Go Back   nV News Forums > Graphics Card Forums > NVIDIA Legacy Graphics Cards

Newegg Daily Deals

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 06-26-03, 05:26 AM   #1
StealthHawk
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default 3dmark03 Pro and GeForceFX Cards

I think some of you guys have 3dmark03 Pro.

For those that do, and who also own a GeForceFX card, could you please run the test normally, and also enable the option that forces cards to use PS1.1 instead of PS1.4 and post the results?

Thanks.
  Reply With Quote
Old 06-26-03, 11:00 AM   #2
Sazar
Sayonara !!!
 
Sazar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Austin, Texas
Posts: 9,297
Default Re: 3dmark03 Pro and GeForceFX Cards

Quote:
Originally posted by StealthHawk
I think some of you guys have 3dmark03 Pro.

For those that do, and who also own a GeForceFX card, could you please run the test normally, and also enable the option that forces cards to use PS1.1 instead of PS1.4 and post the results?

Thanks.
why ?

the scores will automatically be lower ?

experiment ?
Sazar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-26-03, 11:18 AM   #3
Uttar
Registered User
 
Uttar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 1,354
Send a message via AIM to Uttar Send a message via Yahoo to Uttar
Default

My bet: With cheating drivers, they'll be lower. With non-cheating drivers, they'll be higher.
Simply because with cheating drivers, nV is *already* using FX12 even though it isn't normally permitted by PS1.4. ( but it is by PS1.1. ) - and then, all you get is an additional performance hit of having to do multiple passes...


Uttar
Uttar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-26-03, 11:20 AM   #4
Sazar
Sayonara !!!
 
Sazar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Austin, Texas
Posts: 9,297
Default

uttar... concerning the new 44.6x driver set... per the grapevine @ b3d... the scores are back @ pre patch 330 levels with the 44.03...

comments ?
Sazar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-26-03, 11:32 AM   #5
Nutty
Sittin in the Sun
 
Nutty's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 1,835
Send a message via MSN to Nutty
Default

if FX12 isn't allowed in PS1.4, then what format did the R8500 use?
Nutty is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-26-03, 11:36 AM   #6
Uttar
Registered User
 
Uttar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 1,354
Send a message via AIM to Uttar Send a message via Yahoo to Uttar
Default

Nutty: The R(v)2xx supports FX16. Yeah, small difference, but MS cares I guess

Sazar: My guess is that the 44.65 do the same thing as the 44.03 did. But there's another upcoming driver release which will retrieve a few 3DMark "optimizations", but keep most in.


Uttar
Uttar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-26-03, 11:38 AM   #7
Sazar
Sayonara !!!
 
Sazar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Austin, Texas
Posts: 9,297
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by Uttar
Nutty: The R(v)2xx supports FX16. Yeah, small difference, but MS cares I guess

Sazar: My guess is that the 44.65 do the same thing as the 44.03 did. But there's another upcoming driver release which will retrieve a few 3DMark "optimizations", but keep most in.


Uttar
seemed interesting.. since a lad with a 5900U on b3d posted a thread about perceived 'optimizations'

ah well..
Sazar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-26-03, 11:55 AM   #8
SurfMonkey
QuadCore G80 PS3 Overload
 
SurfMonkey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: In a small room surrounded by vast, inscrutable, machines...
Posts: 491
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by Uttar
Nutty: The R(v)2xx supports FX16. Yeah, small difference, but MS cares I guess

Sazar: My guess is that the 44.65 do the same thing as the 44.03 did. But there's another upcoming driver release which will retrieve a few 3DMark "optimizations", but keep most in.


Uttar
The 44.65's don't seem to have the same problems as the 44.03's had in 3DMark, renaming it has no effect and there are no glitches when you go 'off the rail'. So either they moved really quickly in making sure these optimisations aren't as easily detected or they already had the code in place ready for such a situation.

Which means that if it was the former, then they just don't care about peoples perceptions of them or, if it was the latter, they were working with malice afore thought. They always knew they'd get caught eventually and were already set up to combat it. Either way it's quite sad. Now if these peformance boosts were legitimate then all well and good... but I don't think they are somehow.
__________________
Folding for Beyond3D
"A lie gets halfway around the world before the truth has a chance to get its pants on."
Sir Winston Churchill

"Halflife2 got halfway around the world before Gabe had a chance to get his pants on."
Anon
SurfMonkey is offline   Reply With Quote

Old 06-26-03, 12:39 PM   #9
Uttar
Registered User
 
Uttar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 1,354
Send a message via AIM to Uttar Send a message via Yahoo to Uttar
Default

Hmm, likely the 44.65 includes the same changes as those upcoming drivers ( official release likely to finish by "7" )

From my understanding, they managed to agree with 3DMark that some "optimizations" were "alright" ( that is, thanks to their legal department ) , but still some had to go.
95% of the "optimizations" are still there though I believe.

Just what part of "Everyone is being paranoid about cheating now and wants to trap you everywhere they can for the fun" can't nVidia understand?

As I said, they're footing themselves in the shoot.


Uttar
Uttar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-26-03, 01:03 PM   #10
Nutty
Sittin in the Sun
 
Nutty's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 1,835
Send a message via MSN to Nutty
Default

Yup, even apple fudged the benchmarking of their new G5.

http://www.haxial.com/spls-soapbox/apple-powermac-G5/
Nutty is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-26-03, 01:47 PM   #11
Sazar
Sayonara !!!
 
Sazar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Austin, Texas
Posts: 9,297
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by Nutty
Yup, even apple fudged the benchmarking of their new G5.

http://www.haxial.com/spls-soapbox/apple-powermac-G5/
they took it a step further...

apple == teh suck...

teh very GOOD LOOKING suck... but teh suck nevertheless
Sazar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-26-03, 07:28 PM   #12
StealthHawk
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: Re: 3dmark03 Pro and GeForceFX Cards

Quote:
Originally posted by Sazar
why ?

the scores will automatically be lower ?

experiment ?
Well, I would assume that running PS1.4 would give higher scores than running PS1.1. But until someone tests, there really is no clear cut evidence of that....and it is still an assumption.
  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


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:08 PM.


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