Futuremark releases 3DMark03 patch - alleges NVIDIA cheats

Clockwork · 05-23-03, 09:19 AM

Quote:

3DMark03 Patch 330 Released
Fri 2003-05-23

Saratoga, California USA – May 23rd, 2003

3DMark®03 incorporates many ground breaking new features and technologies and sets the standard for easily and objectively measuring and comparing modern PCs’ 3D graphics performance. Recently, there have been questions and some confusion regarding 3DMark®03 results obtained with certain NVIDIA drivers.

We have now established that NVIDIA’s Detonator FX drivers contain certain detection mechanisms that cause an artificially high score when using 3DMark®03. We have just published a patch 330 for 3DMark03 that defeats the detection mechanisms in the drivers and provides correct results.

Download the 3DMark03 Patch 330 here:

http://www.futuremark.com/download/?...patch330.shtml

A detailed audit report of the drivers and 3DMark03 is available at:

http://www.futuremark.com/companyinf...dit_report.pdf

As with all Futuremark’s benchmarks, 3DMark®03 has been created in cooperation with the major PC industry players to provide users with the best possible and most reliable set of diagnostic tools.

Futuremark is regarded as the driving force that pushes the industry to raise the bar with respect to graphics performance and features. We are committed to deliver performance analysis in an accurate, fair and consistent manner. 3DMark®03 continues in that tradition.

Additional Information Please visit http://www.futuremark.com/products/3dmark03 for additional 3DMark®03 related information. 3DMark®03 is available for free public download at http://www.futuremark.com/download/?3dmark03.shtml

About Futuremark® Corporation
Futuremark® Corporation, formerly known as MadOnion.com™, is the leading provider of computer performance analysis software and services. Futuremark® is known around the world for its benchmark products, including the 3DMark® Series and PCMark™2002 (with more than 30 million copies distributed worldwide) and value-added services powered by a database of over 5 million real life benchmarking results. Futuremark® has offices in Saratoga, California and Helsinki, Finland. For more information, please visit http://www.futuremark.com.

© 2003 Futuremark® Corporation. 3DMark® and PCMark™ trademarks and logos, Futuremark® character names and distinctive likenesses, are the exclusive property of Futuremark Corporation. DirectX® is a registered trademark of Microsoft Corporation. All other trademarks are property of their respective companies.

Company Contact:

Futuremark Corporation
Phone: +1-408-517-0131
Mr. Tero Sarkkinen
Executive Vice President of Sales and Marketing
Email: tero@futuremark.com

http://www.futuremark.com/news/?news...305/2003052308

Special thanks goes out to Nebuchadnezzar!

Nebuchadnezzar · 05-23-03, 09:25 AM

I didn't think you would take it seriously

DSC · 05-23-03, 09:33 AM

From the audit PDF:

Quote:

Our investigations reveal that some drivers from ATI also produce a slightly lower total score on
this new build of 3DMark03. The drop in performance on the same test system with a Radeon
9800 Pro using the Catalyst 3.4 drivers is 1.9%. This performance drop is almost entirely due to
8.2% difference in the game test 4 result, which means that the test was also detected and
somehow altered by the ATI drivers. We are currently investigating this further.

HAHAHAHAHA, so ATI CHEATS also. Good work.

deejaya · 05-23-03, 09:36 AM

This is interesting. If you read the PDF, you find that although not as great a difference, the ATI drivers were found to be "detecting" 3dMark too.

Makes you feel all warm inside when you know the only alternative (to all those people banging on about trust) is Matrox.

Mariner · 05-23-03, 09:37 AM

Yup - ATI cheated by 1.9%
NVidia cheated by 24%

I suppose NVidia's driver team has always had the reputation of being better than that of ATI!

PreservedSwine · 05-23-03, 09:39 AM

Who's going to download the patch run the tests? I'd like to see the new results for both cards.

I never, ever thought I'd ever say this, but Great job futuremark!

tertsi · 05-23-03, 09:40 AM

Copy from Futuremark's report:

Our investigations reveal that some drivers from ATI also produce a slightly lower total score on this new build of 3DMark03. The drop in performance on the same test system with a Radeon 9800 Pro using the Catalyst 3.4 drivers is 1.9%. This performance drop is almost entirely due to 8.2% difference in the game test 4 result, which means that the test was also detected and somehow altered by the ATI drivers. We are currently investigating this further.

Busted!

DSC · 05-23-03, 09:41 AM

At least we can now happily be in the one big family of cheaters, whether you're an Nvidiot or fanATIc.....

GROUP HUG GROUP HUG!!!!!

PreservedSwine · 05-23-03, 09:47 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by DSC
At least we can now happily be in the one big family of cheaters, whether you're an Nvidiot or fanATIc.....

GROUP HUG GROUP HUG!!!!!

I think you've missed the point. Cheating is bad, & that means even if everyone is doing it. ATI owners ahould feel cheated as well.

This doesn't make it OK, and way to go Futuremark for exposing any cheats!

digitalwanderer · 05-23-03, 09:49 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by tertsi
Copy from Futuremark's report:

Our investigations reveal that some drivers from ATI also produce a slightly lower total score on this new build of 3DMark03. The drop in performance on the same test system with a Radeon 9800 Pro using the Catalyst 3.4 drivers is 1.9%. This performance drop is almost entirely due to 8.2% difference in the game test 4 result, which means that the test was also detected and somehow altered by the ATI drivers. We are currently investigating this further.

Busted!

No, no...that one is a legitimate bug.

Gotta say it, nice job to futuremark for catching both of 'em (if ATi's is an actual cheat, I was joking 'bout with the legitimate bug bit.

) and I hope they keep it up.

c4c · 05-23-03, 09:49 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by deejaya
This is interesting. If you read the PDF, you find that although not as great a difference, the ATI drivers were found to be "detecting" 3dMark too.

Makes you feel all warm inside when you know the only alternative (to all those people banging on about trust) is Matrox.

Matrox probably just hasn't been important enough to scrutinize yet. Besides, they have enough problems as it is

To the topic at hand:

I have to say I am VERY impressed with this statement from Futuremark. I hope they continue to release reports like this about cheats/unexplainable performance. This will do alot towards making 3DMark a worthy benchmark, instead of a nice demo that shows some numbers at the end. (which is what all the previous versions have been to me)

Please please please keep watching out for stuff like this guys. It is interesting to see that Ati might also have their hand in the cookie jar.

Nebuchadnezzar · 05-23-03, 09:49 AM

Rofl you people trying to tell that that 1.9% difference on the ATI cards justifies the 24% of the Nvidia's?

05-23-03, 09:25 AM	#2
Nebuchadnezzar Registered User Join Date: Feb 2003 Location: Internet Posts: 122	I didn't think you would take it seriously __________________ [ P4 3.5GHz / SP-94 \| 1GB HyperX \| Asus P4C800-E Del. \| 400GB SATA-R0 + 200GB \| 6800GT 399/1120::67.03 \| Sonata 380W \| LiteOn DVD±RW \| NEC 17" TFT \| SE K700i ] [ 3DMark01:20406][03:12401][05:5153][PCMark04:4572][Aquamark³:67465][CpuZ ]

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, 09:36 AM	#4
deejaya Monster 3d Join Date: Jan 2003 Posts: 200	This is interesting. If you read the PDF, you find that although not as great a difference, the ATI drivers were found to be "detecting" 3dMark too. Makes you feel all warm inside when you know the only alternative (to all those people banging on about trust) is Matrox.

05-23-03, 09:37 AM	#5
Mariner Registered User Join Date: Apr 2003 Location: England Posts: 75	Yup - ATI cheated by 1.9% NVidia cheated by 24% I suppose NVidia's driver team has always had the reputation of being better than that of ATI!

05-23-03, 09:39 AM	#6
PreservedSwine I'm always hungry Join Date: Aug 2002 Posts: 548	Who's going to download the patch run the tests? I'd like to see the new results for both cards. I never, ever thought I'd ever say this, but Great job futuremark!

05-23-03, 09:40 AM	#7
tertsi www.fornvidiots.net Join Date: May 2003 Posts: 340	Copy from Futuremark's report: Our investigations reveal that some drivers from ATI also produce a slightly lower total score on this new build of 3DMark03. The drop in performance on the same test system with a Radeon 9800 Pro using the Catalyst 3.4 drivers is 1.9%. This performance drop is almost entirely due to 8.2% difference in the game test 4 result, which means that the test was also detected and somehow altered by the ATI drivers. We are currently investigating this further. Busted!

05-23-03, 09:41 AM	#8
DSC Registered User Join Date: Nov 2002 Posts: 882	At least we can now happily be in the one big family of cheaters, whether you're an Nvidiot or fanATIc..... GROUP HUG GROUP HUG!!!!!

05-23-03, 09:49 AM	#12
Nebuchadnezzar Registered User Join Date: Feb 2003 Location: Internet Posts: 122	Rofl you people trying to tell that that 1.9% difference on the ATI cards justifies the 24% of the Nvidia's?