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

Newegg Daily Deals

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 05-21-03, 09:25 AM   #349
Behemoth
radeon 9800 pro
 
Behemoth's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Darkness Falls
Posts: 841
Default

i dont hate nvidia as much, perhaps mainly because i appreciate 9700/9800pro more than any one of you so called ati fanboys, coz i think they are GREAT, they are so great nv30 look pale in comparsion, but i wouldnt hate nvidia coz of this, coz 9700/9800pro are GREAT, not just better than a POS, they are even better than a great card called nv30!!!
in regard to cheating, its bad, if nvidia cheated us customers its real bad, but it would rather be ok to me if it cheated 3DMark, coz i dont like 3DMark in the first place.
Behemoth is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-21-03, 09:28 AM   #350
Sazar
Sayonara !!!
 
Sazar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Austin, Texas
Posts: 9,297
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by Behemoth
i dont hate nvidia as much, perhaps mainly because i appreciate 9700/9800pro more than any one of you so called ati fanboys, coz i think they are GREAT, they are so great nv30 look pale in comparsion, but i wouldnt hate nvidia coz of this, coz 9700/9800pro are GREAT, not just better than a POS, they are even better than a great card called nv30!!!
in regard to cheating, its bad, if nvidia cheated us customers its real bad, but it would rather be ok to me if it cheated 3DMark, coz i dont like 3DMark in the first place.
the point though... is that cheating is invalid in ANY situation...

regardless of the motives the fact that cheating occurs anywhere is incorrect in terms of ethics...

I would say the same thing about any other company... look @ what ati has had to deal with for the past year and a half... and they have taken steps to avoid the same situation...

nvidia should be held to the same standards... regardless of the validity in your or anyone elses opinion of a particular benchmark...
Sazar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-21-03, 09:30 AM   #351
NightFlight
 
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 2
Default

Here's a good link with some good points on this issue....


http://www.elitebastards.com/page.ph...d=1&comments=1

Last edited by NightFlight; 05-21-03 at 09:35 AM.
NightFlight is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-21-03, 09:31 AM   #352
digitalwanderer
 
digitalwanderer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Highland, IN USA
Posts: 4,944
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by NightFlight
Here's a good link with some good points on this issue....


http://www.elitebastards.com/page.p...ad=1&comments=1
Yeah, listen to it straight from a group of self-named "bastards"...
__________________
[SIZE=1][I]"It was very important to us that NVIDIA did not know exactly where to aim. As a result they seem to have over-engineered in some aspects creating a power-hungry monster which is going to be very expensive for them to manufacture. We have a beautifully balanced piece of hardware that beats them on pure performance, cost, scalability, future mobile relevance, etc. That's all because they didn't know what to aim at."
-R.Huddy[/I] [/SIZE]
digitalwanderer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-21-03, 09:34 AM   #353
NightFlight
 
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 2
Default

Doesn't matter what their name is, still alot of good points in that article. As for me I just use Fraps and call it a day.
NightFlight is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-21-03, 09:38 AM   #354
Behemoth
radeon 9800 pro
 
Behemoth's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Darkness Falls
Posts: 841
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by Sazar
so.. what was the logic of your previous post if you do not intend to go to an ati fansite ?

are you as bored as I am sitting here @ home sick

lol

i really wanted to see how he would feel if nvidia-lovers do this same thing, which i think is stupid and childish, back to him.
Behemoth is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-21-03, 10:46 AM   #355
digitalwanderer
 
digitalwanderer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Highland, IN USA
Posts: 4,944
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by NightFlight
Doesn't matter what their name is, still alot of good points in that article. As for me I just use Fraps and call it a day.
I was being sarcastic, I was on staff at EB up until yesterday.
__________________
[SIZE=1][I]"It was very important to us that NVIDIA did not know exactly where to aim. As a result they seem to have over-engineered in some aspects creating a power-hungry monster which is going to be very expensive for them to manufacture. We have a beautifully balanced piece of hardware that beats them on pure performance, cost, scalability, future mobile relevance, etc. That's all because they didn't know what to aim at."
-R.Huddy[/I] [/SIZE]
digitalwanderer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-21-03, 11:07 AM   #356
zakelwe
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 768
Default

I'd far rather be a drunkenbastard than an elitebastard to be honest

Here's some examples of the GT1 game using 41.09 drivers and 42.68 drivers. This is not a clipping or precision bug, it's a non drawing bug -- 41.09 is really slow ( 128 fps ) and 42.68 is really fast ( 138fps ).



41.09 frame 440

42.68 frame 440

41.09 frame 830

42.68 frame 830

As I pointed out earlier Futuremark no longer mind these drivers, so they think of iot as a bug not a cheat.


Regards

Andy
zakelwe is offline   Reply With Quote

Old 05-21-03, 11:09 AM   #357
Sazar
Sayonara !!!
 
Sazar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Austin, Texas
Posts: 9,297
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by zakelwe
I'd far rather be a drunkenbastard than an elitebastard to be honest

Here's some examples of the GT1 game using 41.09 drivers and 42.68 drivers. This is not a clipping or precision bug, it's a non drawing bug -- 41.09 is really slow ( 128 fps ) and 42.68 is really fast ( 138fps ).



41.09 frame 440

42.68 frame 440

41.09 frame 830

42.68 frame 830

As I pointed out earlier Futuremark no longer mind these drivers, so they think of iot as a bug not a cheat.


Regards

Andy
I believed futuremark was going to sort the scores per WHQL and non-WHQL standings in order to separate the two...

dunno... perhaps Worm can enlighten us..

btw... for the record.. the older driver sets IQ is some of the worst I have seen... what exactly is it rendering ??

not much apparently..
Sazar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-21-03, 11:28 AM   #358
rokzy
 
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 158
Default

now that nvidia's finally got some DX9 drivers, when will they get on the Hall of Fame?

though the Hall of Fame seems quite useless atm; no FX cards at all, no 9800 or 9600 cards, and no differentiation between 9700 and 9500 cards...
rokzy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-21-03, 06:37 PM   #359
legion88
WhatIfSports.com Junkie
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 135
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by Nv40
what i find really sad ,Joe.. its HOW fraudulent is this PS1.4 benchmark.
i find very hard to believe ,that you believe in the things you say.
you only focus you view in what Nvidia have done ,but cares nothing about the test at all. How unfair it is for Nvidia cards ,but still people like you with some "knowledge" still defend the test. everyones knows this ..
3dmark is not apples vs apples , but you point your finger to Nvidia
for not playing apples vs apples.. you complain for Doom3 benchamrks
but are VERY pleased with 3dmark2003. DONt you see the pattern here?
Take your glasses Dude.. look things from other points of view too..
I understand clearly all your points , but what you dont want to see
is the truth of 3dmark 2003 as a fair comparisons between NVidia and ATI cards ,and as a bench representative of Games of the FUture...

you already knows this ,that the test is already invalid ,
since one participant does not agree with their rules anymore .
BUt as you have said."THE only thing that matters is the scores "

wait... it also matters that both cards do things in exactly in
the same way.. Ohh.. but thats impossible..
WHo cares.. "THE only thing that matters is the scores "

what is even Funny is that in games of the Future (Doom3)
using the best engine in the following years ,Nvidia have the fastest cards ..and trounce all ATI cards.. ppsss... in the real WOrld.

3DMark2003 does not include 'code' specifically to make selected video cards faster. That is something you want everyone else to believe for quite sometime, like for several months. I have not been paying attention to this forum for about a month or so (been somewhere else) but I see that the 'commentary' has not changed from you in regards to 3DMark.

3DMark2003 was designed from the ground up to be as close to an "apples-to-apples" comparison as it can be. That is why FutureMark did not include code like "if video card is an NVIDIA run this slower code instead or run this 'do more rendering work to make it look slower' code or run this 'do less rendering work to make it run faster' code" instead.

Games will often treat various cards different which is why they are not suitable for benchmarking. It is funny how the "real-world" crowd continue to fail to mention this fact when they propagandize the alleged superiority of "real-world" games over "synthetics" for benchmarking.

I can see websites wanting to use "real-world" games as it makes their reviews longer and, generally, more interesting. In other words, real-world games make the reviews look better (as in a better read) but it does not make the quality of the data that they provide better. The quality of the data is actually worse as the reviewer can not prove at all that the games are not selectively favoring one card over another.

3DMark2003 does not selectively treat NVIDIA cards different from ATI cards. 3DMark2003 treats all the cards the same. By definition (something you ignore with your commentary), this is an apples-to-apples comparison.

Cheating on the other hand can render the results invalid. In other words, cheating can make the results a non-apples-to-apples comparison. That is obviously not the fault of 3DMark2003 or FutureMark but the fault of the accused--in this case, allegedly NVIDIA.
legion88 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-22-03, 06:16 PM   #360
hithere
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 176
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by legion88
3DMark2003 does not include 'code' specifically to make selected video cards faster. That is something you want everyone else to believe for quite sometime, like for several months. I have not been paying attention to this forum for about a month or so (been somewhere else) but I see that the 'commentary' has not changed from you in regards to 3DMark.

3DMark2003 was designed from the ground up to be as close to an "apples-to-apples" comparison as it can be. That is why FutureMark did not include code like "if video card is an NVIDIA run this slower code instead or run this 'do more rendering work to make it look slower' code or run this 'do less rendering work to make it run faster' code" instead.

Games will often treat various cards different which is why they are not suitable for benchmarking. It is funny how the "real-world" crowd continue to fail to mention this fact when they propagandize the alleged superiority of "real-world" games over "synthetics" for benchmarking.

I can see websites wanting to use "real-world" games as it makes their reviews longer and, generally, more interesting. In other words, real-world games make the reviews look better (as in a better read) but it does not make the quality of the data that they provide better. The quality of the data is actually worse as the reviewer can not prove at all that the games are not selectively favoring one card over another.

3DMark2003 does not selectively treat NVIDIA cards different from ATI cards. 3DMark2003 treats all the cards the same. By definition (something you ignore with your commentary), this is an apples-to-apples comparison.

Cheating on the other hand can render the results invalid. In other words, cheating can make the results a non-apples-to-apples comparison. That is obviously not the fault of 3DMark2003 or FutureMark but the fault of the accused--in this case, allegedly NVIDIA.
I think there's a misconception here: Users aren't benchmarking a card alone when they use "real-world" benchmarks (games). You contend that games treat different cards differently, therefore there can be no valid comparison. But what if the user doesn't care which card is "superior"? All the user wants to know is which card will deliver the best performance in his/her favorite game, no matter how that game "treats" either manufacturer.

The 3dMark thing is a cheat. The benchmark depends on being run as if it were a normal game in order to facilitate comparison. It is irrelevant that the cheat is invisible, it still destroys the integrity of the test, the benchmark, and that of the driver coder who facilitated this nonsense. It is irrelevant if you think it is an invalid benchmark: Nvidia thinks it's valid enough to set coders to work putting in clipping planes in complete disregard to the integrity of the test. Instead of offering enhancements to drivers that enable a faster run of the test in a legitimate manner, they have endeavored to circumvent the spirit of the benchmark.

I don't care how any of you want to sugar-coat it. The fact is, they turned a fully realized 3-d test environment into a rendering on rails to inflate their score, and that sucks.

Optimization: Enables a higher score/smoother performance while maintaining the credibility of the test/ viability of the gameplay experience.

Cheat: Enables a higher score/smoother performance in a benchmark/timedemo at the cost of the credibility of the test or the viability of the gameplay experience, usually coupled with secrecy; sometimes referred to as an extremely fortunate "bug"
ex: Clipping planes that just so happen to follow the camera around in a rail-guided benchmark, and continue to follow the preset path of the camera even when the user takes the camera off the rails.
hithere 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 06:00 AM
Thoughts from console owners on NVIDIA's GEFORCE GRID MikeC Console World 11 05-27-12 08:43 AM
Looking for a good 21"/22" Monitor...any thoughts? Guuts General Hardware 13 09-22-02 11:04 AM
Thoughts on the command line as an interface. lunix Microsoft Windows XP And Vista 10 09-12-02 08:44 PM
GTA Thoughts? Typedef Enum Gaming Central 5 09-03-02 04:51 PM

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:26 AM.


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