NV users, voice your displeasure

[DSC]

I think all Nv users should voice their extreme displeasure at what is going on and what Nvidia is doing recently..... :mad: :mad: :mad:

Although I may be perceived as an "Nvidiot", I don't really blindly defend them. You can see my previous posts here where I heavily slammed the NV30 and the BS that was put out about it. I'm not ignorant of the facts and I don't like 1 bit whats transpiring now. I believe the community has some influence, and it's time that we use it.

Although I don't believe in 3dmark03 being the be-all, end-all, CHEATING and INFLATING the score IS NOT ACCEPTABLE. Dropping IMAGE QUALITY is NOT ACCEPTABLE.

ATM I would like to do this to the ppl at Nvidia.

:nutkick:

WTF are they thinking?!?! :mad:

[jAkUp]

i would also have to say that im really upset by the recent driver events... i cannot believe they would resort to something like this, its wrong, and its false advertising. making someone believe your card is something that is not, is just wrong. i think games is where it all matters, but what nvidia did is just wrong.

i would also call myself and nvidiot, im a huge nvidia fan, i love my nv30 for everything i use it for, but i strongly disagree with the decisions that nvidia is making.

[digitalwanderer]

"Bad nVidia, BAD!!!!!"

[The Baron]

Am I bothered by this? Yes. Am I surprised by it? No, not at all. Everybody cheats at 3DMark--EVERYBODY.

Now, if they were doing this in an actual game, I would feel very differently (and not give any money to NVIDIA for a long time). But nobody's blameless in this. Just one of those things.

[jAkUp]

Originally posted by The Baron
Am I bothered by this? Yes. Am I surprised by it? No, not at all. Everybody cheats at 3DMark--EVERYBODY.

yes alot of people cheat in it... but not to the extent that nvidia did. they did anything and everything to make their product look better than what ati had.

[The Baron]

And so did Trident. And so did SiS.

The only thing that really bothers me is the amount of time they put into getting higher scores in 3Dmark. It's a stupid benchmark and it's generally useless.

[john19055]

I have been very satisfied with my TI4600 runs all the games I have with no problems SOF2, UR2, URT2, NFSHS2, GR, RSC.

[rellingsen]

The 5900 Pro is a damn fast card in the benches. It tops the 9800 Pro in most of them. I'm not real impressed with the AA on the card from the screen shots but that may be fixed. It just happens to lose at 3DMark 2003. Which means they had no choice but to cheat. 3DMark scores to a super advanced user are only slightly helpful in the decision making but thats about it. The whole problem is the masses almost only see 3DMark scores with little other info. If you don't believe me just open any of the computer magazines and take a look at the reviews. I was just flipping thru June's Computer Gaming World and there was a review on the 9800 Pro. The review had almost nothing but the 3DMark 01 and 03 scores. They also partly base the power of their "Gaming Rig" on 3DMark scores. The higher the better right? I'll pretty much bet that the card with the highest scores will sell better if they are the same price.

[Morrow]

The only thing which bothers me at the moment is when the GFFX 5900 Ultra will be available...

[bkswaney]

I'll wait and see if NV address this.
If not I'll be getting a 256mb 9800 Pro
for my next card.

[StealthHawk]

Originally posted by The Baron
Am I bothered by this? Yes. Am I surprised by it? No, not at all. Everybody cheats at 3DMark--EVERYBODY.

Not everybody cheats to the extent of nvidia. Especially after nvidia pimped up the NV3x series so much.

Now, if they were doing this in an actual game, I would feel very differently (and not give any money to NVIDIA for a long time). But nobody's blameless in this. Just one of those things.

They might be. Discussion (http://www.nvnews.net/vbulletin/showthread.php?s=&threadid=12339).

Originally posted by The Baron
And so did Trident. And so did SiS.

The only thing that really bothers me is the amount of time they put into getting higher scores in 3Dmark. It's a stupid benchmark and it's generally useless.

The difference here is that SiS and Trident produce junk 3d hardware. We shouldn't expect or tolerate extreme cheating from an industry leader.

[The Baron]

As soon as it is shown that NVIDIA is cheating (actively cheating) in a game, I will buy no NVIDIA video cards for a year. Yes, even if NV40 is the be-all-end-all, I will refuse to buy it if they are cheating at Splinter Cell.

I'll buy an nForce 2 (or 3) of course, just because I hate Via even more, and Intel is just too expensive for my tastes.

So yeah. I've said that if NVIDIA is cheating at games, I'll stop supporting them. Anyone else care to join in?

[Shaitan]

my displeasure comes from the fact that both card manufacturers are suspect now. I just wanna play games, and use a card I can trust. My ti4600 did awesome for its time span as did my Geforce 1, and ti500, but there are games soon to be here that NEED a next gen card as the ti4600s are not gonna cut it.

nVidia have at least till September as far as I am concerned anyways to release the 5900 Ultra 256s. Of course we will be seeing them in June likely. There are still no games out by that time that require the horsepower yet.

I have both a ti4600, and a 9700 Pro. But I lean towards nVidia.... as I have owned more than a few. Politics AND "I got you last" PR blows dudes. Plain and simple. The games are why we play, not the hardware. As long as the 5900 Ultra plays the games coming soon I want them to at decent fps, thats all I care about.

Cheating on a benchmark? WTF cares? I`ll bet this has been done by all the card devs to some point. The sooner the damn cards are in our systems finally, and the real games are here, the sooner we can get on with the business at hand. = Gaming

[Nv40]

Originally posted by john19055
I have been very satisfied with my TI4600 runs all the games I have with no problems SOF2, UR2, URT2, NFSHS2, GR, RSC.


yes SIr....

im going to say THanks Nvidia for the great JOB you are doing
in Games .my Geforce4 is by far one of the best Purchases ,not only
works great in all my games 99.5% rock solid ,but also in my profesional
3d animation software , and looking foward for the Nv35 or maybe the Nv40 :) j

just add new AA/AF and IQ modes and you will see
the same gamers that complains about NVidia switching to this side.
and dont waste you time in 3dmark's ,but better focus in incoming games like HL2 ,Deux2,Quake4, Doom3,Stalker.
and show everyone that syntetic benchamrks has nothing to do ,with the
reality . and let your high quality products ,and drivers to speak louder in games than anything negative posted in web sites about Nvidia . :)

[sebazve]

cheats all the way...whats the problem with cheating:angel::smoking: :lol2:

[Kruno]

I think you should all STFU and play games. :lol:

I would be surprised if ANY of you play games for more than 5 minutes without bitching about some made up crap. :lol:

[Ghola]

Originally posted by DSC
I think all Nv users should voice their extreme displeasure at what is going on and what Nvidia is doing recently..... :mad: :mad: :mad:

Although I may be perceived as an "Nvidiot", I don't really blindly defend them. You can see my previous posts here where I heavily slammed the NV30 and the BS that was put out about it. I'm not ignorant of the facts and I don't like 1 bit whats transpiring now. I believe the community has some influence, and it's time that we use it.

Although I don't believe in 3dmark03 being the be-all, end-all, CHEATING and INFLATING the score IS NOT ACCEPTABLE. Dropping IMAGE QUALITY is NOT ACCEPTABLE.

ATM I would like to do this to the ppl at Nvidia.

:nutkick:


im sooo sorry!!! ahhg im feel so used and cheap!!.... argh.. ahhhhh.. ok im better thanx

WTF are they thinking?!?! :mad:

[Dazz]

I am alittle pissed off with my card as the more upto date DFX drivers really could not suck anymore for Geforce 4 cards, most games become flaky and games crashing. In Rainbow six 3 if you change your weapon more then 6 times everything becomes blurry etc so i had to go back to 43.51. In Half-life i often get unrecoverble NV loop bug errors no matter what drivers used. Out of all the nVidia cards i have had i thought the best was the Geforce 2 GTS, and i have had 1 nVIDIA card from each generation from the TNT~Geforce 4 (except the Geforce3). I think i am going to change over to ATi now, the only reason i have stuck with nVIDIA for so long is because they 'always' had the fastest cards avilable.

[silence]

i don't play 3Dmark, i play games and as long as they don't scr*w my gaming with their "optimisation" i don't give a rats ass about it. i hear ppl bitch also how Doom III has optimization for NV cards, so what??...if they gonna give better IQ and more fps in game using those optimizations -> I AM HAPPY.

i hear so much....we need to compere apples_to_apples when running bencmarks, but do we really? if there are 2 major manufacturers and they use diff architectures and games can run much better if games are optimized for each of them...WTF??...what's the big deal?? 3Dmark issue is overblown IMO.....ya, they cheated....ya,they prolly did cause too many ppl look at 3Dmark and decides upon it's results....BUT what's the big deal if we have games optimized for OUR cards, ones we payed with OUR cash......

if i drop few hundred $ into NV pocket i really don't mind them forcing developers to optimize for their cards, not really my problem.......as long as i get what i payed for.

other thing is if they decided to sacrifice MY gaming for results, then i have every reason to be pissed, cause they deceived me.

so......as long as this doesn't affect games i play.....i dun mind it.
as soon as it shows that their optimization is scr*wing my gaming...goodbye NV.

[Richard999]

I don't engage in such bash threads. Heck, I don't engage in hardly any threads, yet I do read a lot of them. Here's my take on this.

NVIDIA deserves to be taken to the woodshed for this one. Fudging a few numbers here and there is one thing, but the extent that they cheated in a highly popular benchmark is downright criminal. Granted, my world doesn't revolve around 3dMark. (I've only ran 3dMark2001SE a couple of times to see what it looked like.) However, I do see how it could be regarded as a litmus test for general performance.

It would be like GM sneaking a highly tuned Corvette into a one on one comparo vs a Dodge Viper. Then not telling Car and Driver about the tweaks and letting them draw some bogus conclusions.

One also has to take these matters more seriously when considering the ever increasing cost of this hardware. Nowadays, a highend video card purchase must last a good two years to be a worthwhile purchase (for me.) If deception (of this magnitude) is the basis that I arrive at my decision - I would feel cheated.

"Everyone cheats..."

Two wrongs don't make a right. I don't care what the other companies do. NVIDIA used to produce the best video cards - no questions asked. Now they've stooped to this to somehow try and make up for the SNAFU that was the GFfx 5800 Ultra? Even then, it's not so much the cheating, but the way things were handled when caught. Shame on you NVIDIA.

[evilangel]

Originally posted by silence
i don't play 3Dmark, i play games and as long as they don't scr*w my gaming with their "optimisation" i don't give a rats ass about it. i hear ppl bitch also how Doom III has optimization for NV cards, so what??...if they gonna give better IQ and more fps in game using those optimizations -> I AM HAPPY.

i hear so much....we need to compere apples_to_apples when running bencmarks, but do we really? if there are 2 major manufacturers and they use diff architectures and games can run much better if games are optimized for each of them...WTF??...what's the big deal?? 3Dmark issue is overblown IMO.....ya, they cheated....ya,they prolly did cause too many ppl look at 3Dmark and decides upon it's results....BUT what's the big deal if we have games optimized for OUR cards, ones we payed with OUR cash......

if i drop few hundred $ into NV pocket i really don't mind them forcing developers to optimize for their cards, not really my problem.......as long as i get what i payed for.

other thing is if they decided to sacrifice MY gaming for results, then i have every reason to be pissed, cause they deceived me.

so......as long as this doesn't affect games i play.....i dun mind it.
as soon as it shows that their optimization is scr*wing my gaming...goodbye NV.

I agree.

[Morrow]

You don't get it! optimization... reordering shader programs.... that's all beautiful and true but isn't allowed by FutureMark!

let's see, official FutureMark statement made one week after the release of 3dmark03 concerning driver optimizations:

* A concern has been expressed, that synthetic benchmarks force hardware manufactures to optimize drivers for that specific benchmark (3dmark03).

* This is because ajy specific driver tuning might produce results that are not genuinely comparable.

* Furthermore, 3DMark03 includes advanced analytical tools to enable independent observers to catch any potential questionable driver optimizations. By taking a tough stance against any kind of driver optimization, the media can discourage this practice.

You see, it's not about making optimization which are normally done in games it's about changing the 3dmark code in a way that your hardware can produce higher scores! To summarize the FM's statement: ANY optimization or change in a driver to put your hardware in a better light is not legitimate and by that a cheat.

Of course nvidia cheated a lot more and probably also even a lot "better", ATI is by no means harmless and not unguilty considering this whole 3dmark03 driver optimization/cheat debacle.

Optimizations are legitimate in games but when the purpose of a benchmark is to demonstrate raw performance and not optimized performance of graphiccards, both companies are now guilty of not following the rules. The fact that ATI is still a FM beta member and paying FM and nevertheless cheating on the FM rules, makes the situation certainly not less severe.

Don't come now with, but Tim Sweeney said... What Tim said is true for games but not for 3dmark03! Big difference. Rules are rules


I got this post from another news website and found it very interesting. The poster seems to have some valid points, even though that puts nvidia not in a better light. It's not about that.

He just seems trying to open the eyes of many people which have now been fooled by ATI PR who are trying to keep themselves out of the driver optimizations discussions by saying that they can do driver optimizations and not cheats although FM rules explicitely forbid to use any optimizations for their benches...

In fact, this whole 3dmark03 driver foundings are nothing new and nothing to be surprised of. Cheat/optimizations have been practised by every company since day one.

There is just one thing which confuses me: FM said they want to benchmark standard 3d performance in future games! How can they put "standard code" and "future games" in one sentence since we all know that current games and future games will rely heavyly on driver optimization (especially "the" future game for many years come, namely Doom3). It's all about optimization and vendor specific paths so how can 3dmark03 be a reliable indicator of future games?

All I know now is that I will not use 3dmark to decide whether I'm going to buy an ATI or nvidia graphiccard but I will wait until the next generations games are out (HL2, DX2. Doom3) and then decide which card performs the best... I believe this 3dmark03 bench is as synthetic as it gets...

[Star_Hunter]

Originally posted by Morrow

There is just one thing which confuses me: FM said they want to benchmark standard 3d performance in future games! How can they put "standard code" and "future games" in one sentence since we all know that current games and future games will rely heavyly on driver optimization (especially "the" future game for many years come, namely Doom3). It's all about optimization and vendor specific paths so how can 3dmark03 be a reliable indicator of future games?

All I know now is that I will not use 3dmark to decide whether I'm going to buy an ATI or nvidia graphiccard but I will wait until the next generations games are out (HL2, DX2. Doom3) and then decide which card performs the best... I believe this 3dmark03 bench is as synthetic as it gets...

I wish more people would think like this!!!!

Games Optimize and if your trying to get how good a card is in games then dont you think you should Optimize yourself so you can TRUELY reflect this....Just like the Althon(Ati) can run standard code a lot better the the P4(Nvidia) once you optimize both the most you can the P4 ends up winning by a little the question is WHY IS EVERYONE EVERYWHERE I LOOK AGAINST THIS!!!

[StealthHawk]

Originally posted by Star_Hunter
I wish more people would think like this!!!!

Games Optimize and if your trying to get how good a card is in games then dont you think you should Optimize yourself so you can TRUELY reflect this....Just like the Althon(Ati) can run standard code a lot better the the P4(Nvidia) once you optimize both the most you can the P4 ends up winning by a little the question is WHY IS EVERYONE EVERYWHERE I LOOK AGAINST THIS!!!

GAMES optimize. ie, the coders who write the game are the ones optimizing. nvidia shouldn't be able to "optimize" whatever way they choose, because it is not their place to be doing such "optimization."

Can you not see the difference in reality here? Intel provides a compiler that optimizes for Intel CPUs. nvidia does the same thing with Cg. It is the developer's choice whether to use these optimizing compilers, whether to optimize by hand, or whether to do no specific IHV optimizations. In this case, it would be Futuremark's discretion to optimize or not. Clearly, they choose not to. nvidia has NO RIGHT to "optimize" the way they did.

Oh, and last time I checked, "optimizing" by lowering image quality was called cheating. This is what nvidia did. Not even considering the free cam stuff they did(ie, where image quality is only affected in free cam mode, which isn't a valid optimization anyway, since it ONLY helps time demos), they lowered IQ!
See for yourself (http://www.beyond3d.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=6042). On the other hand, you can see that ATI's optimizations did not affect IQ at all.

You can also see why what nvidia did was horribly wrong by reading my comments in this thread (http://www.nvnews.net/vbulletin/showthread.php?s=&threadid=12354). Essentially, all timedemos and scenes with shaders are now suspect.

[Morrow]

Originally posted by StealthHawk
GAMES optimize. ie, the coders who write the game are the ones optimizing. nvidia shouldn't be able to "optimize" whatever way they choose, because it is not their place to be doing such "optimization."

...nvidia does the same thing with Cg.

no, Cg is not an optimization kit or whatever you want to call it. Far from that. Cg is a tool to develop high-quality shader using high-level language, but you can't optimize your game, read: your games won't run faster when using Cg :)

So, if hardware vendors are not allowed to optimize their drivers (that's what you have been saying in your post), than I'm really wondering what the ATI and nvidia driver coder are doing all day long.. bug fixes? ATI maybe yes

You don't seem to know that ATI and nvidia have both special teams working on the drivers which only purpose is to optimize the drivers for one particular game! That's how it works this day.

anyway, seems that some people are more eagerly trying to get a GF FX 5900 Ultra now than ever before:

e-bay (http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=2731972061&category=40161)

current bid is 900$