I agree with what GTA said.
About the best you can do is say "my block is better than commercial block X (that I actually own and have used) by Y degree for my personal system/testbed".
If you're really serious, you can maybe try it out on 3 different systems and see if the differences stand up.
Saying my block is better than block X by Y degrees on my system, therefore it must be better than block A by B degrees based on a test result somewhere else, is a totally flawed assumption to make.
I'm reminded of a reseller closely associated with a certain commerical block maker saying that because they outperform a Silverprop Cyclone 5 by 2 degrees on some test bed, so based on the VR-Zone review of the White Water vs the Cyclone 5 taken on a singular P4 setup (which I suspect has a faulty thermal diode), that their Maze 2 look-alike design is the equal of the White Water, which they had never tested, and then using these claims in marketing material.
"hop-step-jump" comparisons between different systems cannot be made, and really this is the basis of what has sparked off the issue that created this thread.
Everyone has the right to say that the block they made measured on their system is doing wonders. They also have the right to expect to be viewed with a certain amount of disbelief when they start using "hop step jump" comparisons to say they have just invented the best block ever.
|