Go Back   nV News Forums > Website Related > Feedback Forum

Newegg Daily Deals

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 02-12-03, 02:58 PM   #49
FrgMstr
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: The Great State of Texas
Posts: 47
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by Solomon
Since Kyle is here. How about shedding light on picking which benchmarks to run for your FX review? Why didn't you use AA + AF during the Serious Sam results? I never understood that one. You seem to use AA+AF on other results you used? Seems to be you didn't use the AA+AF on Serious Sam because it showed that the ATi Radeon 9700 was leaps ahead of the FX. Only Anandtech seem to show that test result. Why was it left out on yours Mr. Kyle Bennet.

The only reason why I brought up the ATi issue was that it seemed people would jump up saing ATi is optimizing for specifics. Now that people are finally saying that Nvidia was optimizing for benchmarks seemed ironic that before everyone was hush hush in saying that.

Pretty fast in judging me and my site just because my understanding of the ATi situation differs from you. You seemed pretty fast on slamming ATi about that quake.exe issue. You never seemed to mention that the quake.exe was in the drivers well before the ATi 8500 ever surfaced. You never seemed to mentioned it didn't affect the Radeon 64mb video card when it was implemented. You never seemed to mentioned that the drivers are universal base so how can you seriously have facts that it wasn't for the 64mb Radeon instead of the 8500 ? When it was known ATi fixed it in the next release. So in theory it was only in one release from ATi even though it was in months before in beta releases.

There are two sides of this quake.exe issue. Apparently it's your opinion that matters and there is no other side to it. To each his own.

Regards,
D. Solomon Jr.
*********.com
I have had posts deleted here due to them being off topic sooo....

If you would like to take this discussion to another thread in our forums as to keep thisone on topic, please mail me url so I can look into it. And my name is spelled "Bennett". You might pay more attention to detail and you should really let go of being upset that we will not post your links due to your OCZ affiliation.
__________________
Kyle Bennett
Editor-in-Chief @ HardOCP.com
FrgMstr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-12-03, 03:00 PM   #50
FrgMstr
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: The Great State of Texas
Posts: 47
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by sebazve
really who was the idiot that didnt know companies optimize their drivers for specific games or engines???

how the **** did you expect to have faster games, by some ****ing miracle!!????

BULLSEYE!!!!!!!!
__________________
Kyle Bennett
Editor-in-Chief @ HardOCP.com
FrgMstr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-12-03, 03:01 PM   #51
Solomon
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: In a House
Posts: 502
Default

Brent,

Your review of graphics card is a pleasure to read. Can you provide some feedback of why you chose what benchmarks to represent the FX in the review? Did you run Serious Sam though with AF + AA enabled at the same time through out your usage? It just seemed odd how you ran Serious Sam with only one enabled and not both. I want to clear the air and say I'm not pointing fingers that Nvidia had some input of what benchmarks to only show. I wouldn't know... I was just wondering what conclusion you came too for showing the results that you did. Was it just merely time constraints and if you had more time would you have shown the AA+AF results on Serious Sam? It seems this games results with AA+AF enabled highly shows in favor of the Radeon 9700 Pro.

Regards,
D. Solomon Jr.
*********.com
Solomon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-12-03, 03:09 PM   #52
Solomon
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: In a House
Posts: 502
Default

Kyle,

Please don't slander me with OCZ again. I haven't dealt or done any web work for OCZ in over a year and I would never do it again. Please stop referring me to being affiliated with OCZ as I'm not affiliated with them. Do you want me to fax you a copy of the papers from my Lawyer to prove this to you? Give a fax # and I would gladly fax you the papers. You don't see me pointing fingers saying you are in bed with BFG and VIA now do you? No... So please stop associating me with OCZ as I haven't dealt with them in over a year...

You are right this is way off topic. I'm just tired of being said I'm associated with OCZ. That was one year ago I broke off with them. So seriously. I haven't been associated with OCZ in over a year. Funny you mention OCZ. Futuremark seems to be advertising them.

Thank you.

Regards,
D. Solomon Jr.
*********.com

And this mad thing about you not posting are news? I don't know what you are talking about as we haven't had any news for anyone to post about. You're simply one site out of many out there. Seriously you're not even thought about.
Solomon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-12-03, 03:09 PM   #53
Brent
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 65
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by Solomon
Brent,

Your review of graphics card is a pleasure to read. Can you provide some feedback of why you chose what benchmarks to represent the FX in the review? Did you run Serious Sam though with AF + AA enabled at the same time through out your usage? It just seemed odd how you ran Serious Sam with only one enabled and not both. I want to clear the air and say I'm not pointing fingers that Nvidia had some input of what benchmarks to only show. I wouldn't know... I was just wondering what conclusion you came too for showing the results that you did. Was it just merely time constraints and if you had more time would you have shown the AA+AF results on Serious Sam? It seems this games results with AA+AF enabled highly shows in favor of the Radeon 9700 Pro.

Regards,
D. Solomon Jr.
*********.com
I've shown SS2 in many of my 9700 Pro reviews with AA + AF, and would have done so as well in the GFFX Preview if time had permitted.

We did a lot of testing with AA and AF in UT2k3 in that preview, mostly because it is a very recent game and is played a lot right now.

We use AA + AF in every vid card review we do now I like my games to look good and perform good too!
Brent is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-12-03, 03:17 PM   #54
Solomon
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: In a House
Posts: 502
Default

Brent,

Thanks for the clarification. It's really appreciated. I'm glad you focus on image quality with performance as I too find that very important. It helps to know that you were time limited and if you could of you would have shown the results.

Thanks for your response. Keep up the good work on the vid reviews.

Regards,
D. Solomon Jr.
*********.com
Solomon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-12-03, 04:09 PM   #55
Ratchet
The Tool
 
Ratchet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 96
Send a message via ICQ to Ratchet Send a message via MSN to Ratchet
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by Solomon
Hey Ratchet,

Cool icon. You got a site that shows your Flash work?

Regards,
D. Solomon Jr.
*********.com
It's actually just a simple animated gif made with photoshop and imageready.

I got a site, but it's more just a dumping ground rather than anything actually useful. http://www.ratchetsgame.com
oh, and for my fellow reviewers, check out my chart making thing - http://www.rage3d.com/chartwiz/
it's pretty cool, if not a bit overly complex

Last edited by Ratchet; 02-12-03 at 04:15 PM.
Ratchet is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-12-03, 04:11 PM   #56
The Baron
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Ooh, Solomon vs. Kyle Pissing Match Part 2 (now that the Pelly thread is gone).

Sheesh, folks, grow up.

ANYWAY, moving right along...

Personally, I care about a few things:

a Doom3 benchmark when a semi-stable version is available (pssst, JC, you could charge for it and everyone would still buy it and Doom3)
UT2003/Unreal2 (don't know if you can benchmark with the latter, but I'd be curious to see--seems to be more video card intensive than UT2003)
Serious Sam: SE (good for AA and AF)
maybe a Kreed benchmark (when/if one is available)

Maybe there needs to be some standard way of compiling results from individual GAMES to make some sort of standard benchmark...

--edit--one more thing--3DMark should have some sort of community source review. then you can't stupidly question whether it's valid or not based on scores alone. still means they can sell it, they just have to give the source code away as well --/edit--
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-12-03, 05:03 PM   #57
StealthHawk
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by Brent
The 8500 was the first to implement PS 1.4

the GF3 and GF4 only support PS 1.3

the fallback to PS 1.1 is obvioulsy in 3dmark03 so these cards can also run the game test, else they wouldn't be able to run cause they don't support PS 1.4
gf3 doesn't support PS1.3. it supports a maximum of PS1.1
  Reply With Quote
Old 02-12-03, 05:08 PM   #58
StealthHawk
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by Ratchet
What I'm concerned about is his nV-inspired "opinion" that 3DMark is worthless - it's not. Obviously the benchmark isn't going to tell you much about what current games may perform like (pervious version of 3DMark were never any good for current games either), but I really do think that it will give you a good idea of what future games will play like. That's just as important, if not more so, especially considering how much videocards cost these days - not everyone can afford to upgrade whenever a new game comes out.
isn't that the point? i'm not going to judge the validity of nvidia's statements, but they are saying that the benchmark game tests are not indicative of future games or future game performance.

it sounds like they were complaining about the implementation of the real time shadows; saying that it is poorly done and that future games will not have code like that.

i won't bother commenting on the flight simulator comment as i think it's rather ludicrous. a game is a game after all.
  Reply With Quote
Old 02-12-03, 05:10 PM   #59
batterbrain101
"TAZ LIKE!"
 
batterbrain101's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Spokane, Washington, USA
Posts: 191
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by Typedef Enum
Let me also add one more thing...

It's utterly insulting, IMHO, to see nVidia employees say things to the effect of

"We would be much better off optimizing our drivers for actual games, rather than synthetic benchmarks."......
Insulting?? why would that insult you, if nvidia actually went through with optimizing for games, you know, the thing that you actually spent big bucks on a card for, so you could play games with out tearing and lagging are less important than a baseline refernce tool that you run for 5 minutes? Piss on that, if ATI and Nvidia quit wasting resources on that crap (Yeah, we all know they both have been doing it for ever, THEY ARE BOTH GUILTY OF THE SAME THING! - not new news, and actually made my $300+ card play my $50-60 game better, I would be happy as hell knowing that I paid for game performance and not a stupid benchmark that isn't a game.

Quote:
Originally posted by Typedef Enum
[b]I don't know who these guys are fooling, but it's certainly not me. nVidia rised to the top by doing that EXACT same thing...what the heck are they talking about?..[b]
Once again, duh, hello!, ATI, Nvdia, 3dfx, they all did it, ATI and Nvidia still do, you got to be blind to not see that, and to not see that us, the paying consumer is getting reamed in the wallet for the glorious synthetic benchmark, while that game still wont run right because their not important. Wow, that's what is insulting, above and beyond Nvidia or ATI taking turns saying the other cheated, meanwhile the paying consumer is hung out to dry!!! IMO of course, and I'm sorry if I offended you, I just think that we need to step back and look outside the box! We pay for the goods, we have the power of creating the demand for true perfomance and not "the hype", unfortunantly, we have fallen for just that.
__________________
] My village called, their Idiot is missing!

My rig:
Asus Maximus VI Hero
Intel i7 4770K@ 4.2 GHz
16GB G-Skill Trident X DDR3 2400 Ram
Corsair 750HX "Silver Certified" PSU
Corsair H70 Hydro CPU Cooler
2x PNY GTX 770 OC2 4GB in SLI
180 GB Intel 520 SSD
2 TB Barracuda HD, 2 TB WD Caviar Green
Logitech G-510 Keyboard
Windows 7 Professional 64 bit
3 Samsung 24" LED SyncMaster Monitors


Last edited by batterbrain101; 02-12-03 at 05:16 PM.
batterbrain101 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-12-03, 05:25 PM   #60
batterbrain101
"TAZ LIKE!"
 
batterbrain101's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Spokane, Washington, USA
Posts: 191
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by The Baron
Personally, I care about a few things:

a Doom3 benchmark when a semi-stable version is available (pssst, JC, you could charge for it and everyone would still buy it and Doom3)
UT2003/Unreal2 (don't know if you can benchmark with the latter, but I'd be curious to see--seems to be more video card intensive than UT2003)
Serious Sam: SE (good for AA and AF)
maybe a Kreed benchmark (when/if one is available)

Maybe there needs to be some standard way of compiling results from individual GAMES to make some sort of standard benchmark...
Exactly my thoughts, benchmarks from the game you pay for, real info directly related to the reason you want to spend alot of money on the product that actually play your expensive game the best, not some stupid free, unrelated benchmarks!
__________________
] My village called, their Idiot is missing!

My rig:
Asus Maximus VI Hero
Intel i7 4770K@ 4.2 GHz
16GB G-Skill Trident X DDR3 2400 Ram
Corsair 750HX "Silver Certified" PSU
Corsair H70 Hydro CPU Cooler
2x PNY GTX 770 OC2 4GB in SLI
180 GB Intel 520 SSD
2 TB Barracuda HD, 2 TB WD Caviar Green
Logitech G-510 Keyboard
Windows 7 Professional 64 bit
3 Samsung 24" LED SyncMaster Monitors

batterbrain101 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
(PR) New 3DMark Trailer Shows Stunning DirectX 11 Graphics News Archived News Items 0 06-21-12 08:30 AM
Computex: 3DMark Announces Windows 8 Benchmarking - First Screenshots News Archived News Items 0 06-05-12 06:30 PM
poor 3Dmark score wysiwyg Benchmarking And Overclocking 4 09-27-02 04:25 AM
3dmark reports my fsb is 66? Gator Benchmarking And Overclocking 7 09-21-02 10:10 PM
3DMark, Fastest Webmasters and Me. intercede007 Benchmarking And Overclocking 4 08-17-02 10:49 AM

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:10 PM.


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