Is NVIDIA cheating to sell graphic cards?

[digitalwanderer]

Originally posted by Sazar
lol... hopefully hosted by someone else this time round so as to keep the forums speedy :D

See? Being popular blows chunks in a whole lot of ways! :p

[deejaya]

http://www.vr-zone.com/Home/news194/news194.htm#3017

I took these results, and worked out some percentage increases, the attachment is a slightly modified table from the link above. I don't think the increases show anything out of the ordinary, but I would like to hear otherwise if someone can prove it. I'm pretty sure the 43.45's aren't questionable, but I don't feel like reading back through 26 pages to see, neither do I have a 5900 Ultra :)

Is it possible to go off the rail in UT2003 Flyby? :confused:

[Sazar]

Originally posted by deejaya
http://www.vr-zone.com/Home/news194/news194.htm#3017

I took these results, and worked out some percentage increases, the attachment is a slightly modified table from the link above. I don't think the increases show anything out of the ordinary, but I would like to hear otherwise if someone can prove it. I'm pretty sure the 43.45's aren't questionable, but I don't feel like reading back through 26 pages to see, neither do I have a 5900 Ultra :)

Is it possible to go off the rail in UT2003 Flyby? :confused:

43.45 AFAIk also had precision questions raised about it...

[Hanners]

Originally posted by deejaya
Is it possible to go off the rail in UT2003 Flyby? :confused:

I believe it is - I seem to remember Brent from [H]ardOCP trying it after the whole '3DMark cheat' news broke, and saw no visual problems when he did so.

[tamattack]

tamattack wrote
1) NV35 on ARB2 path ~ NV35 on NV30 path (hooray if this is true).

StealthHawk replied
Obviously the first logical choice.

I agree, this is obvious and logical to you and me! But when the statement is filtered PR-speak... well, you know what I mean.

tamattack wrote
2) NV35 on ARB2 path ~ NV30 on NV30 path (not as good, but still respectable if this is what they mean).

StealthHawk replied
Not sure what you mean here. nvidia said that NV35 would run the ARB2 path just as fast as it runs the NV30 path. Not that the NV35 would run the ARB2 path just as fast as NV30 runs the NV30 path. Of course the reality is that NV35 will probably run the ARB2 path a little slower than the NV30 path, but who knows for sure. Unforunately the ARB2 path wouldn't run at all on NV35 with the latest drivers.

I just mean that it depends on how the statement was phrased (and I freely admit that I don't know how the statement was phrased). For example, the statement: "the performance seen with the NV30 path will be equalled by the NV35's performance with the ARB2 path" conveniently omits the hardware qualification for the NV30 path performance, so it could the interpreted as "the performance seen with the NV30 path [ie: on the NV30] will be equalled by the NV35's performance with the ARB2 path". Again, marketing-filtered PR-speak could easily distort the true meaning while leaving a false impression.

tamattack wrote
3) DetFX on NV35 special cases DIII ARB2 path and automatically switches back to NV30 path (conspiracy theorist in me...).

StealthHawk replied
A possibility, nvidia would come under heavy criticism if true. The 3dmark03 issues came to light pretty fast, I would expect Doom3 problems would be exposed equally as fast..

True, but they would only come under criticism is they were caught! Even with the 3dmark03 issue, we still see a significant percentage of those polled in this thread who believe that NV was not cheating...

Again, my point is just that it's so hard to take anything they say at face value right now. Which is a sad state of affairs.

[zakelwe]

Originally posted by creedamd
What do you think?

http://www.extremetech.com/article2/0,3973,1086860,00.asp

Is Nvidia cheating to sell "graphic cards?"

Only if you fall into catagory 2 of the following :-

1) A computer geek
2) A computer geek who only uses 3dmark for his source of what to buy ( ie an oxymoron)
3) Joe Sixpack as Ed Stroglio would say.

I'd say 99% of sales fall into catagory 3.

Look at the UK's biggest high street PC company for instance. Go onto their web site and hit the button called :-

COMPUTERS

hit

DESKTOPS


then you get this :-

http://www.pcworld.co.uk/store/martprd.dll/store/pcw_page.jsp?BV_SessionID=@@@@0449280230.105354599 9@@@@&BV_EngineID=ccccadcighfhhidcefecfgmdffgdfgj.0&category_oid=-15243&category_name=%2fDSG%2f01.+Computers%2fDesktop+PCs&page=Category


Now check down the graphics specs for each .. err ...


Ones not listed, ones called " shared graphics " and two are GF4 MX 440 which I have one of, but only because I am a pervert.

No wonder ATI doesn't sell as much as nVidia even though their present line up is better.

So asking whether nVidia is cheating to sell graphics cards is like saying is nvidia making their candle slightly brighter when it is sitting next to a blast furnace.

No, it's more likely that nVidia is showing their contempt of Futuremark to be honest, or it's a bug .

But no, it is not to sell a significant number of extra cards.

Regards

Andy

PS I quite like the thought of " shared graphics ". I'd like to share it with my "integrated" Raid controller. :D

[StealthHawk]

Originally posted by Sazar
43.45 AFAIk also had precision questions raised about it...

That's correct.

[muzz]

I personally don't consider 26% SIGNIFICANT... especially when compared to 67% that believe there is foul play.

26% could just be hardcore fans.
I'll leave it at that.

[hithere]

Is Nvidia cheating to sell video cards? Of course not. They are cheating for altruistic reasons.

[Martrox]

It's official..... nVidia CHEATED!!!!

http://www.futuremark.com/companyinfo/3dmark03_audit_report.pdf

[hithere]

Originally posted by zakelwe
Is Nvidia cheating to sell "graphic cards?"

Only if you fall into catagory 2 of the following :-

1) A computer geek
2) A computer geek who only uses 3dmark for his source of what to buy ( ie an oxymoron)
3) Joe Sixpack as Ed Stroglio would say.

I'd say 99% of sales fall into catagory 3.

Look at the UK's biggest high street PC company for instance. Go onto their web site and hit the button called :-

COMPUTERS

hit

DESKTOPS


then you get this :-

http://www.pcworld.co.uk/store/martprd.dll/store/pcw_page.jsp?BV_SessionID=@@@@0449280230.105354599 9@@@@&BV_EngineID=ccccadcighfhhidcefecfgmdffgdfgj.0&category_oid=-15243&category_name=%2fDSG%2f01.+Computers%2fDesktop+PCs&page=Category


Now check down the graphics specs for each .. err ...


Ones not listed, ones called " shared graphics " and two are GF4 MX 440 which I have one of, but only because I am a pervert.

No wonder ATI doesn't sell as much as nVidia even though their present line up is better.

So asking whether nVidia is cheating to sell graphics cards is like saying is nvidia making their candle slightly brighter when it is sitting next to a blast furnace.

No, it's more likely that nVidia is showing their contempt of Futuremark to be honest, or it's a bug .

But no, it is not to sell a significant number of extra cards.

Regards

Andy

PS I quite like the thought of " shared graphics ". I'd like to share it with my "integrated" Raid controller. :D

So, to sum up:
1. Everyone else is doing it.
2. It barely makes a difference anyway.
3. It's such a small lie compared to all the other ones.

I used to use that logic. Then I got to fourth grade and straightened out.

[AnteP]

Originally posted by Martrox
It's official..... nVidia CHEATED!!!!

http://www.futuremark.com/companyinfo/3dmark03_audit_report.pdf

just got the press release, indeed 3dmark03 scores are lowered a lot by this "cheatless" version

[zakelwe]

Originally posted by hithere
So, to sum up:
1. Everyone else is doing it.
2. It barely makes a difference anyway.
3. It's such a small lie compared to all the other ones.

I used to use that logic. Then I got to fourth grade and straightened out.

That's your summation not mine.

Or at least you indicate you used to use that logic but no longer. What's your new summation ?

Regards

Andy

[Ady]

no suprise at all. Just confirming what we knew. It's nice to see someone actually do something about it though. Kudos to Futuremark. I think a welldone and an apology in some people's cases needs to go to extremetech and possibly B3D aswell for discovering all this. If people keep putting in hard work like this we want have to worry about cheats.

[Hanners]

Can't we just close this thread now with the answer 'Yes'? ;)

[The Baron]

Originally posted by Hanners
Can't we just close this thread now with the answer 'Yes'? ;)
God, I hope so... it's growing at an exponential rate, and it seems like in 3 1/2 minutes, the boards will explode...

[digitalwanderer]

Originally posted by Hanners
Can't we just close this thread now with the answer 'Yes'? ;)

Yay, GREAT idea!

http://208.56.183.227/images/yay.jpg

"The kitty, it's following me!!!"

[creedamd]

I would like to thank my parents, fanatics, nvidiots, all of my friends down street, and the Lord above, for helping me create such a thread, this is my longest thread evar, it compensates well for lack of shortness the Lord gave me, he should try folding this thing in his pants every morning:mad:

:D

Get it together Nvidia. We need you in the game.

[hithere]

You can always tell a 5900 running 3dMark by the shakey "cam," the washed out colors, and the shadows of people in the audience laughing and getting up to go pee.:D

[StealthHawk]

Yes, nvidia was cheating. Case closed. :ORDER:

The new discussion is here: http://www.nvnews.net/vbulletin/showthread.php?s=&threadid=12262