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

Newegg Daily Deals

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old 05-23-03, 09:35 PM   #361
retsam
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 2,602
Default

well stealth hawk nvidia has no say into how futuremark was writen they are no loger part of that .didnt they drop out back in december or something?? but ati is so wouldnt logic tell you that of course ati didnt need to cheat. the benchmark is already optimized for the 3xx series of cards.. not nv 3X series .ati had a lot of input on what went into the benchmark.... well how could nvidia not cheat if they had no say whats so ever what went into futuremark 2003.. im not justifying what they did .. i personally think nvidia is off there rocker for doing what they did. but i just dont see any other way nvidia could have optimized with out it being called cheating ..


rets



ps im just hopeing that nvidia realizes that the nv3X's suck so bad that they need to push out the 4x's that mush faster
retsam is offline  
Old 05-23-03, 09:47 PM   #362
solofly
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 213
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by StealthHawk
Why has nvidia so vehemently opposed 3dmark03(first the .pdf in Jan or Feb) and now with the response they made today? The fact is that nvidia is the one who keeps making 3dmark into a big deal, by denouncing it with one hand, and by cheating/optimizing in it with the other.
But you're missing my point too... You think that's going to make me and others get Ati over nVidia just because of a worthless, useless demo that shows a calculated number by who knows what, to give you what...? The next time I find a warning on a retail game, stating minimum requirements and that being a 3dmark benchmark outcome, then I will become concern. 3dmark has no way of telling if your computers is too slow for a game or any game. I really can't find any use out of it but that's just me...

Last edited by solofly; 05-23-03 at 10:13 PM.
solofly is offline  
Old 05-23-03, 09:56 PM   #363
retsam
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 2,602
Default

Quote:
The next time I find a warning on a retail game, stating minimum requirements and that being a 3dmark benchmark outcome, than I will become concern. 3dmark has no way of telling if your computers is too slow for a game or any game. I really can't find any use out of it but that's just me...

ya but i think there is a great need for these benchmarks if im plucking down 300$ + dollars on a new card i want to know what im getting myself into .... i think nvidia mad a bad move by dropping future mark ..... they should focus on helping developers and benchmark companies optimize there code for there cards instead of wasting time on driver hacks ..... bah


just my two cents

rets
retsam is offline  
Old 05-23-03, 10:02 PM   #364
DaNzA
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 17
Default

maybe nvidia is tring to show how 'useful' 3dmark2003 relly is

I think nvidia is betting on d3 to be the benchmarking standard..
DaNzA is offline  
Old 05-23-03, 10:10 PM   #365
solofly
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 213
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by DaNzA
I think nvidia is betting on d3 to be the benchmarking standard..
I hope so. I want that game to look and run like a million dollars...
solofly is offline  
Old 05-23-03, 10:17 PM   #366
digitalwanderer
 
digitalwanderer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Highland, IN USA
Posts: 4,944
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by DaNzA
maybe nvidia is tring to show how 'useful' 3dmark2003 relly is
ROFLMFAO~~~~~~

Yeah, and mebbe monkeys will fly out me butt...but I tend to doubt it.
__________________
[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  
Old 05-23-03, 10:20 PM   #367
Ghola
Registered User
 
Ghola's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Winnipeg
Posts: 132
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by solofly
I hope so. I want that game to look and run like a million dollars...
i wish ppl would say fun, thats why 95% OF PC GAMES LICK ASS. Then all theyère good for is "benchmarking"

edit by StealthHawk: don't circumvent the swear filter.
Ghola is offline  
Old 05-23-03, 11:47 PM   #368
conscript
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 6
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by retsam
well stealth hawk nvidia has no say into how futuremark was writen they are no loger part of that .didnt they drop out back in december or something??

Has it occurred to anyone that Nvidia dropped out of the Futuremark program because their next generation of cards couldn't legitimately compete with ATI's in the benchmark? A benchmark, that up until DX 9, was valid enough that Nvidia used it as an advertising and marketing ploy to show how much better their cards were. I think the whole show in December denouncing the benchmark was a setup incase they got caught like they did. Now they have their prepared "excuse". I smell
__________________
Heatware 71-0-0

A64 3200+ w/ Zalman CNPS7000A | Aopen AK86-L | 2GB (2x1gb) PMI PC3200 | PNY 6800 GT | 2x160gb Samsung HD's | TT 560W P/S | PIONEER DVR-107

Last edited by conscript; 05-23-03 at 11:50 PM.
conscript is offline  

Old 05-24-03, 12:10 AM   #369
digitalwanderer
 
digitalwanderer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Highland, IN USA
Posts: 4,944
Exclamation What? NO WAY!

Quote:
Originally posted by conscript
Has it occurred to anyone that Nvidia dropped out of the Futuremark program because their next generation of cards couldn't legitimately compete with ATI's in the benchmark? A benchmark, that up until DX 9, was valid enough that Nvidia used it as an advertising and marketing ploy to show how much better their cards were. I think the whole show in December denouncing the benchmark was a setup incase they got caught like they did. Now they have their prepared "excuse". I smell
No, seriously? You don't think they would try anything that dirty, devious, and underhanded...do ya?

Couldn't be, it must just be Futuremark pursuing some private vendetta against nVidia along with ExtremeTech........and most of the rest of the sane people in the world...

I don't think it's "possible", I think it's "happening"

(Sorry, this post was pushing rude. I didn't mean it to be, I was going for funny but methinks it's a bit past me bedtime.... )
__________________
[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  
Old 05-24-03, 12:45 AM   #370
john19055
 
john19055's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: GREENVILLE,TX
Posts: 3,857
Default

I wasted a couple of hours reading who cheated ,They both cheated,ATI admitted it and so did nvidia,But how many games are made with the futuremark engine.
john19055 is offline  
Old 05-24-03, 12:46 AM   #371
jAkUp
eat. sleep. overclock.
 
jAkUp's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Chino, California
Posts: 17,744
Default

bah thats not the point here. the point here is nvidia lied and decieved to make their product looks better than the competetor's.
__________________
965xe || evga x58 classified || 3x evga gtx 480 || 6gb g.skill || win7 x64
jAkUp is offline  
Old 05-24-03, 12:51 AM   #372
digitalwanderer
 
digitalwanderer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Highland, IN USA
Posts: 4,944
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by john19055
They both cheated,ATI admitted it and so did nvidia
No offense, but could you kindly point out where nVidia admitted to any cheating? I didn't see that anywhere, and I was looking for it.

nVidia not admitting up to the cheating is worse to me than the original cheating itself, especially in the face of such overwhelming and damning evidence.
__________________
[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  
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
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

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:59 AM.


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