Originally posted by digitalwanderer
Very nicely put, and very truthful. nVidia really does have a point in their argument, but their credibility is pretty shot right now.
So people who make 3D-benchmarks should only make benchmarks that are solely targeted at NV-hardware? If some "other" 3D-companies have more advanced features, they must not be supported so that almighty NV doesn't get shown in bad light?
"We could use PS 1.4, it is better choice after all..."
"Forget it! ati supports it, but NV doesn't so that's a big no-no!"
Why should Futuremark optimize for NV? If they do that, they are screwing Ati? isn't it just smart to use the best tech available? With Ati, 3DMark uses PS 1.4. NV doesn't support it, so it defaults to lesser PS (and takes the performance-hit with it).