View Single Post
Old 02-15-03, 06:17 AM   #83
Registered User
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 114

Originally posted by StealthHawk
the point is that while they could be games, they aren't games. as has already been pointed out, even the Max Payne game test in 3dmark2001 didn't reflect real world Max Payne performance. so it's obvious that either the engines being used are not indicative of games, or the scenes being portrayed are not examples of real world games. either way something should be done to rectify this.
I still donšt see a problem. All I see is NV whining about nothing. Here are the facts:

NV was big supporter of 3DMark01. They had exactly ZERO problems with it, even though it was not "real-life" benchmark.

Now, all of a sudden they have big problem with 3DMark03. Why? Because it uses PS1.4 that is in every way superior to PS 1.1, 1.2 and 1.3 (1.2 and 1.3 didn't bring any big improvements to PS1.1, PS1.4 did). And that really is NV's problem. They were the ones who chose not to support PS1.4. You could say that NV is holding the industry back by pushing inferior shaders to mainstream.

Ati is one generation ahead of NV in low-end and mainstream: their products all support DX9 and PS1.4, NV's products do not. That is the reason why NV whines. They made a wrong design-decision in the past, and that decisions has come around and bit them in the ass. Seriously, that is NV's problem, and no-one elses. Why should Futuremark cripple their software just so NV's crippled hardware would look better on it? The point of 3DMark is to show how the cards perform using latest and upcoming technology. PS1.1 that NV supports is old and inferior. PS1.4 and 2.0 are considerably better and there are titles on the way that take advantage of it.

I repeat: the point of 3DMark is to test performance in new and upcoming technologies. PS1.1 is neither of those. It's only used as an emergency backup if the card doesn't support PS1.4. PS1.2 or 1.3 are not used since the differences between those and 1.1 aren't that great. They had mostly trivial changes.

PS1.4 and 2.0 are the things that will be used in future games (Doom3 anyone?), and that's what 3DMark tests. If NV wants top keep on pushing yesterdays tech, they can do so. But they can't then whine if they don't look so good in softwre that takes advantage of new tech!

If NV wants to find someone to accuse over this thing, I suggest they look in to mirror. Fact is that Ati's entire product-lineup supports PS1.4 and DX9 (well, 9100 doesn't support DX9, but it has PS1.4). Large part of NV's lineup is still DX7 (GF4 MX)! NV has been holding the industry back, it's about time they catch up!
Nemesis77 is offline   Reply With Quote