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

Newegg Daily Deals

View Poll Results: Choose One
NVIDIA's new products (NV31 and NV34) are not DX9 parts and their current line lacks the technology to do well 62 65.26%
3DMark03 is a poor benchmark 18 18.95%
Both, but more of option number 1 9 9.47%
Both, but more of option number 2 6 6.32%
Voters: 95. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 02-17-03, 02:56 PM   #25
legion88
WhatIfSports.com Junkie
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 135
Default

I pick option 5.

5) The benchmark did not provide the GeForce FX 5800U results that was anticipated either by themselves or by the public.

It does not mean that the benchmark was bad nor does it have anything to do with NV31/34 or current NVIDIA-based products.

This is nothing new to NVIDIA. NVIDIA has criticized Futuremark's products before (e.g. 3DMark2000 back in January of 2000). The results of 3DMark2000 was not inline with a certain reviewer's expectations (he's not exactly a tech-head). Rather than call the reviewer's bluff (i.e. he's an idiot), NVIDIA chose to attack the benchmark.

You will find, if you haven't noticed already, that reviewers have teflon shielding. They often don't get criticized for not understanding a benchmark's results or misusing a benchmark.
legion88 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-17-03, 03:35 PM   #26
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

Quote:
And exactly how do you know it's badly written? You've dissected the source code already? Or are you simply parroting a certain IHV's opinion?
Read the whitepaper..

Quote:
there are many REAL games out there that unfortunately are also badly written

case in point... ut2k3... even though I play it flawlessly @ 1600x1200 epic really made me mad with the memory leaks and what not in the game

however it is still used as one of the premier benchmarking games out there... even with the splash screen... even with the memory leak issues... hence alls fair... init ?

btw I still don't understand why 3dmark03 is considered badly written...
Yeah, but it runs at a decent frame rate on gpu's lesser than a 9700 dont it?!

It's badly written because it does soo much redundant stuff. Like skinning the characters 3 times! No 3d-engine coder in the games industry would do that. Publishers simply wouldn't accept users _requiring_ a 9700/Gf-FX to get playable frame-rates.

Quote:
Do you realize that each strand of the woman's hair is being rendered individually in that scene? Let me guess, you would rather have a big blurred texture there instead?
Yes I did realize that, and no I would not have preferred a big texture slapped on her head. There are many other methods for doing more realistic hair than that. They basically picked the easiest method, which also probably used the most resources and looked the worst.
Nutty is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-17-03, 07:10 PM   #27
PreservedSwine
I'm always hungry
 
PreservedSwine's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 548
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by Nutty
Read the whitepaper..



Nutty, what portions of the whitepaper point to it being poorly coded?

After reading the whitepaper, I came away feeling it is coded much more accuratley than 3dK01.

Just snip the portions you feel point to it being poorly coded, and the following explanation.

Thanks
PreservedSwine is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-17-03, 07:33 PM   #28
Onde Pik
Thrakhath nar Kiranka
 
Onde Pik's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Kilrah
Posts: 92
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by PreservedSwine
Nutty, what portions of the whitepaper point to it being poorly coded?

After reading the whitepaper, I came away feeling it is coded much more accuratley than 3dK01.

Just snip the portions you feel point to it being poorly coded, and the following explanation.

Thanks

I think you will se a mystical disapearance of Nutty from this thread now -
Onde Pik is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-17-03, 08:48 PM   #29
legion88
WhatIfSports.com Junkie
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 135
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by Nutty
Read the whitepaper..



Yeah, but it runs at a decent frame rate on gpu's lesser than a 9700 dont it?!

It's badly written because it does soo much redundant stuff. Like skinning the characters 3 times! No 3d-engine coder in the games industry would do that. Publishers simply wouldn't accept users _requiring_ a 9700/Gf-FX to get playable frame-rates.



Yes I did realize that, and no I would not have preferred a big texture slapped on her head. There are many other methods for doing more realistic hair than that. They basically picked the easiest method, which also probably used the most resources and looked the worst.
Obviously you do not know what the purpose of a graphics card intensive benchmark is. Naturally, I do recognize that you will dispute that fact--you simply do not know the purpose. Feel free to dispute it.

For your education, Mr. Rain Man ( http://www.idiotsavant.com/raymond/ ), the purpose of a graphics intensive benchmark is to test (a) the capabilities of the card and (b) the performance of that card, relative to the competition.

A benchmark that may require a dual 8GHz Athlon XP to force the graphics card to be the bottleneck is not much of a useful graphics card benchmark since we don't have a dual 8GHz Athlon XP at our disposal.

The purpose of a benchmark is not to provide "playable frame-rates", "more realistic hair", or any other nonsense you can imagine. The purpose of the graphics intensive benchmark is to "bring the card to its knees" and see how it can handle the load relative to the competition.
legion88 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-17-03, 08:52 PM   #30
StealthHawk
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by John Reynolds
And exactly how do you know it's badly written? You've dissected the source code already? Or are you simply parroting a certain IHV's opinion?
compare the performance of GT2 and GT3 with that of the Doom3 alpha.
  Reply With Quote
Old 02-17-03, 08:55 PM   #31
StealthHawk
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by legion88
Obviously you do not know what the purpose of a graphics card intensive benchmark is. Naturally, I do recognize that you will dispute that fact--you simply do not know the purpose. Feel free to dispute it.
that's just the problem. everything would be fine and dandy if Futuremark didn't advertise 3dmark03 as "the gamer's benchmark." i don't know about you, but as a gamer, i want a game that depicts some facet of realworld performance. and that means taking into account the CPU.

i don't think anyone is contesting that 3dmark03 is a video intensive benchmark. it is. and the results show that it is very clearly without a doubt. they are contesting that it shouldn't be, since that is not indicative of a realistic gaming experience.
  Reply With Quote
Old 02-17-03, 10:17 PM   #32
Joe DeFuria
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Posts: 236
Default

Quote:
The purpose of a benchmark is not to provide "playable frame-rates", "more realistic hair", or any other nonsense you can imagine. The purpose of the graphics intensive benchmark is to "bring the card to its knees" and see how it can handle the load relative to the competition.
Somebody shoot me...I agree with Roscoe!
Joe DeFuria is offline   Reply With Quote

Old 02-17-03, 10:49 PM   #33
jbirney
Registered User
 
jbirney's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 1,430
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by Joe DeFuria
Somebody shoot me...I agree with Roscoe!
Me 2

Quote:
advertise 3dmark03 as "the gamer's benchmark."
so its ok for the last 3/4 games I have bought to have the nV logo with the way the game is ment to be played on in even though we both know to get the best IQ/FPS from a game today, then you better not use nV hardware?

"the gamer's benchmark." is as stupid as an advertising slogan as "The way the game is ment to be played".
jbirney is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-17-03, 11:01 PM   #34
Sazar
Sayonara !!!
 
Sazar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Austin, Texas
Posts: 9,297
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by StealthHawk
that's just the problem. everything would be fine and dandy if Futuremark didn't advertise 3dmark03 as "the gamer's benchmark." i don't know about you, but as a gamer, i want a game that depicts some facet of realworld performance. and that means taking into account the CPU.

i don't think anyone is contesting that 3dmark03 is a video intensive benchmark. it is. and the results show that it is very clearly without a doubt. they are contesting that it shouldn't be, since that is not indicative of a realistic gaming experience.


hence why it is a SYNTHETIC benchmark...

seeing as dell has adopted it and as intel has indicated it seems to like the benchmark also... that a pretty large chunk of the pc market right there intel as producer and dell as distributor...
Sazar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-18-03, 02:31 AM   #35
StealthHawk
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by Sazar


hence why it is a SYNTHETIC benchmark...

seeing as dell has adopted it and as intel has indicated it seems to like the benchmark also... that a pretty large chunk of the pc market right there intel as producer and dell as distributor...
as if their support should mean anything to us. i'm sorry if this sounds like a pathetic attempt to grasp at straws....but really it isn't.

great, Dell, the people advertising the highest end P4 systems with TNT2 and gf2mx chips in magazines and slogans like "all i need is more power than my friends" or other such rubbish.

and then of course we have Intel's advertising schemes: Pentium4 with NetBurst architecture, it makes the internet fly!

  Reply With Quote
Old 02-18-03, 03:54 AM   #36
Sazar
Sayonara !!!
 
Sazar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Austin, Texas
Posts: 9,297
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by StealthHawk
as if their support should mean anything to us. i'm sorry if this sounds like a pathetic attempt to grasp at straws....but really it isn't.

great, Dell, the people advertising the highest end P4 systems with TNT2 and gf2mx chips in magazines and slogans like "all i need is more power than my friends" or other such rubbish.

and then of course we have Intel's advertising schemes: Pentium4 with NetBurst architecture, it makes the internet fly!

the reason it matters is that these companies have influence... dont forget intel makes boards and intel actually has a far larger slice of the cpu market than amd... dell is a big seller of intel parts exclusively intel desktops)

so these things add up... ie.. give credible weight to the legitimacy of 3dmark03 as a legit benchmark...

its just the way it is...

now when it comes to advertising... yer opening a can of worms slamming other companies in defense (in a manner of speaking) of nvidia
Sazar 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
Need Help Installing NVIDIA Tesla M2070Q in Linux RHEL5 Ferianto85 NVIDIA Linux 0 05-18-12 09:35 PM
Rumor regarding lack of 680 availability ViN86 Rumor Mill 6 05-09-12 05:48 PM
rh7.3 and nvidia vcrispo NVIDIA Linux 11 07-31-02 09:57 PM

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:19 PM.


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