View Single Post
Old 05-27-03, 01:23 AM   #18
StealthHawk
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by Morrow
I mean, 3dmark03 is obviously an unfair benchmark. FM wants to bench standard performance however games use optimized paths where nvidia hardware shines (like with SSE2 optimizations on P4, the P4 is unbeatable with SSE optimized instructions, that's the reason why AMD was so interested in integrating SSE2 in their Hammer CPUs). The R3x0 has more raw power which favorites Radeons in 3dmark03.
And from a developer's perspective:
Quote:
I find it interesting that Futuremark works with ATI and Nvidia to make the benchmark run as fast as possible on specific hardware. Game developers don't have the luxury of doing this. Publishers want them to finish the game as quick as possible and most of them don't have months to spend tweaking code paths for specific cards, especially when new cards are coming out every few months.

I think Nvidia saying that Futuremark is out to get them is nonsense. An application should run faster than your competition regardless of how it was programmed. Game developers aren't going to design games that match your hardware's abilities exactly, in terms of number of textures used, shader instructions, etc. Picking apart the techniques used in 3DMark is rather pointless. You might as well pick at every game and complain how they didn't optimize for your card.

3DMark should be used by Nvidia to tell where their card needs improvement, not as an advertisement to make their cards look good.
http://www.beyond3d.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=6087
  Reply With Quote