View Single Post
Old 02-12-03, 02:11 PM   #38
The Tool
Ratchet's Avatar
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 96
Send a message via ICQ to Ratchet Send a message via MSN to Ratchet

Originally posted by Solomon
Since Kyle is here. How about shedding light on picking which benchmarks to run for your FX review? Why didn't you use AA + AF during the Serious Sam results? I never understood that one. You seem to use AA+AF on other results you used? Seems to be you didn't use the AA+AF on Serious Sam because it showed that the ATi Radeon 9700 was leaps ahead of the FX. Only Anandtech seem to show that test result. Why was it left out on yours Mr. Kyle Bennet.

The only reason why I brought up the ATi issue was that it seemed people would jump up saing ATi is optimizing for specifics. Now that people are finally saying that Nvidia was optimizing for benchmarks seemed ironic that before everyone was hush hush in saying that.

Pretty fast in judging me and my site just because my understanding of the ATi situation differs from you. You seemed pretty fast on slamming ATi about that quake.exe issue. You never seemed to mention that the quake.exe was in the drivers well before the ATi 8500 ever surfaced. You never seemed to mentioned it didn't affect the Radeon 64mb video card when it was implemented. You never seemed to mentioned that the drivers are universal base so how can you seriously have facts that it wasn't for the 64mb Radeon instead of the 8500 ? When it was known ATi fixed it in the next release. So in theory it was only in one release from ATi even though it was in months before in beta releases.

There are two sides of this quake.exe issue. Apparently it's your opinion that matters and there is no other side to it. To each his own.

D. Solomon Jr.
It's quite simple really, nVidia told him what to do about the whole quake.exe thing. He listened to nVidia and never thought things through himself - much like he is doing now with this whole 3DMark03 thing. I'm sure he now wishes he had handled the whole quake.exe situation better, but that's way in the past.

What I'm concerned about is his nV-inspired "opinion" that 3DMark is worthless - it's not. Obviously the benchmark isn't going to tell you much about what current games may perform like (pervious version of 3DMark were never any good for current games either), but I really do think that it will give you a good idea of what future games will play like. That's just as important, if not more so, especially considering how much videocards cost these days - not everyone can afford to upgrade whenever a new game comes out.
Ratchet is offline   Reply With Quote