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

Newegg Daily Deals

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 06-02-03, 11:47 PM   #169
muzz
 
muzz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 816
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by Zenikase
They've been doing this for a while. That "The Way it's Meant to be Played" logo? Yeah, that's an indicator.

Did you mean to say........
" The way it's meant to be rendered" ?

Just curious, as sometimes I get a wee bit confused.
__________________
muzz
muzz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-02-03, 11:47 PM   #170
Sazar
Sayonara !!!
 
Sazar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Austin, Texas
Posts: 9,297
Default kyle redeems himself ?

Quote:
FutureMark & NVIDIA Statements

POOF! All is now AOK!

FutureMark Statement:

Futuremark now has a deeper understanding of the situation and NVIDIA's optimization strategy. In the light of this, Futuremark now states that NVIDIA's driver design is an application specific optimization and not a cheat.

NVIDIA Statement:

NVIDIA works closely with developers to optimize games for GeForceFX. These optimizations (including shader optimizations) are the result of the co-development process. This is the approach NVIDIA would have preferred also for 3DMark03.

Joint NVIDIA-Futuremark Statement:

Both NVIDIA and Futuremark want to define clear rules with the industry about how benchmarks should be developed and how they should be used. We believe that common rules will prevent these types of unfortunate situations moving forward.

Translation VIA HardOCP: FutureMark reneges on previous statements and confirms NVIDIA was not cheating on their benchmark and NVIDIA will not take a legal action against FutureMark that would bankrupt them. All about the $, but that is just our opinion. Still this does not change our thoughts on the FutureMark and their benchmark. Editorial coming...
I will say I personally have been highly critical of our pal kyle bennet from [H]

but @ the same time... that statement of his does put things in perspective

/me thinks shades of 3dfx-esque lawsuits
Sazar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-02-03, 11:52 PM   #171
DivotMaker
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 823
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by Zenikase
CPUs and video cards, as similar as they are becoming, still have a few fundamental differences, one of them being the fact that video processors use vendor-specific driver compilers that translate code on-the-fly into machine language that only that driver's intended product(s) can interpret. With general-purpose processors, there are no such drivers. Rather, programmers can choose from a wide array of different third-party compilers that will in the end produce the same result on various CPUs, although there will be obvious differences in efficiency from compiler to compiler and from CPU to CPU. The problem is that with video card drivers, the manufacturers (ie, nVidia and ATi) have the opportunity to meddle with the drivers in order to produce results that would be more favorable to them, and since it will only work on their products, that same performance gain won't occur on the competition's. In synthetic CPU benchmarks, one doesn't have to worry about these things since most major CPU manufacturers (ie, Intel and AMD) support the same instruction sets (MMX, SSE, SSE2) in hardware that are implemented by that benchmark's developers in their code.
VERY well said...
DivotMaker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-02-03, 11:54 PM   #172
Sazar
Sayonara !!!
 
Sazar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Austin, Texas
Posts: 9,297
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by Zenikase
They've been doing this for a while. That "The Way it's Meant to be Played" logo? Yeah, that's an indicator.

CPUs and video cards, as similar as they are becoming, still have a few fundamental differences, one of them being the fact that video processors use vendor-specific driver compilers that translate code on-the-fly into machine language that only that driver's intended product(s) can interpret. With general-purpose processors, there are no such drivers. Rather, programmers can choose from a wide array of different third-party compilers that will in the end produce the same result on various CPUs, although there will be obvious differences in efficiency from compiler to compiler and from CPU to CPU. The problem is that with video card drivers, the manufacturers (ie, nVidia and ATi) have the opportunity to meddle with the drivers in order to produce results that would be more favorable to them, and since it will only work on their products, that same performance gain won't occur on the competition's. In synthetic CPU benchmarks, one doesn't have to worry about these things since most major CPU manufacturers (ie, Intel and AMD) support the same instruction sets (MMX, SSE, SSE2) in hardware that are implemented by that benchmark's developers in their code.
I thought that was why there was the belief that the directx api would lead IHV's to implement standardised features... ?

it is not the fault of the industry that some IHV's refuse to follow standards... or that those products tend not to perform @ a competitive levels @ those standards...
Sazar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-02-03, 11:59 PM   #173
Zenikase
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 99
Default

Yes, the problem is that both ATi and nVidia refuse to conform to the standards set in DirectX and implement their own ideas about how things should be done, even if they're radically different (case in point: nVidia's static/dynamic flow instruction set).
Zenikase is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-02-03, 11:59 PM   #174
Neural
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 9
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by Zenikase
They've been doing this for a while. That "The Way it's Meant to be Played" logo? Yeah, that's an indicator.

CPUs and video cards, as similar as they are becoming, still have a few fundamental differences, one of them being the fact that video processors use vendor-specific driver compilers that translate code on-the-fly into machine language that only that driver's intended product(s) can interpret. With general-purpose processors, programmers can choose from a wide array of different third-party compilers that will in the end produce the same result on various CPUs, although there will be obvious differences in efficiency from compiler to compiler and from CPU to CPU. The problem is that with video card drivers, the manufacturers (ie, nVidia and ATi) have the opportunity to meddle with the drivers in order to produce results that would be more favorable to them, and since it will only work on their products, that same performance gain won't occur on the competition's. In synthetic CPU benchmarks, one doesn't have to worry about these things since most major CPU manufacturers (ie, Intel and AMD) support the same instruction sets (MMX, SSE, SSE2) in hardware that are implemented by that benchmark's developers in their code.
I think you mistook me for meaning that they could liscense the optimizations to software programmers. I dont know for sure but I think they probably give the optimizations out for free to programmers or even pay them(under the table of course *cough* intel *cough*) to use their optimizations so there cards run faster. What I was referring to though is how intel is forced by non monopoly laws to liscense its SSE implementation to AMD because if intel refused, AMD could claim that intel was stopping it from being competitive i.e. M$java and Sun java. Intel gets around this though by implementing new optimizations in each new core refresh in order to stay one step ahead of its liscensees. I shudder to think of the evilness at the top of intel...

Forgot something, I agree with most of what you say about the CPU/GPU achitectures and drivers, but i dont know if microsoft develops the drivers for different CPUs, I could be wrong but I would have thought that their makers made the drivers, submit for WHQL, and are then implemented in the OS. Not all CPUs are natively supported by a standard driver, I had to get a driver update from windows update for my barton in order to take advantage of the extra L2 cache. Windows update also offers some older GPU drivers, but they dont try to keep up with the ever changing GPU drivers.

Last edited by Neural; 06-03-03 at 12:07 AM.
Neural is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-03-03, 12:02 AM   #175
Ady
...
 
Ady's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Australia
Posts: 502
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by Neural
Here ya go! Thanks for listening. Kinda long so grab a snack or save them for when you have plenty of time. There in order from first article to the third.

http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=9693

http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=9711

http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=9744
thanks mate
__________________
Dying is not going to kill me.
Ady is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-03-03, 12:02 AM   #176
Zenikase
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 99
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by Neural
I think you mistook me for meaning that they could liscense the optimizations to software programmers. I dont know for sure but I think they probably give the optimizations out for free to programmers or even pay them(under the table of course *cough* intel *cough*) to use their optimizations so there cards run faster. What I was referring to though is how intel is forced by non monopoly laws to liscense its SSE implementation to AMD because if intel refused, AMD could claim that intel was stopping it from being competitive i.e. M$java and Sun java. Intel gets around this though by implementing new optimizations in each new core refresh in order to stay one step ahead of its liscensees. I shudder to think of the evilness at the top of intel...
Yes, it's one of the several reasons why I despise Intel and will probably never buy their CPUs and motherboards as long as there is viable competition. I wish they would enforce the same type of anti-competitive laws on video card manufacturers, and who knows, it may happen in the near future.
Zenikase is offline   Reply With Quote

Old 06-03-03, 12:03 AM   #177
Steppy
Radeon 10K Pro
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 351
Default

If the use of clip planes is now "optimization", then where does the line get drawn? Not rendering ANYTHING would just be the extreme case of using clip planes, would give super high scores, but would be worthless...but according to FM and NV that theoretically would be a perfectly acceptable "optimization". Something stinks here IMO.
__________________
Here's my clever comment
Steppy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-03-03, 12:03 AM   #178
jAkUp
eat. sleep. overclock.
 
jAkUp's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Chino, California
Posts: 17,744
Default

i feel nv, or other video card companies have to throw in something extra for the "average joe." cinematic computing... and fp32 are words they use to attract consumers. just following the dx9 spec, and being fast at it doesnt cut it anymore for the average "joe consumer" i think it would be great to just follow dx9 specs, it allows more developers to concentrate on gameplay and graphics. and keeps them from moving towards consoles (which more and more companies tend to be doing)
pc gaming is dying slowly... the recent big games have sucked. the cost for creating pcgames are getting higher than the profits... and generally pc gaming is in a slump.
hopefully hl2 and doom3 breath new life into pcgaming.
__________________
965xe || evga x58 classified || 3x evga gtx 480 || 6gb g.skill || win7 x64

Last edited by jAkUp; 06-03-03 at 12:09 AM.
jAkUp is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-03-03, 12:07 AM   #179
Zenikase
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 99
Default

The reason why more developers are moving on to consoles is because there are they have rules set in stone as to what will work and what won't. It's a single set of hardware they have to program for, and there's no need to worry about compatibility because it will never change. This leads to much faster and cheaper development time, allowing them to focus on more important things, like the game itself.
Zenikase is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-03-03, 12:14 AM   #180
ragejg
nV News Alumni
 
ragejg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Finger Lakes of Hell, NY
Posts: 5,399
Send a message via AIM to ragejg
Default ...

I have to disagree...

I think publications are misguidedly conveying things like that. Is the astronomical rise in population of hardware phr33ks all for nothing?

PC gaming is growing in crazy ways... It's created scrutiny for the stars on this playing field, and magnified the occurence of the rifts between companies in this competitive environment.

And it leads to real big threads...
__________________

2010-2011 Reviews: GTX 570 | GTX 580 | GTS 450 | GTX 460 | GTX 465
Pre-2010 Reviews: 6600 GT | XMS 4400 DDR | SilenX Cooler | 6800 | 5900 XT | Personal Cinema | 5900 NU


______________________________________________
Phenom II x6 1090t @ 4.0 ghz | Asus M498TD-EVO Am3 SLI nForce 980a | 2x EVGA GTX 560 SLI | 2x4gb DDR3-1333 | Antec EarthWatts EA650 PSU | 60gb Mushkin Calisto Enhanced Sandforce SSD | 2x WD2500KS RAID 0 | Sunbeam Tuniq 3 case | 24" Asus 19x10 LED LCD | 26" Panasonic 720p TV | Sidewinder X5 mouse | Logitech MX5500 & Revolution mouse | Altec Lansing 5.1 THX-Certified audio | Win 7 Ultimate | desk | couch


ragejg 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
User Response : PR Response to Linus Torvald's Inflammatory Comments Blackcrack NVIDIA Linux 16 06-29-12 05:57 AM
PR Response to Linus Torvald's Inflammatory Comments News Archived News Items 0 06-19-12 01:00 AM
PR Response to Linus Torvald's Inflammatory Comments MikeC NVIDIA Linux 0 06-18-12 11:14 PM
NV30 name poll sancheuz NVIDIA GeForce 7, 8, And 9 Series 72 10-19-05 02:23 AM
Any details on Nvidia's failed NV2 for SEGA? suburbanguy Rumor Mill 1 08-21-02 11:30 PM

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:04 PM.


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