Go Back   nV News Forums > Hardware Forums > Benchmarking And Overclocking

Newegg Daily Deals

View Poll Results: Are they cheating again?
Yes 132 67.01%
No 53 26.90%
I don't have a clue by four. 12 6.09%
Voters: 197. You may not vote on this poll

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old 05-15-03, 11:17 AM   #157
brute
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Calgary, Alberta Canada
Posts: 17
Send a message via ICQ to brute Send a message via Yahoo to brute
Default

Here's What HARDOCP.COM has to say about this matter..

Posted by Kyle 9:30 AM (CDT)

3DMark Invalid?
Two days after Extremetech was not given the opportunity to benchmark DOOM3, they come out swinging heavy charges of NVIDIA intentionally inflating benchmark scores in 3DMark03. What is interesting here is that Extremetech uses tools not at NVIDIA's disposal to uncover the reason behind the score inflations. These tools are not "given" to NVIDIA anymore as the will not pay the tens of thousands of dollars required to be on the "beta program" for 3DMark "membership".


nVidia believes that the GeForceFX 5900 Ultra is trying to do intelligent culling and clipping to reduce its rendering workload, but that the code may be performing some incorrect operations. Because nVidia is not currently a member of FutureMark's beta program, it does not have access to the developer version of 3DMark2003 that we used to uncover these issues.

I am pretty sure you will see many uninformed sites jumping on the news reporting bandwagon today with "NVIDIA Cheating" headlines. Give me a moment to hit this from a different angle.

First off it is heavily rumored that Extremetech is very upset with NVIDIA at the moment as they were excluded from the DOOM3 benchmarks on Monday and that a bit of angst might have precipitated the article at ET, as I was told about their research a while ago. They have made this statement:


We believe nVidia may be unfairly reducing the benchmark workload to increase its score on 3DMark2003. nVidia, as we've stated above, is attributing what we found to a bug in their driver.

Finding a driver bug is one thing, but concluding motive is another.

Conversely, our own Brent Justice found a NVIDIA driver bug last week using our UT2K3 benchmark that slanted the scores heavily towards ATI. Are we to conclude that NVIDIA was unfairly increasing the workload to decrease its UT2K3 score? I have a feeling that Et has some motives of their own that might make a good story.

Please don't misunderstand me. Et has done some good work here. I am not in a position to conclude motive in their actions, but one thing is for sure.

3DMark03 scores generated by the game demos are far from valid in our opinion. Our reviewers have now been instructed to not use any of the 3DMark03 game demos in card evaluations, as those are the section of the test that would be focused on for optimizations. I think this just goes a bit further showing how worthless the 3DMark bulk score really is.

The first thing that came to mind when I heard about this, was to wonder if NVIDIA was not doing it on purpose to invalidate the 3DMark03 scores by showing how the it could be easily manipulated.

Thanks for reading our thoughts; I wanted to share with you a bit different angle than all those guys that will be sharing with you their in-depth "NVIDIA CHEATING" posts. While our thoughts on this will surely upset some of you, especially the fanATIics, I hope that it will at least let you possibly look at a clouded issue through from a different perspective.

Further on the topics of benchmarks, we addressed them earlier this year, which you might find to be an interesting read.

We have also shared the following documentation with ATI and NVIDIA while working with both of them to hopefully start getting better and more in-game benchmarking tools. Please feel free to take the documentation below and use it as you see fit. If you need a Word document, please drop me a mail and let me know what you are trying to do please.
brute is offline  
Old 05-15-03, 11:19 AM   #158
flick556
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 34
Default

If 3dmark was a real game and if you could go off the rale than NVIDIA would not need to cheat because they would already be killing the 9800. No one uses 3dmark because they include 1.4 shaders that only ATI supports natively which is wrong forcing Nvidia to do some funky conversions. No real games would be silly enough to use that much 1.4 when thier are only a few cards in the world that will ever support this spec. everyone has moved to 2.0 for very good reason.

Nvidia should hack thier drivers to not run 3dmark03 at all, because it's not fair and descredits Synthetic benchmarking in general.
flick556 is offline  
Old 05-15-03, 11:21 AM   #159
Behemoth
radeon 9800 pro
 
Behemoth's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Darkness Falls
Posts: 841
Default

ok, forget it, i made that up.
Behemoth is offline  
Old 05-15-03, 11:21 AM   #160
Hanners
Elite Bastard
 
Hanners's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 984
Default

Do I sense another webmaster war of words coming on here?

Although Kyle makes some fair points, and a refreshingly different perspective, it is a little ironic considering his own part in the whole 'Quack' thing back in the day.

He also fails to mention that it isn't just ExtremeTech calling nVidia on this issue - In fact, it was mentioned over at Beyond3D quite some time before the ExtremeTech report.
__________________
Owner / Editor-in-Chief - Elite Bastards
Hanners is offline  
Old 05-15-03, 11:22 AM   #161
brute
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Calgary, Alberta Canada
Posts: 17
Send a message via ICQ to brute Send a message via Yahoo to brute
Default

As i stated in the other thread..
How much $$$$ did nvidia just pay hardocp for such a statement
brute is offline  
Old 05-15-03, 11:25 AM   #162
Behemoth
radeon 9800 pro
 
Behemoth's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Darkness Falls
Posts: 841
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by Hellbinder
that is such a retarded comment..

It is just unbelievable what some of you people are posting. Have you no shame? Even i am not this big a fanboi.. its embarassing..
you are just a retarded fanboy
Behemoth is offline  
Old 05-15-03, 11:27 AM   #163
brute
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Calgary, Alberta Canada
Posts: 17
Send a message via ICQ to brute Send a message via Yahoo to brute
Default

Kyle is probably getting a ******* from a nvidia rep right now hahahahahahaha
brute is offline  
Old 05-15-03, 11:35 AM   #164
jbirney
Registered User
 
jbirney's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 1,430
Default

Yea for some one that was had feed the info about ATI Q3 driver tricks he shure seems to now turn a blind eye.... Pretty sad I had just started to like their site again....
jbirney is offline  

Old 05-15-03, 11:36 AM   #165
waylman
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 3
Default

Wow! What a bunch of IDIOTS...I was starting to re-gain some respect for NVIDIA and now this. Unbelievable.....they should be really ashamed of themselves for this one.
waylman is offline  
Old 05-15-03, 11:36 AM   #166
Sazar
Sayonara !!!
 
Sazar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Austin, Texas
Posts: 9,297
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by flick556
If 3dmark was a real game and if you could go off the rale than NVIDIA would not need to cheat because they would already be killing the 9800. No one uses 3dmark because they include 1.4 shaders that only ATI supports natively which is wrong forcing Nvidia to do some funky conversions. No real games would be silly enough to use that much 1.4 when thier are only a few cards in the world that will ever support this spec. everyone has moved to 2.0 for very good reason.

Nvidia should hack thier drivers to not run 3dmark03 at all, because it's not fair and descredits Synthetic benchmarking in general.
what are you on about ?

futuremark clearly states they recommend only using 3dmark03 for dx9 based cards which will have to incorporate ps 2.0 anyway... hence everything is on a fair footing... the benchmark is designed to STRESS video cards... how it does it and the benchmark 'games' themselves may not be the greatest in the world but consider this... many of the games that are used to test are designed with a particular platform in mind... not THE WAY ITS MEANT TO BE PLAYED logo on some of the titles that are used to bench with

I am not a big fan of synthetic benches but the reason nvidia does not like it is because of the failure of futuremark to incorporate nvidia specific coding/paths into the program in order for their products to perform better...

if there is a product you do not like you do not purposely sabotage it in order to prevent others running it specially if there is a problem with it running the way it was designed to be run on your hardware... that is extremely unethical though this is what kyle is implying is the case...

now.. the problem is not native to 3dmark03... the way most benches are conducted are quite similar to 3dmark03... even if it is not a real game engine... and hence what is to prevent nvidia from doing the same thing that they are doin in the benches here in other benches...

is it that hard to understand that 'optimizations' like this are providing a false idea of the performance of a product... not to say the nv35 is a bad product... I have said many times it is a very good card.. but in order for it to 'beat' the 9800pro if the optimizations are netting a few fps here and there through cheating alone and not through raw power there is something wrong...

bear in mind also the sheer number of people who actually do put weight in 3dmark03 results... other than kyle of couse
Sazar is offline  
Old 05-15-03, 11:49 AM   #167
Behemoth
radeon 9800 pro
 
Behemoth's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Darkness Falls
Posts: 841
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by Hanners
[blind fanboy mode] Maybe they are trying to show how stupid using synthetic benchmarks are, so it's okay to cheat? [/blind fanboy mode]

I don't even know enough about how SPECviewperf works to be able to comment on the possibility of cheating in it, and like dig says I wouldn't blindly trust ATI either - If you have evidence of ATi cheating you want to bring to the table, then please do, but until then it's nothing more than throwing wild accusations around.
here is the quote i dig up from cg boards:

quote:Originally posted by raz-0
From what I can glean, the x1 and the 1000 score fairly similarly under specviewperf 7.0. Given similar hardware configs, the x1 scores within about 10% of the 1000.

It is painfully clear that there was serious viewperf 7.0 cheating. The move to viewperf 7.1 addressed that and at that point you saw a huge difference in performance between X1 and FX 1000. Since then, there are no X1 viewperf 7.1 numbers posted, all have been pulled.

Seems pretty definitive to me.
Behemoth is offline  
Old 05-15-03, 11:58 AM   #168
Hanners
Elite Bastard
 
Hanners's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 984
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by Behemoth
here is the quote i dig up from cg boards:

quote:Originally posted by raz-0
From what I can glean, the x1 and the 1000 score fairly similarly under specviewperf 7.0. Given similar hardware configs, the x1 scores within about 10% of the 1000.

It is painfully clear that there was serious viewperf 7.0 cheating. The move to viewperf 7.1 addressed that and at that point you saw a huge difference in performance between X1 and FX 1000. Since then, there are no X1 viewperf 7.1 numbers posted, all have been pulled.

Seems pretty definitive to me.
Link please? I'm kind of confused, because you said you made it up just now.
__________________
Owner / Editor-in-Chief - Elite Bastards
Hanners is offline  
Closed Thread


Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Need Help Installing NVIDIA Tesla M2070Q in Linux RHEL5 Ferianto85 NVIDIA Linux 0 05-18-12 08:35 PM
Rumor regarding lack of 680 availability ViN86 Rumor Mill 6 05-09-12 04:48 PM
NVIDIA could rule if they really wanted to Vid_craze NVIDIA GeForce 7, 8, And 9 Series 25 08-16-02 05:24 PM

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:45 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 1998 - 2014, nV News.