Futuremark releases 3DMark03 patch - alleges NVIDIA cheats - Page 12

Gar · 05-23-03, 12:30 PM

Quote:

quote from Ante P at B3D

Abit GeForce FX 5800
build 320: 4700 marks
build 330: 3400 marks

28 % less...

Does that help?

Solomon · 05-23-03, 12:30 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by $E Mun$
Maybe nVIDIA incorporated this cheat on purpose to make 3D Mark 2003 irrelevant at the expense of their own integrity.

I certainly wish Matrox would get back in the swing of things. Maybe some AIB company would buy em ....

I'm all for that!!!

Just give Parhelia a 500Mhz core and a 1GHz DDR and it should do just fine.

Regards,
D. Solomon Jr.
*********.com

Behemoth · 05-23-03, 12:30 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by bkswaney
Well, all i see is a bunch of flaming.
Has anyone run the new test yet?
How much did your score go down?

i lost 14.86% for my fx5800 non-ultra
from 4051 to 3449

digitalwanderer · 05-23-03, 12:31 PM

My score on Bubbles went from 4440 to 4350 after patch.

There's a comparison chart over here, something like this:

Quote:

Originally posted by Hanners

By the way, isn't it a scary coincidence how many people use the same posting style as Nv40?

Great minds think alike, or something like that...

**saturnotaku** · 05-23-03, 12:31 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Solomon
I'm all for that!!! Just give Parhelia a 500Mhz core and a 1GHz DDR and it should do just fine.

Regards,
D. Solomon Jr.
*********.com

Bah, you just want that because you know the Parhelia is the only somewhat reasonably priced card that comes with dual DVI-outputs.

Gar · 05-23-03, 12:33 PM

Lets change the topic's direction. Do these results show that the FX line is highly inferior based on the drop in performance or will this not end up in real world performance?

EMunEeE · 05-23-03, 12:33 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Sazar
has the opteron out and is shortly releasing the athlon64...

Not to change the subject,hope the Athlon 64 will perform. I'll get one...but we know Intel has the technical edge and they'll come out with something to compete....

Quote:

Originally posted by Gar
Lets change the topic's direction. Do these results show that the FX line is highly inferior based on the drop in performance or will this not end up in real world performance?

I don't think it will show in real world performance as it is a 3D Mark 2003 cheat...other games should play just fine. The NV30 core to me is inferior to the R300/R350. The NV35 looks to be a great core.

Behemoth · 05-23-03, 12:36 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Gar
Lets change the topic's direction. Do these results show that the FX line is highly inferior based on the drop in performance or will this not end up in real world performance?

the main drop comes from GT4, if real world games work like GT4, then FX is gonna perform very badly.

Hanners · 05-23-03, 12:36 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Gar
Lets change the topic's direction. Do these results show that the FX line is highly inferior based on the drop in performance or will this not end up in real world performance?

I don't think it's inferior in current games by a long stretch, but it may show that performance will be lower than anticipated when we start seeing DirectX 9 games.

This doesn't chance the fact in my eyes that NV35 is a great product, but I imagine this whole incident will leave a bad taste in many people's mouths.

Ady · 05-23-03, 12:38 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by digitalwanderer
My score on Bubbles went from 4440 to 4350 after patch.

There's a comparison chart over here, something like this:

that pixel shader cheat is HUGE.

Sazar · 05-23-03, 12:39 PM

yes... ps 2.0 == teh suck on nv3x gpu's it seems...

when will they decide to fix that ?

curio · 05-23-03, 12:39 PM

Comparatively speaking, how is this any different then companies that give false revenue reports/inflated profits to get more investors? And yes, that is quite illegal.

The point is that you should not be able to inflate numbers to your advantage - it is not only un-ethical, but it absolutely should be illegal.

Many people use 3DMark as part of their desision making when buying graphics cards - that's a fact regardless of whether you think it is worth a crap as a benchmark.

IMO - inflating numbers/cheating should be illegal, and should absolutely come with consequences.

05-23-03, 12:39 PM	#143
Sazar Sayonara !!! Join Date: Jan 2003 Location: Austin, Texas Posts: 9,297	yes... ps 2.0 == teh suck on nv3x gpu's it seems... when will they decide to fix that ? __________________ Help to find cures for Alzheimer's, Mad Cow (BSE), CJD, ALS, Huntington's, Parkinson's disease, and many Cancers. Folding@Home - Is it in you?

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
Current NVIDIA FreeBSD graphics driver releases	zander	NVIDIA FreeBSD	0	01-27-09 05:22 PM
Current NVIDIA Linux graphics driver releases	AaronP	NVIDIA Linux	0	11-06-08 04:39 PM

05-23-03, 12:33 PM	#138
Gar I like cats. Join Date: Dec 2002 Posts: 151	Lets change the topic's direction. Do these results show that the FX line is highly inferior based on the drop in performance or will this not end up in real world performance?

05-23-03, 12:39 PM	#144
curio R3D Pimpin' Join Date: May 2003 Posts: 10	Comparatively speaking, how is this any different then companies that give false revenue reports/inflated profits to get more investors? And yes, that is quite illegal. The point is that you should not be able to inflate numbers to your advantage - it is not only un-ethical, but it absolutely should be illegal. Many people use 3DMark as part of their desision making when buying graphics cards - that's a fact regardless of whether you think it is worth a crap as a benchmark. IMO - inflating numbers/cheating should be illegal, and should absolutely come with consequences.