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

Newegg Daily Deals

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 05-18-03, 09:15 PM   #121
Nv40
Agent-Fx
 
Nv40's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: everywhere
Posts: 2,216
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by ChrisRay
I think Nvidia should just lock frame rates in 3dmark too a specific point. Maybe 30 FPS, That way people could see 3dmark as what it is, a techniqal demo. And just screw the 3dmarks all together

that is a nice idea..

that will force websites to stop using 3dmark2003 with Nvidia cards,
as a measures of accurate performance.. the only we need is to enjoy
and relax with the graphics.. 30frames is enough..
Nv40 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-18-03, 09:19 PM   #122
Sazar
Sayonara !!!
 
Sazar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Austin, Texas
Posts: 9,297
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by Nv40
DOnt miss cuote me..

You can only cheat if you agree with the rules of a contest_and later you
break them ... Since Nvidia already told they dont agreed with the rules
of 3dmark for X ,Y,Z reasons , and WARNS WEBS SITES to not use the bechmark ,because it does-not represent the real performance of Nvidia cards. WHo is misleading here the public? is that clear?

and there is already many post by me.. about why i think 3dmark
is not doing what people say it does. just enter BIG tread of 3dmark2003
and re-read my post again ,im tired of repetitions
nv40... so you agree that nvidia is cheating then ?

thats what I gather from your post...
Sazar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-18-03, 09:20 PM   #123
Clockwork
I was cured all right...
 
Clockwork's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: The Korova Milk Bar
Posts: 115
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by Nv40
DOnt miss cuote me..

You can only cheat if you agree with the rules of a contest_and later you
break them ... Since Nvidia already told they dont agreed with the rules
of 3dmark for X ,Y,Z reasons , and WARNS WEBS SITES to not use the bechmark ,because it does-not represent the real performance of Nvidia cards. WHo is misleading here the public? is that clear?

It's not up to nVidia (nor any other IHV) to decide what benches should and should not be used with their cards.

LOL.

Or do you only want benches that show product in the best light or are partial to a certain vendor?? Doesn't that kind of defeat the purpose of benchmarking in general (3dmark or otherwise).
__________________
| AMD Athlon 64 3500+ | 1GB Corsair XMS Extreme Memory PC3200 DDR | GIGABYTE GA-K8NSNXP-939 nForce3 Ultra | WD 120GB SATA | BFG 6800GT OC w/ Zalman VF700cu | Pioneer DVR-A07XLA 8x DVD+-R/RW | Aopen 1640Pro-A 16x DVD | Cooler Master Cavalier 1 CAV-T01-WWA case | Ultra X-Connect 500watt psu | Windows XP Professional w/ SP2 |Samsung 193p+ 19" LCD
Clockwork is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-18-03, 09:21 PM   #124
Nv40
Agent-Fx
 
Nv40's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: everywhere
Posts: 2,216
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by Sazar
nv40... so you agree that nvidia is cheating then ?

thats what I gather from your post...
how about Justice ? sounds better..
Nv40 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-18-03, 09:26 PM   #125
Sazar
Sayonara !!!
 
Sazar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Austin, Texas
Posts: 9,297
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by Nv40
how about Justice ? sounds better..
how bout I say b.s. and we call it even



um... no... justice is not what this is...

but I am with you in saying this is a cheat...
Sazar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-18-03, 09:33 PM   #126
StealthHawk
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by jimmyjames123
I mean, some of the older non-WHQL detonators didn't have corruption of image quality, right?
The ones that didn't were about half as fast as the cheating drivers though. Convenient, isn't it?

43.51 "fixed" the problem of lower precision, it was WHQL, but it also had these clipping plane problems.
  Reply With Quote
Old 05-18-03, 09:33 PM   #127
jimmyjames123
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 665
Default

Quote:
@ this time... through all the posts I have read from you... and jimmy... and behemoth... I have yet to see anything that shows that

a) ati is cheating or coercing with futuremark on 3dmark03
b) futuremark is purposely seeking to reduce nvidia's scores
c) nvidia is in fact not cheating
d) the evidence produced and provided is indeed not showing any cheating going on
No one here has ever claimed that point a) and b) are true. Point c) and d) is a matter of perspective. From NVIDIA's point of view, they (presumably) "optimized" for 3dmark03 without any corruption of actual image quality. From ATI's point of view, they "cheated".

What seems to be getting lost here is that:

1) The Detonator FX 44.03 drivers have improved image quality and performance across many different gaming benchmark's for FX graphics cards, while at the same time being WHQL certified for FX graphics cards.
2) The rendering errors occur off camera and can be found using a developers 3dmark version that NVIDIA doesn't have authorized access to (unlike ATI).

These 3dmark03 rendering issues do not affect FX graphics card owners in a negative way with respect to image quality or performance. They might affect absolute comparisons between ATI cards for 3dmark03, and that's about all we can speculate about at this time.
jimmyjames123 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-18-03, 09:35 PM   #128
StealthHawk
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by ChrisRay
Why? They improved AF quality 10 fold and and lost little to no performance, There is way more to these drivers than just 3dmark.
They also decreased the quality of Quality AF. But I agree, they vastly improved the quality of Performance AF and HIgh Performance AF. But then, should we really give them brownie points for this? Performance AF and High Performance AF had terrible image quality before.

Also, as proved by Behemoth, these changes came around in the 43.51 driver. They are not new to 44.03.

Discussion
  Reply With Quote

Old 05-18-03, 09:41 PM   #129
jimmyjames123
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 665
Default

And they are also the first version of Detonator FX drivers too
jimmyjames123 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-18-03, 09:42 PM   #130
Sazar
Sayonara !!!
 
Sazar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Austin, Texas
Posts: 9,297
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by jimmyjames123
No one here has ever claimed that point a) and b) are true. Point c) and d) is a matter of perspective. From NVIDIA's point of view, they (presumably) "optimized" for 3dmark03 without any corruption of actual image quality. From ATI's point of view, they "cheated".

What seems to be getting lost here is that:

1) The Detonator FX 44.03 drivers have improved image quality and performance across many different gaming benchmark's for FX graphics cards, while at the same time being WHQL certified for FX graphics cards.
2) The rendering errors occur off camera and can be found using a developers 3dmark version that NVIDIA doesn't have authorized access to (unlike ATI).

These 3dmark03 rendering issues do not affect FX graphics card owners in a negative way with respect to image quality or performance. They might affect absolute comparisons between ATI cards for 3dmark03, and that's about all we can speculate about at this time.
ati has not officially or unofficially stated anything concerning the det 44.03 driver irregularity issue... AFAIK...

the dets do a good job... no doubt.. but the point is in tihs particular situation which undoubtedly is what you were pointing to when starting the thread... there is a problem...

nvidia WOULD have authorised access to the same features that you claim ati has access to.. they choose not to have that access... this is nobody's fault but nvidia's and no one but nvidia can deal with this...

also... again this has nothing really to do with ati cards though being nvidia's primary competition I can understand why you pointed that out... and I will leave it at that... (ie I agree to an extent with a comparison though I do not support it in this line of discussion) ...

consumers are affected anytime false results are posted because THEY will purchase a product based on the fact that it performs @ a certain level...

undoubtedly the nv3x series (high end cards) perform well... but a matter such as this puts a black mark on the reputation of the company and its product whose score it was trying to boost...
Sazar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-18-03, 09:49 PM   #131
jimmyjames123
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 665
Default

Quote:
nvidia WOULD have authorised access to the same features that you claim ati has access to.. they choose not to have that access... this is nobody's fault but nvidia's and no one but nvidia can deal with this...
Absolutely. Unfortunately they would have to pay Futuremark in order to do this, and we all know what they really think of 3dmark03 as a gamer's benchmark tool
jimmyjames123 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-18-03, 09:53 PM   #132
Sazar
Sayonara !!!
 
Sazar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Austin, Texas
Posts: 9,297
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by jimmyjames123
Absolutely. Unfortunately they would have to pay Futuremark in order to do this, and we all know what they really think of 3dmark03 as a gamer's benchmark tool
it is unfortunate they have not taken a more pro-active stance on futuremark

would have saved us all going through dozens of pages of the same old stuff...
Sazar is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


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
Bored, impressed, and giddy: Our final thoughts on E3 2012 (with photos) News Archived News Items 0 06-13-12 07:00 AM
Thoughts from console owners on NVIDIA's GEFORCE GRID MikeC Console World 11 05-27-12 09:43 AM
Looking for a good 21"/22" Monitor...any thoughts? Guuts General Hardware 13 09-22-02 12:04 PM
Thoughts on the command line as an interface. lunix Microsoft Windows XP And Vista 10 09-12-02 09:44 PM
GTA Thoughts? Typedef Enum Gaming Central 5 09-03-02 05:51 PM

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:38 PM.


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