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, 02:59 AM   #73
Nv40
Agent-Fx
 
Nv40's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: everywhere
Posts: 2,216
Default

Quote:
So something IS indeed wrong.
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".

Last edited by Nv40; 05-15-03 at 03:13 AM.
Nv40 is offline  
Old 05-15-03, 03:01 AM   #74
bkswaney
Mr. Extreme!
 
bkswaney's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: SC
Posts: 3,421
Send a message via Yahoo to bkswaney
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by AnteP
ATis "Quack" was evident in one single driver.
nVidia has had "problems" with 3DMark for 3-4 driver revisions now.

When ATi removed the Quack "problem" they actually gained performance and quality.
I'm not saying it wasn't cheating.
But to me the whole ordeal looked to obvious to be a cheat. If you're going to cheat at least make it a bit hard to notice ey... I don't think ATi were that stupid.

But in all fairness nVidia surely desrves a chance to correct their problems and if quality is fixed and performance is equal then they're off the hook.

BTW I can't belive how many people in here actually are fine with cheating.

The thing I want to check out is Shadermark, as this is one of the benches where DetFX does wonders.

Above all I think it just rose my suspicion. How can I trust any benchmark that an FX produces now? Must I test them all for abnormalities or is this limited to 3DMark03?
I'm sure not fine with cheating.
I'm talking facts about scores. With or without th so called cheats.
I will say this. If there cheating keeps making my IQ better maybe they need to cheat more often. "J/K" The 44's look wonderful in all my games. UT2003 and UT2 rock!
bkswaney is offline  
Old 05-15-03, 03:11 AM   #75
AnteP
Nordic Nerd
 
AnteP's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Sweden, Lund
Posts: 552
Send a message via ICQ to AnteP
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by nVidi0t
There is clearly no link between your performance in 3dmark03 and ANY games out now. It's merely a tool for manufacturers to optimize their products for to sell their graphics cards.
Ok I don't want to be an ass, but man think about it "FUTURE"mark.

It's not supposed to mimic current games. The only tests that does (GT1) is in fact also the test that DOES "take note" of what CPU you are using.

In future games where shading is the predominant factor of performance CPUs will matter less and less.

Of course 3Dmark03 has some really bad code in it, I have to agree with that. Artificially inflating your code just to make it more demanding is the wrong way to go. Instead they should've just made the scenes more complex.

This of course also opened up for cheaters. If the code is inflated with uneccesary stuff driv devs can try to "cut out" those parts to increase performance which would give them an unnatural advantage.
AnteP is offline  
Old 05-15-03, 03:12 AM   #76
Behemoth
radeon 9800 pro
 
Behemoth's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Darkness Falls
Posts: 841
Default

even its a cheat, nvidia cheated 3DMark, which i believe is an unfair benchmark, cheating an unfair benchmark is just nothing unfair to me.
Behemoth is offline  
Old 05-15-03, 03:21 AM   #77
AnteP
Nordic Nerd
 
AnteP's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Sweden, Lund
Posts: 552
Send a message via ICQ to AnteP
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by Nv40
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.
I saw the screwy pixels the first run I ever made with 44.03 and I wasn't even paying close attention at all. The only thing I did actively look for was the overbright lightning effects in GT4. (Another optimisation that wasn't very obvious without paying any form of attention)

As for playing games, how's this for stable drivers:
http://w1.461.telia.com/~u46115110/GTAVC_FX5800.jpg


But in any case, I don't "play" the 3DMark03 "game". I review hardware and 3Dmark is a good tool for analasys, now I'm not directly referring to the Game Tests but even more so the specific feature tests.
And of course GT4 has a lot of value since it's the only really full DX9 "game-like" scene that we can tests today.
AnteP is offline  
Old 05-15-03, 03:33 AM   #78
Nv40
Agent-Fx
 
Nv40's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: everywhere
Posts: 2,216
Default

Quote:
There is clearly no link between your performance in 3dmark03 and ANY games out now. It's merely a tool for manufacturers to optimize their products for to sell their graphics cards.
indeed..

the only thing that 3dmark2003 have of Future
is their names ->FUturemark.

because there are millions of ways of programming
one better than others ,thats why the performance between
games are as diferent ,as the games itself .
the performance depends of the ability of their programmers.

for me the Future is Doom3,half-life2,Unreal3 ,Stalker ,quake4
eve online , Tribes3 , MOH2 ,HaloPc and others
and neither one will use the futuremark engine for DIrectx9.

heck.. even they use assembler to program their shaders..
strong use of PS1.4 and VertexShaders ,where according to others
ATI is stronger . i dont see fairness there at all.

what its interesting is that many of those games will use
NVidia Cg to program in the Geforcefx..
in the real world game developers number #1 concern is not
Benchmarks but to get the best performance possible and IQ
of *every* video card... no matter what.

a very diferent story ,to what we see today in 3dmark.

Last edited by Nv40; 05-15-03 at 03:54 AM.
Nv40 is offline  
Old 05-15-03, 03:37 AM   #79
Ratchet
The Tool
 
Ratchet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 96
Send a message via ICQ to Ratchet Send a message via MSN to Ratchet
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by bkswaney
What I do not get is the 51's and 44's score about the same.
SO why did they hack the 44's?
Who said they only hacked the 44's? Maybe this "enhancement" was around for awhile, and it's only just now being discovered?
Ratchet is offline  
Old 05-15-03, 03:50 AM   #80
jjjayb
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 101
Default

Quote:
My 3DM03 scores are the same with the 43.51 WHQL and Det 44.03's.
Of course they are. They've traded one cheat for another. The skys mysteriously look like they should, yet the score stays the same. The scores stayed the same because they got rid of the sky cheat and just traded it with this cliping cheat.
jjjayb is offline  

Old 05-15-03, 03:56 AM   #81
Bopple
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 208
Default

Hey guys. Point out what's so unfair about 3DMark03.
With PS 1.1 force option. I don't see any reason to blame it "unfair"

PS) And synthetic benchmarks have their own rights.
You can compare similar systems on standardized situation pretty conveniently.
And you can get a notion if anything has gone wrong or not on your system.
__________________
Handsome fighter never loses battle.

Last edited by Bopple; 05-15-03 at 04:02 AM.
Bopple is offline  
Old 05-15-03, 03:56 AM   #82
ZoinKs!
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 104
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by nVidi0t
... I think 3dmark03 is a ****ty benchmark anyhow. A CPU speed difference of 600-700mhz (which I have tested) makes not a single difference to your 3d Mark score, or miniscule differences to selective tests...
You're right. Higher cpu speed has little impact on 3dmark03. And that's a good thing.

Q: Was 3dmark created to test the performance of the cpu? Or to test the performance of the vidcard?
A: It is meant to test the performance of the vidcard.

These two statements are true:
1. Changing cpu has low impact on 3dmark03 results.
2. Changing vidcards has dramatic effect on 3dmark03 results.

Conclusions: 3dmark03 is an excellent method of measuring vidcards. It is a poor way of measuring cpu's. Therefore, 3dmark succeeds as a vidcard benchmark.

If you want to measure overall system performance, then you need to use a different benchmark. If you want to measure how well a vidcard performs with dx 9 pixel and vertex shaders, 3dmark03 is an excellent tool.



btw, nv40: PS 1.4 is directX 9 spec...if the FX can't handle dx 9 specifications, whose fault is that?
ZoinKs! is offline  
Old 05-15-03, 04:37 AM   #83
Nemesis77
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 114
Default

I find this thread pretty funny. When Ati was caught in the Quack-fiasco, people flamed them. Now that NV gets caught with their pants down in an obvious cheat people say

1. It's 3DMark, so it doesn't matter

2. They are just "exposing flaws in the benchmark"

3. It's just a bug in the drivers

Seriously, just how biased and one-sided CAN you be?
Nemesis77 is offline  
Old 05-15-03, 04:50 AM   #84
panzaman
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 94
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by AnteP
But in all fairness nVidia surely desrves a chance to correct their problems and if quality is fixed and performance is equal then they're off the hook.


..when will we stop to give nvidia new chances???...
__________________
Athlon Sempron 3100+ @ 1600mhz
ABIT NF8
1GB Crucial PC3200
BFG 6600GTOC 128mb
Windows XP SP2
panzaman 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 01:51 AM.


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