View Single Post
Old 02-12-03, 12:57 PM   #20
FrgMstr
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: The Great State of Texas
Posts: 47
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by Solomon
Isn't this sort of ironic. Considering ATi and their Quake3.exe debacle in the drivers. How everyone harped on them for this cheating bit. Now it seems that people are coming out of the wood work saying that Nvidia did indeed optimize drivers for the synthetic benchmark when before all of this no one really wanted to say such words. Now it seems people can't get enough of saying that Nvidia is mad because their drivers aren't optimized or what not for a specific benchmark.

It's weird. First Nvidia users wouldn't admit that Nvidia was indeed doing that. Now that this has happened you can't get enough of them saying that they are mad because their optimizations aren't happening right or what not.

It's like the Twilight Zone!

Regards,
D. Solomon Jr.
*********.com

I think these statements show a general ignorance of the entire situation surrounding the issues above. Your comparison is off base.

What ATI did during the "Quack" issue and what you are seeing NVIDIA currently do, (and I think we are the only ones to prove this currently) are two totally different issues. I would think that someone that runs a site that caters to the 3d crowd would easily see the differences but obviously not.

ATI cheated on the QuakeIII benchmarks by putting QuakeIII specific optimizations in the driver. They did NOT optimize for the QIII engine (which is used by countless games), they only optimized for the game that is widely used as a benchmark, hence they cheated on the benchmark and ignored all the other games out there that could have "benefited" from the technology. That opens up a whole other argument that what they did was of no benefit at all, but rather just and exercise in turning down the overall quality to get better FPS.

NVIDIA optimized it drivers for the techniques that were specifically being used inside 3DMark03. Any game that uses those techniques will benefit from their changes.

So in theory, NV's changes could have far reaching effects that benefit the community at large where ATI's did not.

NV's argument here is that the changes they made in their driver benefit no one, as the techniques being used inside 3Dmark03 are not indicative of any game that we will see now or likely see in the future. They "won" the benchmark with their GFFX and they still don't like the benchmark.

It's only like the Twilight Zone if you don't understand what you are looking at.

(EDIT: DITTO Zeno)
__________________
Kyle Bennett
Editor-in-Chief @ HardOCP.com

Last edited by FrgMstr; 02-12-03 at 01:00 PM.
FrgMstr is offline   Reply With Quote