New Radeon (X1) benchmark screens!!!

[mavis]

Hey everyone!

I just posted this over at Rage3D, but I thought some of you might be interested!!

-------------------------

OMG! I had the most AWESOME morning today. :) :D
My buddy who works for ___ was in town, and paid me a visit, and I got to play a little bit with a new Radeon card!!!

Before anyone asks, I (for OBVIOUS reasons) can't tell who the guy is, because he'd probably get fired, then fly back to Tokyo to KILL me. ;)

Anyway, he was pretty much breathing down my neck the whole time, but he left me alone with the card for about 10 minutes while he took a phone call - so, I used the time wisely and ran 3DMark while he was outside ... :D

screen 1 (http://www.hanners.nildram.co.uk/test_1.jpg)
screen 2 (http://www.hanners.nildram.co.uk/test_2.jpg)

I'm told the clock speeds aren't final, so it may end up being even more powerful than this ... !! Also, I didn't really have a chance to take any pics of the card, but it looked much like the 9800 - red PCB and a power connector, the 4-prong type. The fan was the same old black, cheap looking hs/fan, and there were black heatsinks on the memory (front and back). I didn't notice any major rise in my system temps when I was finished with it, but then again I only had it in my rig for about 45 minutes. So, it didn't seem like it ran especially hot, although it may not have been running long/hard enough to generate significant heat. I just ran 3DMark, and played a little DC .3 ;) ...

Anyway, just thought I'd share. From what I saw, this thing KICKED A$$!! He couldn't tell me when I'd be able to buy one, in fact he didn't even know (or at least, he didn't tell me!) what the name would be, 3DMark said X1 Pro but my friend said that that's just because of the drivers he installed. In any case, I'm really excited about this thing, hopefully it'll be available before the end of the year!!! If this isn't even a *final* version, I can't wait to see what it'll be like once it's all tweaked and perfected!!!

[Uttar]

The 10000 3DMark 2003 score, and now a 19000 score? Damnit... What do you guys have those days :)
Those ones seem even more fake than the last, too. Could be wrong, though - but that'd surprise me. I don't think you could even get that type of GT1 score with any current CPU, even overclocked...


Uttar

[Paul]

http://www.nvnews.net/vbulletin/showthread.php?s=&threadid=10783

Bye.

[mavis]

Originally posted by Uttar
The 10000 3DMark 2003 score, and now a 19000 score? Damnit... What do you guys have those days :)
Those ones seem even more fake than the last, too. Could be wrong, though - but that'd surprise me. I don't think you could even get that type of GT1 score with any current CPU, even overclocked...


Uttar

yeah, my CPU wasn't even overclocked - I have a pretty small rig so I don't overclock anything. I wonder how much better the score would have been if I COULD overclock ... ?

[Nutty]

19,000?!?

BS!

[surfhurleydude]

lol. You can't get that high of a Wings of Fury score on a P4 2.53 CPU.

[Uttar]

Originally posted by surfhurleydude
lol. You can't get that high of a Wings of Fury score on a P4 2.53 CPU.

My point, exactly :)


Uttar

[mavis]

Originally posted by surfhurleydude
lol. You can't get that high of a Wings of Fury score on a P4 2.53 CPU.

Well, I did, obviously ... :D

[BigFish7]

Originally posted by mavis
Well, I did, obviously ... :D

Well i think it's a big fake...
he (the one who says he had it) lies for sure...
Nothing can bring that score, if you think how much graphic card limited 3dmark2003 is.
Think whatkind of card should it be...
Btw it make no sense at all, seeing almost the same PCB as in R9800pro (it should be different core to get that Preformance jump) and it looks the same???(i mean everything should look different hence the new chip, it's true in 99.9% of the cases)
ha? i don't think so...
another fake to the list obviously... :mad: :( :mad: :eek:

[Brick_Top]

I can't wait for tomorrow's 30.000 3dmarks NV6X ultra secretly leaked benchmark

[monkeydust]

Originally posted by Brick_Top
I can't wait for tomorrow's 30.000 3dmarks NV6X ultra secretly leaked benchmark
:clap:

They didn't believe you over at Rage3d so you were hoping that we were more gullible?

[Solomon]

Will this BS ever stop? I explained in another thread how easy it is to fake a fricken screenshot for 3DMark03. Post us a link to the actual server on Futuremark. Otherwise. STOP WASTING OUR TIME!!!

Regards,
D. Solomon Jr.
*********.com

[Brick_Top]

Originally posted by monkeydust
:clap:

They didn't believe you over at Rage3d so you were hoping that we were more gullible?

:confused:

[monkeydust]

Originally posted by Brick_Top
:confused:
The clap was for your comment, Brick_Top.... I was thinking the same thing.

I saw Mavis' post over at Rage3d. The majority of the people didn't believe him. Yet, some say that Mavis is a trustworthy individual. I just find the scores a little hard to swallow.

[Clockwork]

Originally posted by Solomon
Will this BS ever stop? I explained in another thread how easy it is to fake a fricken screenshot for 3DMark03. Post us a link to the actual server on Futuremark. Otherwise. STOP WASTING OUR TIME!!!

Regards,
D. Solomon Jr.
*********.com

Yeah..it's even simpler than we thought.

http://www.rage3d.com/board/showthread.php?s=&postid=1331913550#post1331913550

It was a quick sloppy job just to prove a point. (I wasn't trying to pass this off as legit)

[BigFish7]

It's starting to be a Bad joke, stop it already ...
all these XXXXX numbers, god...
:mad:

[volt]

If someone wanted to make it legit, they would made a little effort and record an mpeg video using those free proggies out there. That's what I would do at least.

[Solomon]

Originally posted by volt
If someone wanted to make it legit, they would made a little effort and record an mpeg video using those free proggies out there. That's what I would do at least.

Or they can just give us the damn link that's supposedly on the Futuremark's server. Is it really that hard for these people too? Which is why all these stupid screenshots are just ridiculous. Plus the X1... LOL! To bad that ATi already has a card call X1, It's called, the FireGL X1... You would think this idiot would at least use a different name. Hehehe.

Regards,
D. Solomon Jr.
*********.com

[GlowStick]

Soloman, after seeing these threads pop up AGAIN and again, i decided to take some initiative.

I busted out VB and Dan Applemans Guide to Visual Basic API. And after about an hour i made a simple VB program that will change the value of any 'label' that has a windows handel.

To get the windows handel there is an app included with Visual Basic that you move your mouse over anything and it spits it out.

Since i am to lazy to make the program find the window handel it self (witch could be done), i just made it to see how easily it could be done. Pritty easy.

Now to fake the 3dmark03 WEB Page shot is even more easy. Just go to any page displaying the information, then save the page locally, and whip out notepad, edit what you want to make it work then take a screenshot, then your done.

Also, did anyone check useing the formula on to the 3dmark03 sore he got? If i were him, id be to lazy to really calc and pull it out of my ass.

[sbp]

http://home.earthlink.net/~sbp777/pics2/99deargod_stop.jpg

[gokickrocks]

Originally posted by GlowStick
Soloman, after seeing these threads pop up AGAIN and again, i decided to take some initiative.

I busted out VB and Dan Applemans Guide to Visual Basic API. And after about an hour i made a simple VB program that will change the value of any 'label' that has a windows handel.

To get the windows handel there is an app included with Visual Basic that you move your mouse over anything and it spits it out.

Since i am to lazy to make the program find the window handel it self (witch could be done), i just made it to see how easily it could be done. Pritty easy.

Now to fake the 3dmark03 WEB Page shot is even more easy. Just go to any page displaying the information, then save the page locally, and whip out notepad, edit what you want to make it work then take a screenshot, then your done.

Also, did anyone check useing the formula on to the 3dmark03 sore he got? If i were him, id be to lazy to really calc and pull it out of my ass.

ewww, vb :eek:

[Ninja Prime]

Fake, although I wonder if a 256mb FireGL X1 clocked at those speeds could get somewhere that high... probably not. As I recall, the stock clock on that card is 325 core and 310 mem, so probably even at 601 core 413 mem it still wouldn't hit that, especially with that CPU. If he had that 3466 Barton that the other BS 10,000 3dmark03 guy had, then I might wonder.

[mavis]

as posted at Rage3d ...

--------------------------------

Hello everyone.

I would like to apologize for my little Radeon "X1" hoax. The entire thing was contrived by me, and chopped in Photoshop - but there was actually a vaild reason for my doing so.

I wish people online would be more skeptical of things like this. It is exceedingly easy to chop pictures and screenshots using common photo-editing software (as my post demonstrates!) and I really wish more people would disregard things like this which cannot (for whatever reason) be proven. My story may have been somewhat convincing, and my chop may have looked legit - but I *am* just another user on a public forum. When something like this comes along, and cannot be confirmed through "reliable" methods, I would think that it should be fairly obvious that it is indeed a fabrication.

I understand that many people thought it was genuine, that was the point of doing a decent job in Photochop - but even "perfect" chops (which mine was not) are still just chops, unless it can be PROVEN otherwise. So, once more - I'm sorry.

I hope you all can understand my motivation in doing this, and I hope that some of you learn to be a little bit more critical of stuff like this in the future.

mavis



ps there were actually several clues for the keen-eyed ;) in my chops, here they are.

1. In the first screenshot, the spacing between the numbers is wrong, the "1" is closer to the "9" than it should be, the difference is noticable without any magnification, when comparing a 19xx score to this 19xxx score.

2. Also in the first screenshot, the word "PRO" is visible behind the active window. Anyone with a Radeon 9700 PRO would see the same thing - yet, "Radeon X1 PRO" contains two less characters, hence all that would be visible would be the "O" in PRO.

3. The "X" in X1, in the second screenshot. I actually colored this one by hand (pixel-by-pixel) but the coloring is a bit off, as I had to guess on how it should be. This is the thing that several people zeroed in on ... lol.

4. The score itself - actually, *all* of the game scores. Although I used the proper formula to obtain the final score, I simply pulled all of the game scores out of thin air. Also, I didn't do the math for fill-rate, it seems I guessed in the right ball-park though. ;)

5. The driver version - someone called me on this one, but yes - the driver version indicated a different operating system than the OS I am actually running (WinXP).

So, there you go. None of the numbers had any scientific base, they were all guesses, except for the final score (which I calculated) ... But there were several hints in the chop, for those so inclined to dissect it. Even IF it had been perfect though, it still should have been obvious as a forgery, for the simple fact that it COULD NOT BE CONFIRMED.

My hope is that this will help some people be more critical the next time someone comes along with a BS story and chopped/fake screenshots.

In any case, I apologize for misleading you all.

[volt]

Yes, thank you. Move along.