NVIDIA's offical response to Futuremark

[muzz]

Originally posted by bkswaney
OK.... So NV's card cannot do this... hummm maybe they should. ;)

Well, at least FM fixed it. So now the 9800 and 5900 r very close in 3DM03. :)

Fixed what?
It wasn't broken in the first place.
NV was stupid enough to use 32 bit, not the DXstandard....
They have NOONE to blame but themselves for POOR scoring.

But as we see they fixed that now didn't they.:rolleyes:

[Neural]

Ive just been reading over everyones thoughts, so just thought i would mention a few of my own. I know I'm new here so flame away if you like.

First, part of me thinks detecting a benchmark and changing its default paths is "wrong", whether "wrong" means "cheat" or "optimization". I would sincerely like to know if someone here could could explain how nVidia could hide the clip panes in their drivers?

*BUT* there may be another way of looking at this.

I think that whether we like it or not, all the big players in software and hardware think it is acceptable to optimize software code so that certain hardware runs better/faster. Intel has been doing the same thing (working to optimize code for their own products) for years as nVidia is trying to do, and for the same reasons as nVidia. Intel even has specific names for their optimizations, i.e. SSE, SSE2, 3.... and intel would be blown out in most applications by AMD if it werent for these optimizations even in BENCHMARKS where you can bet Intel is making sure their optimized instructions aer implemented. While this does effectively assure that AMD will never control the market, I still find it hard to fault intel for making its products work better as long as windows still looks like windows, and UT2K3 still plays like UT2K3. I notice alot of people using P4's in here so it stands to reason that most feel that this is acceptable.

So would it be the same if nVidia optimized software for their architecture, IF everything still looked and played the same? This all assuming that clip panes are of course not used as that would of course be wrong.

On a personal note, I like my 9500np128 mostly for its better image quality, but 8 pipes at 375/642 also runs games pretty good too. ;) Hooray for competition!

[muzz]

UH OH R3D is buckling under the strain of the ALMIGHTY one too.......

3DFX/FM/rage3d gets hammered as a byproduct.....

[solofly]

It’s good to be an nVidia fanboy... (hehe;)) Lets put it this way, nVidia just saved Futuremark from going under. Who would Ati compete with then, themselves? Yes, yes but I don’t want to hear your crying who is right and who is wrong, pointing fingers and such. If you think life is fair then you’re wrong. The only justice in this world is death and nothing else, rich or poor. This is almost better than a movie...

[muzz]

I don't own Intel products........... I NEVER bought an INTEL product....

And I never will as long as someone else comes up with a halfway decent chipset for AMD.

Geeeeeeeeez I hate 4 in 1 drivers..... but at least their IDE drivers work, unlike a certain co. that will remain nameless.

[solofly]

Originally posted by muzz
I don't own Intel products........... I NEVER bought an INTEL product....

And I never will as long as someone else comes up with a halfway decent chipset for AMD.

Geeeeeeeeez I hate 4 in 1 drivers..... but at least their IDE drivers work, unlike a certain co. that will remain nameless.

Never say never...

[reever2]

Originally posted by Neural
Ive just been reading over everyones thoughts, so just thought i would mention a few of my own. I know I'm new here so flame away if you like.

First, part of me thinks detecting a benchmark and changing its default paths is "wrong", whether "wrong" means "cheat" or "optimization". I would sincerely like to know if someone here could could explain how nVidia could hide the clip panes in their drivers?

*BUT* there may be another way of looking at this.

I think that whether we like it or not, all the big players in software and hardware think it is acceptable to optimize software code so that certain hardware runs better/faster. Intel has been doing the same thing (working to optimize code for their own products) for years as nVidia is trying to do, and for the same reasons as nVidia. Intel even has specific names for their optimizations, i.e. SSE, SSE2, 3.... and intel would be blown out in most applications by AMD if it werent for these optimizations even in BENCHMARKS where you can bet Intel is making sure their optimized instructions aer implemented. While this does effectively assure that AMD will never control the market, I still find it hard to fault intel for making its products work better as long as windows still looks like windows, and UT2K3 still plays like UT2K3. I notice alot of people using P4's in here so it stands to reason that most feel that this is acceptable.

So would it be the same if nVidia optimized software for their architecture, IF everything still looked and played the same? This all assuming that clip panes are of course not used as that would of course be wrong.

On a personal note, I like my 9500np128 mostly for its better image quality, but 8 pipes at 375/642 also runs games pretty good too. ;) Hooray for competition!

But in the realm of processors we KNOW what is being optimized and what is not, we also know that both the processors support and can be optimized for SSE, in benchmarks if one board can be optimized one way, and the other one cant its not a fair benchmark, in games its a different story

[muzz]

Read the post, I am sure you can understand what is being said.
Their practices are very similar imo, like I said I would rip this POS out of my case if there was anything else I hated LESS....

Strongarm tactics blow, and TBO I really am tired of them doing it.
FM's credibility is now destroyed, as I bet the pressure was intense, and unbearable to a small outfit like them.

[c4c]

Originally posted by GlowStick
Actually all 3d video cards do that to an extent, and they also do it for the Z plane, withc is objects behind a wall etc, just not as efficnet as a static one.

But PowerVR's idea is they can do a better job of clipping in real time, and they actually did.

Argh, I knew I wouldn't get away with just posting the short answer

Yes, ATI and nVidia both have methods of hidden surface removal which are an order of magnitude less effective than PowerVR's. Not sure if older cards/other manufacturer are using these methods or not. But, PVR proved that deferred rendering can work, it's a shame they don't release some high-end cards.

As a side note to the whole 3dmark thing - It is a common practice for developers to put in their own clip planes to reduce workload. Obviously, nvidia doing it for them (and only for nvidia cards) is not quite the same :)

[jAkUp]

and also... intel is coming out and saying "this is mmx optimized" or such... nvidia kinda slipped behind futuremarks back... and did their own thing. yes it looks the same... etc. but in real games, there is no such things as clip planes.

now that futuremark are taking offers and such... i dont feel that 3dmark can be credible at all... bitboys could offer a hunk of cash and suddenly have the fastest 3dmark03 card...lol:D

so...... whens aquamark 3 coming out???:)

[Ady]

Neural: Did you really mean to say "how nVidia could hide the clip panes in their drivers?" or how did they put them there? Obviously hiding anything in drivers isn't really an issue. it's not like everyone searches through every file to discover such things. You wouldn't be able to find anything unless you had the source code and you seriously knew what you were looking for anyways.

I don't really know anything of Intel optimizing or whatever. I think it would be obvious though if intel decided to optimize just for a particular synthetic benchmark then that would be completely wrong. Especially if it gave consumers a wrong idea of how a particular CPU performed. Obviously optimizing for an actual program is great. If it runs it runs and if it runs even faster then all the better.

It's different when you are talking graphics though. It's the same if you're talking about a synthetic benchmark, it shouldn't be specifically optimized for to improve it's performance at all. When it comes to games then us consumers deserve to see the game exact as it's developer intended it to be shown. It's not right to be cheated of that right. Cheating in a game benchmark is the worst of them all. Giving us consumers the wrong impression of how a video card will perform in that actual game. I know I sure don't want to be fooled.

[GlowStick]

Originally posted by c4c
Argh, I knew I wouldn't get away with just posting the short answer

Yes, ATI and nVidia both have methods of hidden surface removal which are an order of magnitude less effective than PowerVR's. Not sure if older cards/other manufacturer are using these methods or not. But, PVR proved that deferred rendering can work, it's a shame they don't release some high-end cards.

As a side note to the whole 3dmark thing - It is a common practice for developers to put in their own clip planes to reduce workload. Obviously, nvidia doing it for them (and only for nvidia cards) is not quite the same :)

ah, yeah sorry for that hehe

[Ady]

Originally posted by jAkUp
so...... whens aquamark 3 coming out???:)

The really unfortunate part about this whole thing is that now it doesn't matter. aquamark 3 will be cheated in too. The benchmark is the loser here. The cheater came out on top. Why the blame is put on to the benchmark and not on to the cheater I will never know.

[Scorched 2.0]

Originally posted by solofly
It’s good to be an nVidia fanboy... (hehe;)) Lets put it this way, nVidia just save Futuremark from going under. Who would Ati compete with then, themselves? Yes, yes but I don’t want to hear your crying who is right and who is wrong, pointing fingers and such. If you think life is fair then you’re wrong. The only justice in this world is death and nothing else, rich or poor. This is almost better than a movie...

"POOF! All is now AOK!" -Kyle

:rolleyes:

[Nv40]

Originally posted by gordon151
First dibs on this statement! Yay!

Both ExtremeTech and Beyond3D acknowledged the existence of clip planes because they were the only (i.e. NO HardOCP and Anandtech) sites which had access to the developer versions of 3DMark03. Difference is Beyond3D made a quiet mention of it on their forums and notified Nvidia while ExtremeTech notified Nvidia and probably after no reply wrote a huge article about the ordeal. This was backed up by Futuremark and even in this press release they made an explicit statement regards to the type of cheat that Nvidia used, but not directly commenting onwhat Nvidia did.



the problem is that now Futuremark says NVidia was not cheating
only optimizing. so now who are you going to believe
FUturemark or those sites ? :)


i think the right thing to do is an apology from ET and B3d to Nvidia. :)

[StealthHawk]

Originally posted by Jovi
This you over on rage? Cracked me up. I think both sides of the issue need to lay low and kill the smack talk.

Let's leave what happens on Rage3d over at Rage3d, shall we?

[jAkUp]

Originally posted by Ady
The really unfortunate part about this whole thing is that now it doesn't matter. aquamark 3 will be cheated in too. The benchmark is the loser here. The cheater came out on top. Why the blame is put on to the benchmark and not on to the cheater I will never know.

well... the day aquamark 3 is released there will be no cheats in the current generation of cards and drivers. after that though... the next driver updates, and cards will have cheats.

[Ady]

Originally posted by Scorched 2.0
"POOF! All is now AOK!" -Kyle

:rolleyes:

hmm... "Poof" is slang for Homosexual in this country. :confused:

[jAkUp]

Originally posted by Nv40
the problem is that now Futuremark says NVidia was not cheating
only optimizing. so now who are you going to believe
FUturemark or those sites ? :)

what would you say if you were a small company that was threatened to be put out of business??

[muzz]

Originally posted by Nv40
the problem is that now Futuremark says NVidia was not cheating
only optimizing. so now who are you going to believe
FUturemark or those sites ? :)

Gimme a break with that crap, you know whats going on....... stop being such a drone.

[ChrisRay]

There is something ironic about this to me. a discussion me and digital had on another thread.



Originally posted by digitalwanderer
I think it's time that we take a step back from that question and start questioning the original poster who said there was going to be an announcement...what info was that based on?

Because unless I'm mistaken, it's a bit late in the business day for nVidia to be putting out much news.


Originally posted by ChrisRay
Maybe futuremark and Nvidia kiss and make up? naww has to be somethen dirty...


Maybe I was right?


:angel: :angel:

[Nv40]

Originally posted by jAkUp
well... the day aquamark 3 is released there will be no cheats in the current generation of cards and drivers. after that though... the next driver updates, and cards will have cheats.


If the gaming experience and the IQ is the same for ATI and Nvidia
to the gamer ,and they cant notice diferences between cards
then any cheat ,hack,or optimization is valid.

[Ady]

Originally posted by jAkUp
well... the day aquamark 3 is released there will be no cheats in the current generation of cards and drivers. after that though... the next driver updates, and cards will have cheats.

yeh, that is the most likely scenario. I just wish a company big enough and tough enough to stand up to NV would release a benchmark.

[Scorched 2.0]

Originally posted by Ady
hmm... "Poof" is slang for Homosexual in this country. :confused:

Kyle said it on the www.hardocp.com front page, not me. :angel:

[muzz]

Originally posted by Nv40
If the gaming experience and the IQ is the same for ATI and Nvidia
to the gamer ,and they cant notice diferences between cards
then any cheat ,hack,or optimization is valid.

Get a load of this guy.......:rolleyes:
Cmon NV40 gimme something better than that, I've seen alot of spew come out of those fingers B4.

Don't let me down now.