Will Tom's, Anand, [H], etc., run with this story?

[ClyssaN]

Originally posted by Sean P.

Though I have not had the opportunity to speak with Kyle on this matter, I tend to believe that he feels the same way. As a result, ( I believe ) he is waiting to speak fully on the matter until all the information is given to him.

For one reason or another, people seem quick to tackle Kyle for not jumping on this matter. Though we may or may not agree with his approach on this matter, I think that he deserves the benefit of the doubt here.

Like kyle give the benefit of the doubt to ET ?! He sure didn't wait a single minute before attacking them ...

I really like your reviews (and of course Brent reviews ) at HardOCP but your boss has been far from imparcial on this matter.

[digitalwanderer]

Originally posted by Sean P.
I think NVIDIA will respond with some sort of technical information to try and prove their case...What we've heard so far is a quick response...I'd imagine a more thorough and formal response will be coming sometime this week...

Once we have this information, we can look at both sides and then make our final decisions...

Pelly, how many more "give 'em a chance fellas!" do you seriously expect us to give to nVidia when their attitude seems to be so freakingly blatant BS denial?

No offense Pelly as I respect you quite a bit, but how long do you give nVidia to respond? I really don't feel it should be up to them for when we should be able to render a judgement if they ain't gonna step up to the plate and talk about it.

They had quite a bit of time to address it before Futuremark came out with their findings, yet they didn't.

They could have addressed it Friday when this broke in a much more professional and realistic manner, rather than "Futuremark is being mean to us!"

They are all out of time come Tuesday morning Pelly, there is no excuse for them to not have addressed this yet. Holiday or no, this is company killing stuff here!

[Behemoth]

this is one way of shuffling instructions that manually reduces workload:

original program:

do a;
do b;
if (c == true) {do d;}
else { do e;}
do f;
do g;
do h;
do i;
do j;


by studying the scene, c is always true, instructions other than a,d,h have no visual effect in this scene, let me make a faster version of a mathematically functionally visually identical program of above by "shuffle instructions":

do a;
if (c == true) {do d;}
else {do e;
do b;
do f;
do g;
do i;
do j;
}
do h;



original program does 8 instructions and 1 comparison per pass.
my mathematically functionally visually identical program does only 3 instructions and 1 comparison per pass. what an optimization!

shuffle instructions can be very cheaty imho

p.s. if my post offend you in any way, i am sorry, i am just here to share my point of view

[DivotMaker]

Originally posted by digitalwanderer
They are all out of time come Tuesday morning Pelly, there is no excuse for them to not have addressed this yet. Holiday or no, this is company killing stuff here!

All out of time by Tuesday morning? I think someone is being just a tad over-dramatic. I do agree they need to respond and the response needs to make sense and it needs to come pretty soon. But hand-wringing, teeth-gnashing Bad nVidia, Bad responses on forums aren't going to get us or nVidia there any faster. Face it, there is not a thing you, I, or anyone here can do about this other than nVidia.

I happen to feel strongly that there is a whole helluva lot more to this story than a solitary response from an anonymous nVidia employee...we'll see...hopefully soon....

[digitalwanderer]

Originally posted by BigBerthaEA
I happen to feel strongly that there is a whole helluva lot more to this story than a solitary response from an anonymous nVidia employee...we'll see...hopefully soon....

I just keep thinking that I wish nVidia would take this problem half as seriously as the rest of the world seems to, they really disapoint me by not treating this with the seriousness it is due.

So I mock 'em, nuts to ya if'n you don't like it...I hope they don't either.

[DivotMaker]

Originally posted by digitalwanderer
So I mock 'em, nuts to ya if'n you don't like it...I hope they don't either.

Sorry, but I highly doubt they are real concerned with what you or I have to say about them.

I am sure they will respond when they are ready....not when you or any of us tell them.

And as far as your constant derision of nVidia and anyone who remotely supports them, you aren't impressing anyone. Tell me what good that does for ANY discussion on ANY of these boards?

[digitalwanderer]

Originally posted by BigBerthaEA
Sorry, but I highly doubt they are real concerned with what you or I have to say about them.

I am sure they will respond when they are ready....not when you or any of us tell them.

And as far as your constant derision of nVidia and anyone who remotely supports them, you aren't impressing anyone. I am not calling you a troll, but you sure seem to exhibit very troll-like responses. Tell me what good that does for ANY discussion on ANY of these boards?

I disagree, I think they ARE worried about their image and I think it does drive 'em nuts to have to read the drivel I've been putting out. I think they know they're wrong and they're hoping it blows over and everytime they read someone ranting/mocking/informing about what they're doing I think it drives 'em a bit bonkers especially since they apparently CAN'T respond publically to any of it or they'll have to publically respond to ALL of it.

So I mock, scorn, and inform. It's how I get me jollies, don't read it if you don't like it.

[DivotMaker]

Originally posted by digitalwanderer
So I mock, scorn, and inform. It's how I get me jollies, don't read it if you don't like it.

Mock and scorn, yes. 2 out of three ain't bad. Being as I have been a target of your misinformation earlier, I can't exactly ignore what you post here.

Someone is certainly consumed with self-importance...

[digitalwanderer]

Originally posted by BigBerthaEA
Someone is certainly consumed with self-importance...

Yeah I know, that's why I poke fun at ya!

[DivotMaker]

Originally posted by digitalwanderer
Yeah I know, that's why I poke fun at ya!

You confuse me with one who cares....

[Sazar]

Originally posted by Sean P.
Wow.....I leave for a week and come back to find the whole world turned upside-down...

The events we've witnessed over the past week are certainly a cause for concern. Given the severity of the accusations and implications we have seen, it is far too easy to make a quick judgement on this matter. However, I believe that we should take a step back and wait until we have all the information before we make up our minds entirely. Should the final collection of information prove NVIDIA to be in the wrong, you can be sure that a flame-fest is warranted and justified.

Don't get me wrong...right now I tend to believe that NVIDIA was caught in the act of cheating. However, since we do not know all the details from BOTH sides, this initial impression cannot be solidified into a final opinion. Though I have not had the opportunity to speak with Kyle on this matter, I tend to believe that he feels the same way. As a result, ( I believe ) he is waiting to speak fully on the matter until all the information is given to him.

For one reason or another, people seem quick to tackle Kyle for not jumping on this matter. Though we may or may not agree with his approach on this matter, I think that he deserves the benefit of the doubt here. HardOCP readers come to our website for the cold [H]ard truth...with all the PR bull**** cast to the side. Kyle has run [H] that way from the start and I don't think he is planning on changing that anytime soon...

In the end, let's trust Kyle ( and the rest of the media ) to do the right thing...Wait for all the information before making your mind up and let's see what happens in the coming weeks...

If anyone has any direct questions they would like to ask me, please email me...

pelly@hardocp.com

Have a good one guys...

nice response sean...

here's my thing with kyle though...

fair enough if he is not aware of the situation.. he can reserve judgement on nvidia's side of matters...

but... the speed with which he attacked (and I would consider it an attack purely based on the terminology used) ET and the fact that he practically dismissed the document put forth by futuremark is not really a sign of an un-biased 'journalist'

seeing the way he reported the quake issue even with the evidence @ hand and the handling of this matter... it is very apparent there appear to be different standards... whether it is because of bias to a particular IHV or whether it has anything to do with his rather apparent dislike for 3dmarko03 (and therefore perhaps futuremark ? ) I can't say...

but the fact of the matter is we have evidence of something going on... which when disabled renders a product in a not so attractive light... and instead of making ANY comments on this... kyle is making rather thinly veiled accusations at the people reporting this matter rather than discussing anything related to nvidia's side of things... ie how these optimizations affect us...

whether kyle likes 3dmark03 or not is NOT in question... nvidia's use of 'optimizations' is... and yes... while kyle does have a distinct style of reporting... it is disturbing to see the way he has handled this matter...

fair enough... if more info is required... so be it... kyle could have taken the high road and done like anandtech and toms and NOT implicated himself in this matter in the manner he has...

comments made about kyle are based on HIS actions thus far... and are not based on rumours or innuendo... they are based on cross-referencing what we.. the consumers... are seeing on various sites/the futuremark .pdf/independent testers

I am willing to wait to see what happens... I have no problems with that... I just wish kyle had decided to do the same...

ergo... I will 'trust' kyle perhaps when I see what he has to say on the full matter and to see if he manages to do this without throwing out petty and utterly useless accusations concerning other sites and benchmark devs...

-edit- btw nvidia has taken the same route as kyle in attacking futuremark and implying ati's connection rather than taking anytime whatsoever to address the fact that their drivers have been shown to be acting improperly in a benchmark...

Originally posted by Behemoth
yes it is hard to believe.
i didnt say there was no chance nvidia was cheating, i even said in one post that the clipping plane issue was possibly nvidia cheat.

No, you said we should wait for official word from nvidia before condemning them. We have official word from one company on what they did, and it's not nvidia. And ATI never said they were cheating. CatalystMaker said it was an OPTIMIZATION, and he was against removing it because he felt it was valid.

now futuremark caught ati doing driver detection and code alteration, and ati have admitted they did shuffle the instructions, these are hard evidences, they say much more than just a few screenshots and a guess in ET site, nvidia didnt admit anything, fureturemark did not provide any evidences, so i dont think it is cynical, a few corrupted screenshots plus a guess means very different to me than an ati confession plus futuremark evidences.
and yes i didnt believe a few screenshots plus a guess were evident enough to prove nvidia cheating.

What guess? Did you even read the .pdf audit from Futuremark? They said that they DETECTED nvidia's shader programs, and they tell you where each shader program was found.

What Futuremark evidence against ATI? There is NONE. No claims, no screenshots, NOTHING. They said ATI lost 8% in GT4 and they would investigate further. They did not accuse ATI of doing anything. ATI are the ones who said they changed a shader.

i am sorry, i cant really understand how stop doing a suspicious cheat again makes a company more honest than just to prove it was a valid optimization. when people think its a cheat, ati appease them by not doing it again? does that mean ati agreed with people that it was a cheat? or cheat once in a while is ok, forgive-able?

How would they prove it's a valid optimization? By showing you their code compared to the original code? Is that even legal? Can they show you Futuremark's original code legally?

as for gaining speed by shuffling instructions, i can only think they have changed the flow of control that results in skipping part of shader codes and workload that is irrelevant to GT4 sky and water. of coz this is just my guess.

So you don't want to believe the guess of ET, B3D, or Futuremark, but we're supposed to believe your guess....show me the logic. Your guess is based on what observations or evidence?