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

Newegg Daily Deals

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 06-02-03, 06:42 PM   #1
ricercar
fugue master
 
ricercar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: silicon valley
Posts: 1,603
Default NVIDIA's offical response to Futuremark

Hot off the wire and soon to appear in a news outlet near you:

Futuremark Statement

For the first time in 6 months, as a result of Futuremark's White Paper last Friday, Futuremark and NVIDIA have had detailed discussions regarding NVIDIA GPUs and Futuremark's 3DMark03 benchmark.

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 .

The world of 3D Graphics has changed dramatically with the latest generation of highly programmable GPUs. Much like the world of CPUs, each GPU has a different architecture and a unique optimal code path. For example, Futuremark's PCMark2002 has different CPU test compilations for AMD's AthlonXP and Intel's Pentium4 CPUs.

3DMark03 is designed as an un-optimized DirectX test and it provides performance comparisons accordingly. It does not contain manufacturer specific optimized code paths. Because all modifications that change the workload in 3DMark03 are forbidden, we were obliged to update the product to eliminate the effect of optimizations identified in different drivers so that 3DMark03 continued to produce comparable results.

However, recent developments in the graphics industry and game development suggest that a different approach for game performance benchmarking might be needed, where manufacturer-specific code path optimization is directly in the code source. Futuremark will consider whether this approach is needed in its future benchmarks.

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
__________________
I used to drive a Heisenberg, but whenever I'd glance at the speedometer, I'd get lost.
ricercar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-02-03, 06:51 PM   #2
digitalwanderer
 
digitalwanderer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Highland, IN USA
Posts: 4,944
Angry Oh my gods!

It sounds like nVidia was able to bully Futuremark into compliance, they have been assimilated.
__________________
[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   Reply With Quote
Old 06-02-03, 07:03 PM   #3
jimbob0i0
ATI Geek
 
jimbob0i0's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 268
Send a message via ICQ to jimbob0i0 Send a message via Yahoo to jimbob0i0
Default

does this still include the clip planes and buffer clearing
jimbob0i0 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-02-03, 07:06 PM   #4
MikeC
Administrator
 
MikeC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 1997
Location: Virginia
Posts: 7,478
Default

I can already tell this thread is going to go nowhere fast.
MikeC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-02-03, 07:06 PM   #5
Ady
...
 
Ady's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Australia
Posts: 502
Default

well nvidia area really pushing their weight around. either that or it's April fools day or something. Got a link?
__________________
Dying is not going to kill me.
Ady is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-02-03, 07:09 PM   #6
digitalwanderer
 
digitalwanderer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Highland, IN USA
Posts: 4,944
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by MikeC
I can already tell this thread is going to go nowhere fast.
You kidding? This is like flicking matches at a powderkeg!
__________________
[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   Reply With Quote
Old 06-02-03, 07:12 PM   #7
hithere
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 176
Default

It's okay, Futuremark, we all know what really happened. We all know that use of static clip planes is a cheat, and cannot possibly be beneficial under any condition other than a score in a benchmark. We all know that replacing shader code in an application-specific way is also a cheat. We all know that ALL application-specific optimizations for benchmarks that are based on detection are cheats, and not optimizations. Some of us are willing, even, to admit it to ourselves and others. Some are not.

Nvidia: 1
Consumer: 0

Hey Nvidia! How's it feel to exhibit the morals of the average three-year-old? Were you woosing in dat benchmark... awwwww...they're a buncha' bing dum-heads at Futuremark anyways with thier big dum-dum benchmark...I know, we'll just play like we're making the benchmark, and everyone'll believe it, but we'll just be wrecking it instead!!(/three-year-old girl)

Quote:
Originally posted by some news poster on the front page
(some bs about eating crow)
No, thanks. I didn't definine the difference between right and wrong based on what nvidia told me before, and I'm not about to start believing that use of static clip planes and other nonsense is okay because they say so...not now, not ever. Nvidia is showing every one their @##...without an apology to the communities that support them on the web for this BS, Nvidia will never occupy my machine nor my household again.

Last edited by hithere; 06-02-03 at 07:36 PM.
hithere is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-02-03, 07:14 PM   #8
jimbob0i0
ATI Geek
 
jimbob0i0's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 268
Send a message via ICQ to jimbob0i0 Send a message via Yahoo to jimbob0i0
Default

Ady look at www.hardocp.com for the link to the press release and yes I know kyle posted it but Brent has said over at rage3d that this has come from Terro Sarkkinen at futuremark direct to their mailbox.
jimbob0i0 is offline   Reply With Quote

Old 06-02-03, 07:14 PM   #9
Rogozhin
Registered User
 
Rogozhin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: oregon
Posts: 826
Default

this is a joke.

rogo
Rogozhin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-02-03, 07:23 PM   #10
vampireuk
**** Holster
 
vampireuk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: The armoury
Posts: 2,813
Send a message via AIM to vampireuk
Default

*breaks out the shotguns*

I'll be watching you guys, and how do you know they didnt actually just sit down and talk it over? It's possible you know, oh look, its the cancer man!
vampireuk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-02-03, 07:23 PM   #11
muzz
 
muzz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 816
Default

Looks like someone just got slapped around like a red-headed stepchild!

I wonder if they threatened to sue FM, or if there is a BOATLOAD of $ involved....( not insinuating, just wondering........)

" Here lets just revise the tesing procedure so NV has a chance....... even though it was THEIR choice to forego the DX standard of 24bit"

I hope That^^^^^^^^ was NOT anything like what transpired.

I smell BS, and Mike I think your right, nothing good is gonna come out of this except one shiney star..... that star lives in Cali.


BAH!!!!!
__________________
muzz
muzz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-02-03, 07:32 PM   #12
nin_fragile14
Fat Tuna
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Lincoln, Nebraska
Posts: 509
Default

Pretty sad. Looksl like nvidia threatened lawsuit and futuremark backed down. I doubt there's anymore to it than that.
__________________
2.66 P4 @ 3.0 Ghz / Geforce 6800 GT @ 410/1080/ 768 mb Samsung DDR333 @ 374 mhz / Abit IS7 / XP Pro / NEC 1760NX LCD
nin_fragile14 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 08:47 PM.


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