View Single Post
Old 02-18-03, 03:04 PM   #47
tamattack
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 159
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by Nutty
It's badly written because it does soo much redundant stuff. Like skinning the characters 3 times!
How is that a bad thing per se? Let me ask you this: if you wanted to benchmark the speed at which your PC could perform 1000 additions, how would you program it?

[1] 1 + 2 + 3 + 4 + 5 + 6 + 7 + 8 + ... + 1001; or

[2] 1 + 2 (repeat 1000 times)

Obviously [2] is much more redundant than [1], yet it is also much more efficient for this purpose. Personally, I would do [2] because I'm lazy. Are programmers any different? More to the point, is there much of a difference between [1] and [2] above (other than the result of course) if your goal is to benchmark adding speed?

Now apply this line of thought to 3DMark03 and see if you can spot the similarity.

Quote:
Originally posted by Nutty
No 3d-engine coder in the games industry would do that.
Well duh! Obviously their purposes are completely different. Futuremark wanted to stress the vidcard. Game coders want compatibility with a large install base.

Something to think about.
tamattack is offline   Reply With Quote