View Single Post
Old 05-25-03, 12:00 PM   #13
evilangel
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 15
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by silence
well....my point was more like...did NV have in mind something like making 3Dmark useless?cause if they did, then they'll stick with their story and they acchieved their goal. it's bad PR and even worse business politics, but now u can't trust 3Dmark scores and that's something NV wants all the way.

That's actually a good point. If Nvidia proves it's easy to cheat but don't admit it, it may work the other way and hurt FutureMark. It may make enough people paranoid about what's what that they may say screw it with synthetic benches. Although FutueMArk patched the bench, what's to say Nvidia won't just do it again in a smarter way.

Also this could be where Nvidia might want to create their own standards, like Microsoft. This is where people get bent out of shape. Some people say stick to the standards that are in place. If Nvidia wants to create a different way of doing things that benefits the games being played on their cards, doesn't bother me. If you don't like it, don't buy an Nvidia card.

Personally, i'm wondering if there's just bad blood between FutureMark and Nvidia at this point just for the fact that Nvidia didn't pay the couple of hundred thousand dollars to participate in the program.

I think new games coming out should just have a playable demo you can download a few months before it arrives that incorporates native benching and that's that. This way you'll know how the game is going to run on your card before it comes out.

The whole 3DMark thing just never appealed to me, it seems like it's more a sport now than what it was intended to be.

Last edited by evilangel; 05-27-03 at 05:24 PM.
evilangel is offline   Reply With Quote