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, 01:58 PM   #193
omghi2u
Registered User
 
omghi2u's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 39
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by DorXtar
Whoa.... addressed by a mod.

Rage3d mentioned quack, which BTW was not such a horrible cheat as the current one (won't mention brand names or anything for those of more delicate constitutions).
Better yet...BAND!!!


























BTW, I'm still waiting for R3D to open up so I can get my drivers.
__________________
P4 2.4b @ 533FSB | Gigabyte 8SG667 (SiS648 chipset)
Kingston 512MB DDR333
Western Digital 80GB HD
SBLive 5.1 | Logitech Z-560
Radeon 9700 | Futura 19" CRT
omghi2u is offline  
Old 05-15-03, 02:03 PM   #194
DorXtar
3Dlabs Wildcat IV 7210
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 52
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by digitalwanderer
DorXtar, please quit being a dork and play nice! nVnews is being way cool, please quit taunting them.
*poke* *poke*
__________________
I am Dork.
DorXtar is offline  
Old 05-15-03, 02:32 PM   #195
Nv40
Agent-Fx
 
Nv40's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: everywhere
Posts: 2,216
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by Hanners
It's worth remembering that SPECviewperf isn't a gaming benchmark, so any speed increases seen there aren't going to translate to higher performance in games.

i mean it may just be the same kind of cheating behaviour, but this time they are cheating professional users.


---------------------------------------------------------------------

Originally posted by Behemoth
[b]i mean it may just be the same kind of cheating behaviour,
but this time they are cheating professional users.
Hehe.. that was funny!!!!
Professional cheats


hanners.. in what way is diferent SPECviewperf from 3dmark2003 then ?
in 3dmark 2003 scores its not going to translate to any games
have you seen DOOm3 scores? have you seen SPlinter cell scores?
UNrealT2003 scores? Quake3?

3dmark2003 *is* and Unfair benchmark and not represntative
of any future in games ,except 3dmarks . because no game will use
that Engine. IMO.. anyone who doesnt want to see this is in complete denial of the Truth.

if i remember well ..

Game1 -> a DIrectx7 game
Game2/3/ ->Pixel shadels 1.4
Game4 ->pixel shaders 1.4 at near everything /only PS2.0 for the sky.

the benchamrk is biased too cards with powerfull Vertex shaders..
coincidentially here is where ATI clearly leads NVidia ,benefits more
cards ,very fast in single texturing ,again ATI scores .
and if that where not enough it benefit greatly cards with 8x1 designs in their pipes.. so much coincidence , and as a Bonus it force Nvidia Nv3x cards with nothing more than 32bits more of greater presision than ATI ones.. 128bits vs 96bits... too much presision for so mediocre sky..
in Nature test ,that looks to me a 2d picture.. is that FAIR?

wait i forgot another one.. ATI have access to the source code ,
and they have also the advantage here ,because they are members.
did i need to say more??
what would you say if Nvidia were memebers of a benchamk
and not ATI?
did you really believe Nvidia is the Only one company that cut corners
to gain free performance ? the only one with misleading marketing?

so maybe Nvidia was unfair too , so what? the benhmark is unfair
since the begining. the only diference between an Mpeg movie
and 3dmark2003 is that the later give you misleading scores..
of a performance you will never see in your games ..that all.

what i find more deplorable is not this 3dmark unfairness ,
but the People that clearly understand this ,and still point their
fingers to Nvidia for being Unfair ... in an Unfair benchmark.

Last edited by Nv40; 05-15-03 at 02:56 PM.
Nv40 is offline  
Old 05-15-03, 02:40 PM   #196
ChrisW
"I was wrong", said Chris
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: standing in the corner!
Posts: 620
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by Nv40
3dmark2003 *is* and Unfair benchmark and not represntative
of any future in games ,except 3dmarks . because no game will use
that Engine. IMO.. anyone who doesnt want to see this is in complete denial of the Truth.
And just how do you know this? Did you build a time machine and go into the future where DirectX 9 games exist and compare their benchmarks to 3DMark03 benchmark scores?
ChrisW is offline  
Old 05-15-03, 02:50 PM   #197
Moose
Cheating is for losers!!!
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 241
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by Nv40
Hehe.. that was funny!!!!
Professional cheats
wait i forgot another one.. ATI have access to the source code ,
and they have also the advantage here ,because they are members.
so which costs more... membership to Futuremark or paying your engineers to code a clip plane for every frame of the benchmark.

(not that this should matter to a company with millions of dollars lying all around.)


Moose is offline  
Old 05-15-03, 02:58 PM   #198
CaptNKILL
CUBE
 
CaptNKILL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: PA, USA
Posts: 18,844
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by phial
you have absolutely no idea how a video card works do you ? ok now go waste your money... gooood doggy


serioulsy, i dont understand how pepole can argue about what they do not know




dude, you WILL see this when you pay extra for a card thats supposed to be faster, but isnt


ok.. determining what isnt supposed to be rendered takes up processing time yes? more than you think. and by eliminating the need for the GFFX to calculate this, its given the appearance of a speed boost.

meanwhile, other cards, like ATI's, or Kyros still have to calculate this on the fly JUST LIKE THEY WOULD HAVE TO IN GAMES. theres absolutely no way for a game to predict wat direction your going to look when playing, so the video card responds as it happens and changes its culling.....

UNDERSTAND?
easy there killer.... I said I didnt read the article.... if you read my post you wouldnt be wasting your keyboard life flaming me.

At the time of posting, I didnt know what this was about, I was simply saying "If I cant SEEEEEEEEE the disadvantages of a cheat, I dont have a problem with it". OBVIOUSLY, this cheat involves something that we can SEEEEEEEEEEEEEE so my comment doesnt apply to this particular "bug" does it?

I was refering to the "cheats" people whine about that have no visible disadvantages until you take a screenshot and zoom in 100x. Those kinds of "cheats" dont ruin the picture do they? No, but lots of people complain about them just as much as this cheat.

Dont call me a n00b (or a Nub or whatever this week's stupid word is) if you are just going to skim over my post and rant about the first thing that pops into your head.
__________________
---- Primary Rig ---- CoolerMaster 690 II Advance - Gigabyte GA-EP45-UD3P - Intel Core 2 Quad Q9550 @ 4.0Ghz + Thermalright Ultra 120 Extreme
6GB DDR2 @ 942Mhz 5-5-5-20 1.9v (2x1Gb Wintec AMPX PC2-8500 & 2x2Gb G.Skill PC2-6400) - EVGA Geforce GTX 470 @ 750/1500/1850 (1.050v)
Sparkle Geforce GTS 250 1Gb Low-Profile (Physx) - Crucial RealSSD C300 64Gb SSD - Seagate 7200.12 500Gb SATA - Seagate 7200.10 320Gb SATA
ASUS VW266H 25.5" LCD - OCZ GameXStream 700W PSU - ASUS Xonar DX - Logitech Z-5500 5.1 Surround - Windows 7 Professional x64
---- HTPC ---- Asus M3A78-EM 780G - AMD Athlon X2 5050e 45W @ 2.6Ghz - 2x2GB Kingston PC2-6400 DDR2 - Sparkle 350W PSU
Seagate 7200.10 320Gb SATA - Seagate 7200.10 250Gb SATA - Athenatech A100BB.350 MicroATX Desktop - Creative X-Fi XtremeMusic
CaptNKILL is offline  
Old 05-15-03, 03:08 PM   #199
Nv40
Agent-Fx
 
Nv40's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: everywhere
Posts: 2,216
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by Moose
so which costs more... membership to Futuremark or paying your engineers to code a clip plane for every frame of the benchmark.

(not that this should matter to a company with millions of dollars lying all around.)


good question..

it cost more being a member of FUture mark.. by FAR .
because they not only need to pay for membership ,
but also design their Future hardware Nv3x,Nv4x,Nv5x..
with more transistors and spend hundreds of hours
in drivers tweaking ,just for a useless benchmark.

i will like better to see those Hundreds of Hours ,
and those transistors used to play better my games
and not in a syntetic benchmark.

ATi have nothing to loose here ,because already their
hardware was chosen as the "standar" for directx9.
thats what happens when you delay a video card 6months .

Nvidia desing their hardware for TOp games ,
things like Ultra shadow technology is just one
example. DX9+/VS9+ /128bits is another.
i dont know anyone who can complain about this..

Last edited by Nv40; 05-15-03 at 03:29 PM.
Nv40 is offline  
Old 05-15-03, 03:13 PM   #200
Sazar
Sayonara !!!
 
Sazar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Austin, Texas
Posts: 9,297
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by Nv40
good question..

it cost more being a member of FUture mark.. by FAR.
because they not only need to pay for membership ,
but also design their Future hardware Nv3x,Nv4x,Nv5x..
with more transistors and spend hundreds of hours
in drivers tweaking ,just for a useless benchmark.

ATi have nothing to loose here ,because already their
hardware was chosen as the "standar" for directx9.
thats what happens when you delay a video card 6months .

Nvidia desing their hardware for TOp games ,
i dont know anyone who cant complain about this..
ati's hardware is the standard for dx9?

I have not read this anywhere... I have read that ati tends to follow the standards better... thats about it...
Sazar is offline  

Old 05-15-03, 03:29 PM   #201
Sazar
Sayonara !!!
 
Sazar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Austin, Texas
Posts: 9,297
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by Nv40
Hanners.. in what way is diferent SPECviewperf from 3dmark2003 then ?

in 3dmark 2003 scores its not going to translate to any games
have you seen DOOm3 scores? have you seen SPlinter cell scores?
UNrealT2003 scores? Quake3?

3dmark2003 *is* and Unfair benchmark and not represntative
of any future in games ,except 3dmarks . because no game will use that Engine. IMO.. anyone who doesnt want to see this is in complete denial of the Truth.

if i remember well ..

Game1 -> a DIrectx7 game
Game2/3/ ->Pixel shadels 1.4
Game4 ->pixel shaders 1.4 at near everything /only PS2.0 for the sky.

the benchamrk is biased too cards with powerfull Vertex shaders..
coincidentially here is where ATI clearly leads NVidia ,benefits more cards ,very fast in single texturing ,again ATI scores .
and if that where not enough it benefit greatly cards with 8x1 designs in their pipes.. so much coincidence , and as a Bonus it force Nvidia Nv3x cards with nothing more than 32bits more of greater presision than ATI ones.. 128bits vs 96bits... too much presision for so mediocre sky.. in Nature test ,that looks to me a 2d picture.. is that FAIR?

wait i forgot another one.. ATI have access to the source code ,
and they have also the advantage here ,because they are members.
did i need to say more??
what would you say if Nvidia were memebers of a benchamk
and not ATI?
did you really believe Nvidia is the Only one company that cut corners
to gain free performance ? the only one with misleading marketing?

so maybe Nvidia was unfair too , so what? the benhmark is unfair
since the begining. the only diference between an Mpeg movie
and 3dmark2003 is that the later give you misleading scores..
of a performance you will never see in your games ..that all.

what i find more deplorable is not this 3dmark unfairness ,
but the People that clearly understand this ,and still point their
fingers to Nvidia for being Unfair ... in an Unfair benchmark. [/b]
to continually question futuremark in this matter over and above the fact that nvidia obviously did something that did not conform with the guidelines of the benchmark is not right IMO...

it is a matter of opinion whether or not 3dmark03 is a good benchmark or not... IMO perhaps it could have been better... no doubt about it... BUT it is recognized as stressing the video card and it DOES give a representative score for the products as they perform...

notice the difference in performance between ati and nvidia products... there does not appear to be that big a difference with some of the older drivers (precision is called into question but lets let that slip for the sake of argument)

AFAIK nvidia chose to leave on their own from the development of 3dmark03 @ the beta stage...

they then attacked the product released for various reasons... all of which were answered in the white paper... but here is the problem...

nvidia claims that 3dmark03 is a faulty benchmark... fair enough... they then go ahead and have 'optimised' for 3dmark03 since the release of the nv30 and have now very blatantly been caught 'optimizing' or rather cheating in the tests...

the tests are designed to run a particular way... if you 'optimise' in order to find shortcuts in the benchmark you are circumventing the program parameters and hance... are cheating...

the validity of 3dmark03 cannot be raised time and again... the logic that because 3dmark03 is not representative in the eyes of some people... that it automatically gives nvidia (which has professed its dislike very publicly) the right to CHEAT in that benchmark... is inherently flawed...

also... if nvidia is pulling the same stunt in benches such as SS:SE or ut2k3... what then is the view ?

concerning 3dmark03 nv40... I was distinctly under the impression the precision was between int12 and fp16 for nvidia v/s fp24 for ati... the dx9 spec calls for fp24 precision which ati r3xx cards do all the time... for gametest 4...

thats what I thought anyway
Sazar is offline  
Old 05-15-03, 04:10 PM   #202
Blomman00
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 23
Default

Driver bug, case closed
Blomman00 is offline  
Old 05-15-03, 04:27 PM   #203
ChrisW
"I was wrong", said Chris
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: standing in the corner!
Posts: 620
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by Blomman00
Driver bug, case closed
Exactly! NVidia's perfect drivers accidentally detects a certain scene in 3DMark03 and then accidentally does not clear the frame buffer. This sort of accidental scene detection is a very common occurance in drivers.
ChrisW is offline  
Old 05-15-03, 04:28 PM   #204
muzz
 
muzz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 816
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by Nv40
indeed .

and that is that people dont play games anymore ,
but rather spend their time hunting for lost pixels in 3dmarks ,
just to find another "flaw" in the GeforceFx.

if extremetech claims are accurate, it only proof that Nvidia
is cutting curners in that benchmark , it is unfair for ATI ,so what?
3dmark2003 is unfair for Nvidia cards anyway ,since day 1 .
thats why ,they dropped from the beta team , while ATi not.
ATI and Nvidia have diferent arquitectures ,so its not possible
apples vs apples comparisons when it comes to PS/VS.
because everyone doeas things diferently..
so you dont need to be a rocket scientist to know syntetic
benchmarks can be unfair for other companies.

ask AMD ,they will tell you ,many stories about this.

Is Nvidia cheating to sell "graphic cards?"
as far as i know all video cards companies have done this..
ATI,Trident,and according with ET. Nvidia.
any company will take every opportunity they have
to cut corners here and there to gain Free performance.
(look at my tread of anisofiltering )

but they sell graphics cards to earn money ,not to "cheat".
Please tell me why you seem to KNOW that 3DMark is "Unfair" to NV?
I can't wait to hear this one..... they took THEMSELVES out of it. Why exactly was that anyways?
__________________
muzz
muzz 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 10:39 AM.


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