Originally posted by FrgMstr
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)
I totally agree with this post, most sense anyone has talked on here. It seems like nvidia were conned by Futuremark/ATI, as the techniques nvidia use are not present in 3D Mark and only ATI's are hence the huge score difference between Geforce4 and Radeon Pro. Nvidia have a brilliant arguement due to this.