel
You asked for peoples opinions. If you respond to every post with "but your opinion is wrong", then you might as well not ask in the first place.
Who did I say was wrong? I'm defending my opinion... and for the last time, this thread was Assassin's idea... not mine.
Opinions are not facts. Not yours, not anyone elses. Everyone has their own, and it won't change because you quote them some review you dug up somewhere.
I'm not trying to change people's opinion. I'm defending my opinion. Do you understand the difference?
Someone else came up with a review that claimed the opposite, called out ATI/AMD for enabling needless post-processing, and you dismissed it for arbitrary reasons. Oh well.
Oh well nothing. It wasn't a review of the the GPU's picture quality, but a review on transcoding. Did you even look at the article?
The actual reviews for PQ do the comparison on level ground... or at least I'd hope they would.
Several people (including me) have explained how post-processing affects the scores, and how all vendors offer the same post-processing. Yet, for some reason, you still claim AMD is that much superior because they offer post-processing by default. This escapes any logic.
What are you even talking about? You extrapolated a whole lot there.
If you limit yourself to one vendor, its your loss.
I don't. I have a an Intel based system in the bedroom, and I just replaced my Nvidia 240 card in the living room with a Radeon 6770.
Got any more assumptions?
If you insist on using excessive amounts of post-processing, then sure, maybe AMDs post-processing is better (i can't say, I'm not touching that stuff), but if you value pure image quality, the way it was meant to be viewed, there really isn't a difference.
Not according to the HQV scores. There is a difference.
And as for post-processing... what is wrong with denoise, deblocking, etc? This is what most high-end video processors and CE devices do.
"the way it was meant to be viewed..." I love this part too. So you don't do any scaling of non 1080p video? You don't do any cadence detection/pulldown of interlaced material? Do you adjust the resolution and refresh rate for every video? You watch 480i DVD material at 480i resolution/timing?
Cause.... you know... all of that is "processed" by the GPU.
If i ever wanted post-processing, i would actually enable it in the TV, and not be at the mercy of some GPU driver.
Good for you. Not every TV has this capability.