View Single Post
Old 05-18-03, 11:35 AM   #5
jimmyjames123
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 665
Default

Quote:
"But it is a BENCHMARK, and it is meant to be run in a certain way so as to give an accurate comparison of performance. nVidia's driver cheats compromise that by bypassing the benchmark's parameters, which is NOT optimizing but is fraudulently inflating their scores to sell more cards."
Trust me, I fully understand this point of view. However, we all know that NVIDIA and ATI actively "optimize" their drivers for enhanced performance in 3dmark programs. This alone undercuts the argument about an "accurate comparision of performance", because it has been repeatedly shown that driver "optimizations" alone can (sometimes significantly) improve performance.

There is also the issue about what is an "optimization" and what is a "cheat". There is no agreement about what this distinction is. If NVIDIA (or ATI for that matter) can improve performance without compromising image quality, I'd like to think of that as an "optimization".

If anything, maybe this will help Futuremark to create a benchmark that is less susceptible to "optimizations", assuming that they truly want to create an "impartial" benchmarking program.
jimmyjames123 is offline   Reply With Quote