NVIDIA's offical response to Futuremark [Archive] - Page 9

Nv40

06-03-03, 03:29 AM

Originally posted by Zenikase

Microsoft can't force nVidia to do anything, all they do is lay down the guidelines for 3D accelerators to follow. There are only minimums as to how precise they can carry out fragment shader operations, and the manufacturers will have to live with their decisions, be they favorable or not.

oops

you dont know how much power have M$ ,INtel and AMD will never
say something or do something contrary to what MS says.
MS have to much power and control in the COmputer industry.
their OS are the more good looking ,the ones that sells more ,
but the ones with more securitie flaws. why ? youmay ask?
because their first concern is about business.
MS is more a Business company than a technology company.
(this is what the author of my Windows2k server book says :) )
Ask AOL how they won 700millions .. from M$.
what you call "lay down the guidelines" are RULES! nothing more or less. you dont agreed with their rules ,you dont get their aproval for directx9 certification.since there is no other choice or OS ,you cannot sell that hardware . this sounds like a good thing ,compatibility is what matters .
but it kills any posibility for innovations . if absolutely everything in the PC industry needs to be aproved and controlled By MS ,then wait for the times when they start selling computer .(xbox super stations) and you cannot get their OS unless you buy their hardware. ;)

Zenikase

06-03-03, 03:43 AM

So anything designed for Windows is automatically backed by Microsoft and thus inherently evil? Your logic seems a bit flawed, my friend. :p

Besides, the DirectX specification isn't decided upon solely by Microsoft itself. Major players from all parts of the field gather to put their ideas into the next DX standard. They're not going to go ahead and change the specification without the approval of, say, Carmack and Sweeney.

Does OpenGL offer raytracing and realtime radiosity? If so, I wasn't aware. Maybe we really should ditch DirectX. I mean, it's practically useless and obviously just an evil marketing tool from Microsoft.

The bottom line is that DX is a relevant API and will continue to be so for a long time.

EDIT: Also, DirectX is not a type of certification that video cards need to get. It is simply a standard, a set of rules or guidelines designed for compatibility across the entire board. Neither nVidia's nor ATi's top products follow the PS 2.0/3.0 specification word-for-word, but they are still considered DX9-level cards.

SlyBoots

06-03-03, 03:49 AM

ntxawg

06-03-03, 03:51 AM

didnt nvidia originally say it was a driver bug but now they say it was optimization.. sheesh :rolleyes: looks like its time to demand a refund :mad:

Nv40

06-03-03, 03:58 AM

Originally posted by Zenikase
So anything designed for Windows is automatically backed by Microsoft and thus inherently evil? Your logic seems a bit flawed, my friend. :p

Besides, the DirectX specification isn't decided upon solely by Microsoft themselves. They're not going to go ahead and change the specification without the approval of, say, Carmack and Sweeney. Major players from all parts of the field gather to put their ideas into the next DX standard.

Does OpenGL offer raytracing and realtime radiosity? If so, I wasn't aware. Maybe we really should ditch DirectX. I mean, it's practically useless and obviously just an evil marketing tool from Microsoft.

seems you too.. only can see things as black or white.
in no way i suggest they are evil or a good company..
actually i enjoy their latest OS products ;)
they are simply a Business company looking for more money.
like every other one. THe problem is when that company controls
at all the time the direction of the technology . a company with no
experience in graphics hardware and not enough experience in game development,controlling the direction of graphics in the pc industry.
for one reasons those developers you mention support OPENGL too.
for one reason every day more and more developers support LInux and OPenGL. innovations can only exist when standars are flexible enough
and when they benefits the majority .

Matthyahuw

06-03-03, 04:03 AM

Originally posted by nV News Forum Poster
blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah
yadda yadda yadda...badda-bing badda-boom

MrWho

06-03-03, 04:14 AM

Heck, I'm not surprised at all. I just wonder how much nVidia had to pay for this...

In the last few days I was looking around for a card to upgrade my GF3, and in the end decided not to. GeForce FX disapoints me (the good ones are too expensive and the cheap ones are not worthy) and ATI, I never had the chance to try out one (the drivers still spook me, and I won't buy one until I have the chance to try one out for a couple of days) because they are quite hard to find here where I live. So I'm going to buy myself a DVD-R and spend a week vacation on some island in the atlantic.

About 3DMark, I actually believed in their benchmarks. Sure, manufacturers could cheat, but I believed 3DMark would try hard to control the cheatings, and thus keep the scores true. Now that 3DMark themselves come out and tell me this bull****, it's okay. You still can use it as a nice demo to show off your card to your friends, but its benchmark value has dropped to zero.

SurfMonkey

06-03-03, 04:41 AM

I feel quite sorry for ATI at the end of this. They seem, yet again, to have go the sh*tty end of the stick!

According to the FutureMark whitepaper, their *optimisation* is still a cheat, while FutureMark have now endorsed NVidia who didn't cheat but used application specific optimisation.

I think DELL meditated this, they probably told FutureMark that they would endorse their product if they, FM, were to retract the cheating statement about NVidia. DELL uses a lot of NVidia chips and is also a member of the FM beta testers program it would make sense for them to strike a deal.

But at the end of the day FutureMark have said that ATI *cheated* (which they didn't really), and that Nvidia didn't (which they did really), and we've all seen the evidence of ATI's cheating on TechTV!!!

ChrisRay

06-03-03, 05:50 AM

I think DELL meditated this, they probably told FutureMark that they would endorse their product if they, FM, were to retract the cheating statement about NVidia. DELL uses a lot of NVidia chips and is also a member of the FM beta testers program it would make sense for them to strike a deal.

Well for a conspiracy theory its definately plausable that Dell could do this. Both Nvidia and FUturemark currently want Dells partnership.

Anywho. Theres no gaurentee that happenedl

And its more likely lawsuit stuff

g__day

06-03-03, 06:37 AM

Another interesting development along the path to the future of 3d... not too surprising really that companies are finding a way to minimise embrassement and move forward together again.

Mulciber

06-03-03, 06:41 AM

Originally posted by muzz
The Donkey at [H] starts off his linkage with:

POOF! All is now AOK!

That is the first line that was put up above the story.......

What a drone, he BLASTED ATi for ALOT LESS........

I thought I lost all respect for him awhile ago.....

Guess I was wrong....

Silly me....
:lame: :rw:

that was blatant sarcasm :rolleyes:

Kruno

06-03-03, 06:48 AM

FM has finally done something right. NV was not cheating. NV has never cheated. I agree 100% with Kyle from [H] and NV as well as FM.

nVIDIA has never cheated in 3dMark or anywhere. Ati has always cheated. NV's OGMS is far better than Ati's SGAA.

Who in the living hell would accuse NV of cheating? They never cheat.

There are no cheats in 3dmark03. Never!

We are not afraid of Ati. Allah has condemned them. They are stupid. They are stupid (dramatic pause) and they are condemned.

People who don't believe FM, they always depend on a method what I call ... stupid, silly. All I ask is check yourself. Do not in fact repeat their lies.

The non-NV/non-FM press is all about lies! All they tell is lies, lies and more lies!

Lying is forbidden on the internet. NV and FM PR will tolerate nothing but truthfulness as they men of great honor and integrity. Everyone is encouraged to speak freely of the truths evidenced in their eyes and hearts.

I triple guarantee you, there are no cheats in the drivers.

These cowards have no morals. They have no shame about lying. [refering to people who don't believe FM and NV]

AnteP

06-03-03, 06:55 AM

hehe this is the funniest part:

"Futuremark now states that NVIDIA's driver design is an application specific optimization and not a cheat."

nice rethorics
we state it but we don't mean it ;)

ChrisRay

06-03-03, 07:23 AM

First I must admit that there is very little I can comment about the joint statement between Futuremark and Nvidia due to legal aspects. What I can do is answer some frequently asked questions about this and quote some parts of the statement.

Please read the statement well and do not post hasty conclusion after reading only the first two paragraphs of the statement.

Q: Does this mean what you called originally as "cheats" actually were acceptable "optimizations", and that you made a wrong decicion in releasing Patch 330 and the Audit Report?
A: By the definition of our benchmark and process, the optimizations are not acceptable. 3DMark scores are only comparable if drivers perform exactly the work 3DMark instructs them to do.

The statement also says: Quote:
Because all modifications that change the workload in 3DMark03 are forbidden, we were obliged to update the product to eliminate the effect of optimizations identified in different drivers so that 3DMark03 continued to produce comparable results.

As earlier stated, we recommend using the latest build 330 of 3DMark03, with the 44.03 (or 43.51 WHQL) Nvidia drivers, or the Catalyst 3.4 ATI drivers. This way obtained 3DMark03 results are genuinely comparable as far as we know.

Q: What is the reasoning behind this statement?
A: Both companies want to end the public dispute that has been going on since we launched 3DMark03 in mid-February this year.

Q: Did NVIDIA pay you any money to make this statement?
A: No, they did not. Our companies had a mutual desire to end this dispute, and we are very pleased that we reached this agreement.

Q: Does this mean that in the future you will not make patches for 3DMark03 (or 3DMark2001) in order to reveal cheating?
A: We might release further patches to 3DMark03, if a need for preventing driver optimizations appear in the future.

SurfMonkey

06-03-03, 07:32 AM

Is this a good response from ATI?

OK time to get in the fun.

ITS CM TIME!!!!

First of all as a favor to me, leave Kyle and Brent out of this. This has nothing to do with them. Period

Secondly I am a little upset tonight so I wont say much until tomorrow.

Third I guarantee you that I will ask for an investigation for optimized drivers tomorrow such that has never happened in ATI's history. I am prepared to put a hold on all new features I have in the pipeline so our top engineers can see how much we can optmize by not rendering the whole scene. I am guessing we can gain 25% at this point.

Fourth I am not commiting to do these optimizations ever in a released driver but I think its time for apples to apples comparison.

Fifth I am sorry to hear you (the end consumers) so dissapointed in the state of the industry. I feel for you.

Sixth, you all have my personal guarantee that if you continue to support ATI the way you have so far, I will always be here to help out and be one of the boyz on the forums. (I hope that means something to at least some of you)]

Have a good night everyone and lets talk more tomorrow
Terry

From Catalyst Maker over @ Rage3D...

I don't think that's a very good response, they're basically saying we endorse NVidia's method too and just to prove we are no better than they are we will devote time and money into ensuring the consumer and the industry both suffer.

:rolleyes:

StealthHawk

06-03-03, 07:54 AM

Originally posted by Zenikase
You also have to consider the fact that there are more console gamers than PC gamers, since most people don't like going through the trouble of dealing with bugs/crashes, incompatibility, poor performance, etc. Others may not have a system powerful enough to enjoy the game (although this has become less and less common, with the trickling down of DX8.1-class video cards into the value market). With a console you just pop in the disc and you're set. This, plus the fact that console games are much harder to pirate, due to proprietary mediums and the complex hardware modding required to play a pirated game that not only could be risky, but voids your warranty.

Well yeah...hence there are more console game sales. The reasons don't really matter, just that fact that it happens.

I also think that one of the reasons consoles are more prevalent is thier relatively low price and longevity. Although, for the point of this discussion it doesn't really matter why more console games are sold. Mainly because I don't see PC game sales increasing faster than console sales, or even catching up with them.

StealthHawk

06-03-03, 07:58 AM

Originally posted by ntxawg
didnt nvidia originally say it was a driver bug but now they say it was optimization.. sheesh :rolleyes: looks like its time to demand a refund :mad:

At least they aren't claiming it's a driver bug or that Futuremark is out to get them. It's a start, right?

Behemoth

06-03-03, 08:26 AM

Originally posted by SurfMonkey
Is this a good response from ATI?

From Catalyst Maker over @ Rage3D...

I don't think that's a very good response, they're basically saying we endorse NVidia's method too and just to prove we are no better than they are we will devote time and money into ensuring the consumer and the industry both suffer.

:rolleyes:
agree.
its time for "cheats" to "cheats"?
bad move.

Moose

06-03-03, 08:28 AM

The statement is CLEARLY a result of pressure from Nvidia's lawyers on Futuremark. Consider the statement an out of court settlement so to speak.

Futuremark no longer calls Nvidia's cheats "cheats" and Nvidia doesn't take all of Futuremarks money away.

The end result is that the consumer is now screwed again.

Damn and I just bought an Nforce2 based mobo.

I feel so dirty....

Kruno

06-03-03, 08:31 AM

Zurble

06-03-03, 09:25 AM

Futuremark made a very bad move (for them and for us).
Only for that, ATI should do the same as Nvidia.

Why?

because futuremark as signed his own death. Nvidia not only discarded the benchmark for nv users, but now they succeed in completly discredit the bench for ATI users too. I was defending 3dmark, but now they are undefendable.

ATI will make thoose cheats too, they will reach the 7000 barier, then Nvidia will drop 3dmark again, and ATI will listen to there users who will now think the same as nv users: "3dmark is useless".

Wow, is there someone at futuremark who is reasoning?
add to this that Nvidia didn't apologize and made it brute force...

ATI has to do it, the outcome will be better for them then doing nothing (and futuremark deserve it)

SLI_Fallen

06-03-03, 09:26 AM

Damn straight they cheated!

..This "about face" by futuremark is the result of one thing and one thing only..

Lawyers, and good expensive ones. The kind a huge company like Nvidia can sick on a small company like Futuremark, period. What other possible explaination can thier be? The mud slinging has been particularly intense, with Futuremark releasing a patch (330) almost immediately after the discovery. Then we all wake up one day and they are all kissy kissy? I think not.

jAkUp

06-03-03, 09:43 AM

i believe ati really has no option but to cheat... now futuremark is sleeping in bed with nvidia, and ati's products look inferior in 3dmark because of the cheats... i guess this really is one of those time you need to cheat to get ahead. if ati can pull off the same type of cheats in 3dmark03 as nvidia did... their products should be faster than nv.

of course... now 3dmark03 will turn into a cheating benchmark... where the best cheats win. and will be completely useless... sometimes i seriously wish 3dmark03 never existed:rolleyes:

hithere

06-03-03, 10:10 AM

Why doesn't Futuremark simply add a scenario to their benchmark that highlights NV FP16 and 12 optimizations to shaders that have to be run in FP24 on ATI hardware...you could compare the framerates of each while not affecting the benchmark scores.

Instead of arguing the relevance of the benchmark, why don't Nvidia fans simply attempt to educate people on the fact that not all shaders have to be compiled at top precision, and that the FX has a higher degree of flexibility in this regard, and does best when in a situation where developers can optimize shaders for the FX, as in Doom 3? That, to me, would be the civilized solution.

Instead, we have Nvidia and even some fans out there telling us it's alright to cheat when you disagree with the rules. "Oh, well, since the customer obviously can't tell what's best for them, they need to be lied to." What ever happened to, "if you don't like the game, don't play?" Wasn't that what Nvidia was telling us they were gonna do with 3dMark at the debut of the FX? I've seen better behavior on grade school playgrounds.

I'm sorry, but we're talking about a lot of money for a video card these days, and I can't afford to be lied to about any aspect of it, as this casts doubts on the whole. Nvidia isn't saying "this is an irrelevant benchmark" anymore, they're saying "you're too stupid to make your own decisions, so we went ahead and made them for you." Nvidia would have won my respect with higher performance and image quality in games...but now they've just earned my contempt.

hithere

06-03-03, 10:14 AM

Originally posted by jAkUp
of course... now 3dmark03 will turn into a cheating benchmark... where the best cheats win. and will be completely useless... sometimes i seriously wish 3dmark03 never existed:rolleyes:

As long as they don't have to take too many resources away from real games, I hope ATI does demo a cheating driver, so long as it comes with a warning to users that results obtained are for illustration purposes only. After all, we all want a level playing field here, right?