I gotta tell you McCarron is right - hardcore gamers really don't care all that much about benchmarks. They view them as guides, not gospels. Personally, whenever I see benchmark results from ANYTHING, I immediately subtract 20-30% from them. Why? Because that's exactly how the hardware will perform in my house, which is FAR from "labratory conditions".
I can't afford fresh formats, re-installs, and yada-yada-yada because of this thing I have to do for 85 hours every 14 days and that's called WORK
. And even then, my work isn't done because there's another thing that takes up alot of quality time and it's called FATHERHOOD
. When I get time to hop on my rig, the last thing I want to do is hee-haw around with drivers, patches, installs, and re-installs just for a few hundred point gain on a benchmark.
No, I want to stick a pump action into someone's ear and pull the trigger...repeatedly!
Because of this, I automatically subtract 20-30% from all benchmark scores I read on review sites because they only way I could ever see that figure is if I had the time to devote to constant, endless, tinkering and tweaking. Been there, done that, and that's why SiS gets my money instead of VIA.
Benchmarks might matter to 15-25 year old hardcore gamers.
To my ancient 30 year old ass, they're just numbers...
And what embarrassing numbers they are, nVidia!!
What in the 9 hells have you people been doing for the past year? It's a shame that they concentrated so much on a useless benchmark they want nothing to do with in order to brew up drivers that cheat on the damn thing. Imagine if that manpower was used in the R&D department...ATi would be scrambling right now...
Nvidia has been caught with their pants around their ankles.
However, ATI's pants are starting to fall, too, for cheating as well.
Consider this from Sudhian...
Interestingly, however, Game 4 performance for ATI drops 8.9%, indicating ATI's drivers are detecting some part of 3Dmark03 as well. FutureMark states they are investigating the issue. They also state (in apparent anticipation of NVIDIA's reaction) that this is not, in any way, an attempt by them to "punish" NVIDIA.
So.....who's right and who's wrong? Unless FutureMark is out-and-out lying, errata #4 and #5 seem impossible to dismiss as bugs. Failure to issue a back-buffer clear order might be a bug, but bugs don't "accidentally" write entirely new versions of a vertex or pixel shader.
They both are cheating. Plain and simple.
Nvidia's cheating more...but ATI sure aren't angels either.