Originally posted by extreme_dB
Evidence of pixel differences does not mean cheating in and of itself. Other aspects have to be examined for proper analysis.
you will find that i have already said ,that the diferences between antidetector/referenceshots/ATI or NVidia not necessarily means cheats.
specially when we dont know exactly what is desactivating the antidetector,neither we know how effective is detecting ati and nvidia drivers. each one use diferent mechanism of protection.
I totally disagree with your praise of the article because it makes conclusions based on incomplete data, and fails to understand the findings.
well ,feel free to disagree then. its your opinion vs my opinion. vs other opinions.the UNwinder programmer ,the anti-detector programmer have accused not only One company both Two companies,Digitlife too of "optimizing". funny how Futuremark have also done that too.coincidence?
i found very informative the 3dmark 2003 and the 3dmark2001 reports with the IQ comparisons. with optimizations or without optimizations the IQ in detonators 44.61 is a good step in the right direction. whether optimizing shaders are valid or not in that benchmark is a diferent story .so probably Digitlife is right an ATI and NVidia are "optimizing" or probably not. only FutureMark can clarify that.its their benchmark and they set the rules. but taking only one side
of the report (as others have done) that doesnt look good to company A and ignoring the other side of the information that doesnt look good to company B, is simply not being honest with yourself.