View Single Post
Old 05-23-03, 11:45 AM   #48
Sazar
Sayonara !!!
 
Sazar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Austin, Texas
Posts: 9,297
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by saturnotaku
Did you miss the part where FutureMark said the test was altered by ATI drivers?

I think this whole thing is only further going to invalidate 3DMark as a reasonable benchmark. You all can sit here and whine about what NVIDIA and ATI did or didn't do. But I'm going to take my cards and use them for what they were intended - to play games. That's all that should ever matter. If any card is found to be cheating in games, that's a different matter. But it's 3DMark, and I can't play it so I don't care.
the fact that you have a synthetic benchmark that is using standards to demonstrate the potential perofrmance of a product in expected scenarios has no bearing on the product one buys?

FYi... none of the timedemo's used to benchmark cards is playable either... are they ?

hence... what is the criterion used ? actual games where IHV's working closely with game devs CAN have application or hardware specific code ? or synthetic benches where it is supposedly harder to get away with cheats as has been proven...

if anything I believe it underlines the authenticity of futuremarks bench as it shows they are determined to eliminate these application specific hacks... regardless of the IHV... and that should be commended...

I too am going to take my card and play games with it... but I can also rest assured in the fact that potential consumers are less likely to be misled by 3dmark03 scores when benching dx9 hardware...
Sazar is offline