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

Newegg Daily Deals

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 11-20-03, 02:48 PM   #25
Rogozhin
Registered User
 
Rogozhin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: oregon
Posts: 826
Default

"Or we could do something useful and stop supporting Futuremark."


You made the proposition to chose between supporting futuremark or Nvidia-and you said you chose nvidia because futuremark has been invalidated by the cheating of 3d companies-I think this is simply naive and therefore said that I'd rather support a benchmark that is trying level the playing field and not the PRIMARY cheating 3d company.



THis would be like saying the SCAA is a worthless piece of infrastructure because a green bean importer is trying to pass off blue lintong as blue mountain-I sure as hell wouldn't support the importer that's fleecing the public-I'd support the SCAA.

Rogo
Rogozhin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-20-03, 02:55 PM   #26
ChrisRay
Registered User
 
ChrisRay's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Tulsa
Posts: 5,101
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by Rogozhin
"Or we could do something useful and stop supporting Futuremark."


You made the proposition to chose between supporting futuremark or Nvidia-and you said you chose nvidia because futuremark has been invalidated by the cheating of 3d companies-I think this is simply naive and therefore said that I'd rather support a benchmark that is trying level the playing field and not the PRIMARY cheating 3d company.



THis would be like saying the SCAA is a worthless piece of infrastructure because a green bean importer is trying to pass off blue lintong as blue mountain-I sure as hell wouldn't support the importer that's fleecing the public-I'd support the SCAA.

Rogo
Gosh Rog, Ruined stated that we should wait for the next 3dmark drivers to inflate 3dmark scores, Saying I would rather just stop using 3dmark actually contradicts me wanting NVidia to inflate it's scores.


If the stupid benchmark didnt exist. Nvidia wouldnt be wasting its time on it. They are not going to stop. Because of what the benchmark represents. Anyone who knows me on these forums Knows I detest Futuremark as a company and it's benchmark. And I have not changed my position on that. Because I hate what it represents, a Number that sells graphic cards.

Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar my friend, You seem intent on taking every Anti Futuremark sentiment as a pro Nvidia sentiment. And thats not the case.

Of Course, We've heard this rhetoric before. Nvidia is buncha naughty poopy heads and they are dead set on ruining end user experience *sigh* Same old crap. Different week Rog. Save me from the rhetoric someone.
__________________
|CPU: Intel I7 Lynnfield @ 3.0 Ghz|Mobo:Asus P7P55 WS Supercomputer |Memory:8 Gigs DDR3 1333|Video:Geforce GTX 295 Quad SLI|Monitor:Samsung Syncmaster 1680x1080 3D Vision\/Olevia 27 Inch Widescreen HDTV 1920x1080

|CPU: AMD Phenom 9600 Black Edition @ 2.5 Ghz|Mobo:Asus M3n HT Deluxe Nforce 780A|Memory: 4 gigs DDR2 800| Video: Geforce GTX 280x2 SLI

Nzone
SLI Forum Administrator

NVIDIA User Group Members receive free software and/or hardware from NVIDIA from time to time to facilitate the evaluation of NVIDIA products. However, the opinions expressed are solely those of the members
ChrisRay is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-20-03, 03:11 PM   #27
reever2
Registered User
 
reever2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 489
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by ChrisRay
It further shows that ANY benchmark is compromisable.
There, I fixed it for you Chris
reever2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-20-03, 03:23 PM   #28
Rogozhin
Registered User
 
Rogozhin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: oregon
Posts: 826
Default

It's not rhetoric it's logic.

The conclusion is valid-regardless of the week it's propogated in.


I only brought your initial statement to it's conclusion-I didn't begin this diatribe.

rogo
Rogozhin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-20-03, 03:35 PM   #29
ChrisRay
Registered User
 
ChrisRay's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Tulsa
Posts: 5,101
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by Rogozhin
It's not rhetoric it's logic.

The conclusion is valid-regardless of the week it's propogated in.


I only brought your initial statement to it's conclusion-I didn't begin this diatribe.

rogo
You're just playing the semantics game. I know what I said and how I said it. You can believe what I meant is open for interpretation. But it's not. My Conclusion is to stop Supporting 3dmark. The Sooner Futuremark's relevence is brought back down to "Just" a Synthetic benchmark. Rather than a Gamers benchmark where Every Magazine and PC shops sells by its numbers, Then maybe I'll be willing to change my opinion.

I suggested that we stop supporting Futuremark. So the Benchmark will be brought back down to a level of which it's not as important in the market. Has nary a thing to do with Loving Nvidias Optimisations, Or Being supportive of Nvidia.

We can continue this tripe discussion all you like Rog, But it does not change what I originally said and meant. And I close again, a Cigar is just a Cigar. And you're interpretation of what I said is completely off base.
__________________
|CPU: Intel I7 Lynnfield @ 3.0 Ghz|Mobo:Asus P7P55 WS Supercomputer |Memory:8 Gigs DDR3 1333|Video:Geforce GTX 295 Quad SLI|Monitor:Samsung Syncmaster 1680x1080 3D Vision\/Olevia 27 Inch Widescreen HDTV 1920x1080

|CPU: AMD Phenom 9600 Black Edition @ 2.5 Ghz|Mobo:Asus M3n HT Deluxe Nforce 780A|Memory: 4 gigs DDR2 800| Video: Geforce GTX 280x2 SLI

Nzone
SLI Forum Administrator

NVIDIA User Group Members receive free software and/or hardware from NVIDIA from time to time to facilitate the evaluation of NVIDIA products. However, the opinions expressed are solely those of the members
ChrisRay is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-20-03, 03:38 PM   #30
reever2
Registered User
 
reever2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 489
Default

Quote:
So the Benchmark will be brought back down to a level of which it's not as important in the market.
That does not depend on the views of the enthusiast or anybody who goes on msgboards to talk about videocards
reever2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-20-03, 03:44 PM   #31
ChrisRay
Registered User
 
ChrisRay's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Tulsa
Posts: 5,101
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by reever2
That does not depend on the views of the enthusiast or anybody who goes on msgboards to talk about videocards
Of course what I say here is going to mean little in the grand schemes of things, I never represented myself as influential. But I can still suggest we show our support or we dont show our support. Do I believe things will change? No Because the embiciles @ Nvidia decided to put themselves back into the 3dmark program. That really aggrovates,

Once again, They are paying 3dmark to sell cards, And We're never going to escape this Merry Go Round that is 3dmark.
__________________
|CPU: Intel I7 Lynnfield @ 3.0 Ghz|Mobo:Asus P7P55 WS Supercomputer |Memory:8 Gigs DDR3 1333|Video:Geforce GTX 295 Quad SLI|Monitor:Samsung Syncmaster 1680x1080 3D Vision\/Olevia 27 Inch Widescreen HDTV 1920x1080

|CPU: AMD Phenom 9600 Black Edition @ 2.5 Ghz|Mobo:Asus M3n HT Deluxe Nforce 780A|Memory: 4 gigs DDR2 800| Video: Geforce GTX 280x2 SLI

Nzone
SLI Forum Administrator

NVIDIA User Group Members receive free software and/or hardware from NVIDIA from time to time to facilitate the evaluation of NVIDIA products. However, the opinions expressed are solely those of the members
ChrisRay is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-20-03, 05:11 PM   #32
Rogozhin
Registered User
 
Rogozhin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: oregon
Posts: 826
Default

I agree that graphics card companies shouldn't use maipulated 3dmark scores to sell their vgas.

But you're throwing the baby out with the bathwater if you insist on expunging futuremark from the soil of mass media publication.

I've taken the steps to curtail this manipulation by not selling nvidia VGA's to my customers and I've written a few emails to them using analogies from my own buisness (the other one) regarding their actions.

Who's to say that even if a new benchmark takes the place of 3dmark that nvidia won't manipulate it?

There needs to be more solid benchmark guidles but the companies that blantantly cheat need to be "black listed" or the guildines are useless.

rogo
Rogozhin is offline   Reply With Quote

Old 11-20-03, 05:15 PM   #33
ChrisRay
Registered User
 
ChrisRay's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Tulsa
Posts: 5,101
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by Rogozhin
I agree that graphics card companies shouldn't use maipulated 3dmark scores to sell their vgas.

But you're throwing the baby out with the bathwater if you insist on expunging futuremark from the soil of mass media publication.

I've taken the steps to curtail this manipulation by not selling nvidia VGA's to my customers and I've written a few emails to them using analogies from my own buisness (the other one) regarding their actions.

Who's to say that even if a new benchmark takes the place of 3dmark that nvidia won't manipulate it?

There needs to be more solid benchmark guidles but the companies that blantantly cheat need to be "black listed" or the guildines are useless.

rogo
I have a dream, It's a dream where on benchmark isnt used to expressively to sell Graphic card, Where Benchmark suites are taken and people can make educated decisions.

Under the current system of "3dmarks" and how many people percieve graphic cards, This cant be achieved, That being said, You blame this entirely on Nvidia, And it's not entirely Nvidia's Fault. ATI and XGI are just as bad about promoting 3dmarks to how there cards perform.

Does anyone remember XGI releasing 3dmarks way before the first previews came about? What does this tell us? People are placing way too much value in 3dmark, Taking away futuremark's credibility and benchmarking system is the only way we hope to combat this.
__________________
|CPU: Intel I7 Lynnfield @ 3.0 Ghz|Mobo:Asus P7P55 WS Supercomputer |Memory:8 Gigs DDR3 1333|Video:Geforce GTX 295 Quad SLI|Monitor:Samsung Syncmaster 1680x1080 3D Vision\/Olevia 27 Inch Widescreen HDTV 1920x1080

|CPU: AMD Phenom 9600 Black Edition @ 2.5 Ghz|Mobo:Asus M3n HT Deluxe Nforce 780A|Memory: 4 gigs DDR2 800| Video: Geforce GTX 280x2 SLI

Nzone
SLI Forum Administrator

NVIDIA User Group Members receive free software and/or hardware from NVIDIA from time to time to facilitate the evaluation of NVIDIA products. However, the opinions expressed are solely those of the members
ChrisRay is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-20-03, 05:25 PM   #34
Rogozhin
Registered User
 
Rogozhin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: oregon
Posts: 826
Default

I don't sell XGI-right now it's nvidia and ati-and I only sell nvidia when a customer absolutely demands it.

I do blame nvidia more than the other three.


Rogo
Rogozhin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-20-03, 05:29 PM   #35
ChrisRay
Registered User
 
ChrisRay's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Tulsa
Posts: 5,101
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by Rogozhin
I don't sell XGI-right now it's nvidia and ati-and I only sell nvidia when a customer absolutely demands it.

I do blame nvidia more than the other three.


Rogo
I guess it wasnt ATI"s fault when they spent more time optimising for 3dmark2001 on the 8500's release than actually getting games working? Have any doubts?

Check out early 8500 previews for 3dmark, Then check out ship date and actual games. ATI is just as responcible for putting futuremark where it is today as Nvidia is. This is an ongoing thing. Both Companies know how much 3dmark sells cards, So Does XGI, So Does SiS, So Does power VR,

Who do we blame for putting so much value in 3dmark? Nvidia? 3dfx? ATI? XGI? SiS? It all starts somewhere, Futuremark/Madonion would not be where it is today without the support of Nvidia, ATI and other players supporting there benchmark, Spending many man hours making sure all variations of it have ran well.
__________________
|CPU: Intel I7 Lynnfield @ 3.0 Ghz|Mobo:Asus P7P55 WS Supercomputer |Memory:8 Gigs DDR3 1333|Video:Geforce GTX 295 Quad SLI|Monitor:Samsung Syncmaster 1680x1080 3D Vision\/Olevia 27 Inch Widescreen HDTV 1920x1080

|CPU: AMD Phenom 9600 Black Edition @ 2.5 Ghz|Mobo:Asus M3n HT Deluxe Nforce 780A|Memory: 4 gigs DDR2 800| Video: Geforce GTX 280x2 SLI

Nzone
SLI Forum Administrator

NVIDIA User Group Members receive free software and/or hardware from NVIDIA from time to time to facilitate the evaluation of NVIDIA products. However, the opinions expressed are solely those of the members
ChrisRay is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-20-03, 06:02 PM   #36
Rogozhin
Registered User
 
Rogozhin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: oregon
Posts: 826
Default

I had the 8500at release and ran 3dmark2001 myself-I never saw a drastic decrease in performance with later driver versions.

I agree with most of your thoughts about this chris-just not that nvidia is less responsible than all the others.

rogo
Rogozhin 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
happy with new monitor mistrict01 General Hardware 3 05-23-12 12:52 PM

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:00 AM.


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