Nvidia's secret weapon against ATI?

[nekrosoft13]

OMFG, how could they. 3dmark is such an awesome game

[Toss3]

Umm are you guys forgetting that ATi has partnered with Havok? Well, Havok is owned by Intel(and also supported by AMD), so they now have two major players backing them, one of which is the largest force in the industry today.

I really don't think developers would limit themselves to supporting physX when havok is supported by so many more customers.

Just my 2 cents..

[hell_of_doom227]

Well raw power of CPU compared to GPU is joke. CPU test is physics test so using Ageia technology by Nvidia to do those tests is just fine. You have to be retard to say it's cheating.

[XMAN52373]

Originally Posted by Toss3

Umm are you guys forgetting that ATi has partnered with Havok? Well, Havok is owned by Intel(and also supported by AMD), so they now have two major players backing them, one of which is the largest force in the industry today.

I really don't think developers would limit themselves to supporting physX when havok is supported by so many more customers.

Just my 2 cents..

Havok is and will continue to be writen in x86 language to run on x86 based type hardware. PhysX was and will continue to be writen to run on PPU type hardware. As the GPU is more like a PPU than a CPU ever will be, I wouldn't look for Havok to more than a niche thing in the future where as PhysX more likely will be mainstream.

[Thunderbolt56]

All Nvidia did was allow the Physx to run on their cards. If the CPUs all of the sudden started to do video card work would the CPUs be cheating on 3DMark? Of course not it is ADDING features to a given piece of hardware. This whole line of rationalization where because a certain piece of hardware is more capable than the other, it should be normalized.

Agreed. Also, Intel has made no secret they intend to start adding some more GPU functions to their cores in the near future. Everyone is in a race to become the "one-stop-shop".

[shadow001]

Originally Posted by XMAN52373

Until future mark takes a stand on the issue, you can't call it cheating.

Actually,that is specifically stated in the terms of agreement regarding vantage....In short,CPU tests are to be calculated with the CPU,wich is how it's meant to be.


The only thing that Nvidia made sure with this particular driver release is that the scores in vantage using this driver will never be allowed to become an official published score since the drivers aren't on futuremark approval list....It'll say that once someone checks details on your score and sees "Not an FM aproved driver".

[XMAN52373]

Originally Posted by shadow001

Actually,that is specifically stated in the terms of agreement regarding vantage....In short,CPU tests are to be calculated with the CPU,wich is how it's meant to be.


The only thing that Nvidia made sure with this particular driver release is that the scores in vantage using this driver will never be allowed to become an official published score since the drivers aren't on futuremark approval list....It'll say that once someone checks details on your score and sees "Not an FM aproved driver".

And teh WHQL drivers once released will most likely not show up on that list. They aren't cheating, get over it. FYI FM is useless as a bench anyways.

[nekrosoft13]

Originally Posted by shadow001

Actually,that is specifically stated in the terms of agreement regarding vantage....In short,CPU tests are to be calculated with the CPU,wich is how it's meant to be.

and those CPU "test" run on Physx, that also runs on Aigea Physx card. A seperate card can help with that test. That is how Futuremark programmed it.

so Aigea card was replaced with geforce.

[aceflier]

Originally Posted by nekrosoft13

and those CPU "test" run on Physx, that also runs on Aigea Physx card. A seperate card can help with that test. That is how Futuremark programmed it.

so Aigea card was replaced with geforce.

Ding! Ding! Ding! Ding!

WE HAVE A WINNER!!!

[XMAN52373]

Originally Posted by shadow001

Actually,that is specifically stated in the terms of agreement regarding vantage....In short,CPU tests are to be calculated with the CPU,wich is how it's meant to be.


The only thing that Nvidia made sure with this particular driver release is that the scores in vantage using this driver will never be allowed to become an official published score since the drivers aren't on futuremark approval list....It'll say that once someone checks details on your score and sees "Not an FM aproved driver".

http://www.tomshardware.com/news/nvi...sics,5758.html

Not cheating, read for yourself.

[particleman]

It isn't nVidia cheating, more so the blame lies soley with Futuremark for creating a horrible benchmark. nVidia just created a driver that accelerates the physx API, and the whole reason they bought AGEIA was for the physx API. The blame goes to Futuremark for having a proprietary API in their benchmark and the physics benchmark having such a huge impact on the total score.

Like I said proprietary API's have no place in benchmarks. If back in the day there was a glide only benchmark and all other non 3Dfx hardware rendered in software, how ridiculous would that benchmark be? That is the case with 3Dmark.

Futuremark is stupid for including physx acceleration in a way that effects the final score, when in real life, the instances where physx makes a difference are limited to a couple of custom gimmick UT3 maps and one game no one cares about called Cell Factor. Futuremark as a benchmark that is supposed to gauge game performance is a joke. It already had almost no credibility which is the reason why most sites don't include it in reviews, and this will just hurt 3Dmark's credibility even more. Why anyone cares about 3Dmark scores is beyond me.

[SH0DAN]

Originally Posted by Amuro

Now it's up to Nvidia to push developers to support physx in future games.

If any one company can make this happen,its certainly NVDA.