Here's Your Chance To Reply To FutureMark & Nvidia Statement
Posted by: NewsFactory on: 06/03/2003 09:51 PM [ Print | 43 comment(s) ] · 2883 views
Well what can I say? I am lost for words. Someone once told me that if you live long enough, you'll be amazed at what you'll see and boy he wasn't joking either! The day has finally arrived: In the light of this, Futuremark now states that Nvidia's driver design is an application specific optimization and not a cheat. I think this says it all: Cheating Drivers Hidden Dragon.
I must of been asleep last week when Nvidia Accuses Futuremark Of Developing Unfair Benchmarks or FutureMark's 3DMark Audit Report was released or when the good old boy's Dave Baumann and the Reverend at Beyond3D chatted to Tim Sweeney at Epic and to ATI's Director of PR, Christ Evenden about cheating and optimizations brought up by Nvidia's Detonator FX 44.03.
Well we all know Nvidia cheated and so did ATI but like you and me ATI owned up the their optimizations will remove the optimizations in there next release of their CATALYST drivers! Nvidia on the other hand have gone the other way: Do what ever it takes to say we didn't cheat! So here's your chance to tell FutureMark & Nvidia what you think of their statement! Just like these Guy's:
Benchmarking Wrong: HardOCP editorial that takes a look at the underlying issues surrounding 3DMark03 and the reasons you or any company should not take it too seriously.
CATALYST Maker Replies To FutureMark's New Stance: Nvidia Didn't Cheat At DH: Very sad. And here we are struggling to remove our 1.9% optimization to make everything clean and by the rules.
Im going to have an interesting set of meetings tomorrow at work. Guess it's time to investigate how we can get CATALYST to clip planes and render less than 50% than we have to. That should give us an extra 25% performance!
I'm pretty upset right now. Cant wait to go to work tomorrow and find out how this happened.
3DMark Producer's, Patric Ojala, Has Written A Small Q&A In The Beyond3D Forum In Relation To The Joint Statement At Beyond3D: Q: Does this mean what you called originally as "cheats" actually were acceptable "optimizations", and that you made a wrong decicion in releasing Patch 330 and the Audit Report?
A: By the definition of our benchmark and process, the optimizations are not acceptable. 3DMark scores are only comparable if drivers perform exactly the work 3DMark instructs them to do.
As earlier stated, we recommend using the latest build 330 of 3DMark03, with the 44.03 (or 43.51 WHQL) Nvidia drivers, or the Catalyst 3.4 ATI drivers. This way obtained 3DMark03 results are genuinely comparable as far as we know.
Q: Does this mean that in the future you will not make patches for 3DMark03 (or 3DMark2001) in order to reveal cheating?
A: We might release further patches to 3DMark03, if a need for preventing driver optimizations appear in the future.
See also: Penny-arcade.com
I must of been asleep last week when Nvidia Accuses Futuremark Of Developing Unfair Benchmarks or FutureMark's 3DMark Audit Report was released or when the good old boy's Dave Baumann and the Reverend at Beyond3D chatted to Tim Sweeney at Epic and to ATI's Director of PR, Christ Evenden about cheating and optimizations brought up by Nvidia's Detonator FX 44.03.
Well we all know Nvidia cheated and so did ATI but like you and me ATI owned up the their optimizations will remove the optimizations in there next release of their CATALYST drivers! Nvidia on the other hand have gone the other way: Do what ever it takes to say we didn't cheat! So here's your chance to tell FutureMark & Nvidia what you think of their statement! Just like these Guy's:
Benchmarking Wrong: HardOCP editorial that takes a look at the underlying issues surrounding 3DMark03 and the reasons you or any company should not take it too seriously.
CATALYST Maker Replies To FutureMark's New Stance: Nvidia Didn't Cheat At DH: Very sad. And here we are struggling to remove our 1.9% optimization to make everything clean and by the rules.
Im going to have an interesting set of meetings tomorrow at work. Guess it's time to investigate how we can get CATALYST to clip planes and render less than 50% than we have to. That should give us an extra 25% performance!
I'm pretty upset right now. Cant wait to go to work tomorrow and find out how this happened.
3DMark Producer's, Patric Ojala, Has Written A Small Q&A In The Beyond3D Forum In Relation To The Joint Statement At Beyond3D: Q: Does this mean what you called originally as "cheats" actually were acceptable "optimizations", and that you made a wrong decicion in releasing Patch 330 and the Audit Report?
A: By the definition of our benchmark and process, the optimizations are not acceptable. 3DMark scores are only comparable if drivers perform exactly the work 3DMark instructs them to do.
As earlier stated, we recommend using the latest build 330 of 3DMark03, with the 44.03 (or 43.51 WHQL) Nvidia drivers, or the Catalyst 3.4 ATI drivers. This way obtained 3DMark03 results are genuinely comparable as far as we know.
Q: Does this mean that in the future you will not make patches for 3DMark03 (or 3DMark2001) in order to reveal cheating?
A: We might release further patches to 3DMark03, if a need for preventing driver optimizations appear in the future.
See also: Penny-arcade.com
« Nvidia Multimedia Driver Update · Here's Your Chance To Reply To FutureMark & Nvidia Statement
· Apple QuickTime 6.3 Released For Windows & Mac »
2 pages 1 2
Comment
|
digitalwanderer Posts: 3 Joined: 2004-02-22 |
#44468 Posted on: 06/03/2003 10:19 PM
I can't begin to comment, I've been boggled about it since cursing out Kyle last night on Rage3D. It's just such an obvious, over-the-top legal strongarming/bribe/whatever that nVidia put the whammy on Futuremark with to put out that BS retraction that they're trying to say isn't this morning. 
This is a terrible day for graphic enthusiasts everywhere, even the morons who are defending nVidia still. It's just SO unbelievably fricking maddening!!!! Futuremark just commited suicide but they don't quite know it yet, and nVidia REALLY didn't do themselves any favors either. The nVidia enthusiasts are just as pissed off/outraged as the ATi crowd is. (Ok, maybe not QUITE as pissed....but they ain't happy about it either. It ain't even a pyhric victory for 'em either since no one likes winning by cheating...except for nVidia. :mad: ) This sucks, this well and truly sucks. |
Comment
|
hinkle Unregistered |
#44470 Posted on: 06/03/2003 10:54 PM
At last FutureMark realizes that the performance of future games (and of course the games available now) is depending on the level of optimization for a specific hardware. What is that difficult to understand? Real world performance is not measured by standarized code like the one used in 3dmark03 but by optimizations like used in today's games. The GeForce cards are an architecture which were designed to be optimized in order to show off their real performance. Congrats to FM for finally acknowledging that optimizations are the way to go and the the period of raw power is over. It took the graphiccard industry a bit longer than the CPU industry to recognize this but nevertheless it has finally happened. Maybe we can now expect again sometime later a fair benchmark if they just manage to get rid of the FP24 against FP16/FP32 issue... This s Finally the issue has been clarified |
Comment
|
DD Unregistered Posts: 1 Joined: 2003-03-15 |
#44471 Posted on: 06/03/2003 11:10 PM
Have you been living under a rock or do you really want future game optimizations to be based on making the quality of the graphics worse? In that case, you can just "optimize" your gfx card on your own, setting all the details as low as possible and so on. That's the worse piece of crap I've ever heard. I'd rather stay with ATi if that means Doom 3 instead of Doom 2 gfx quality. |
Comment
|
El_Coyote Unregistered Posts: 503 Joined: 2002-12-18 |
#44472 Posted on: 06/03/2003 11:41 PM
your ignorance make me sick... |
Comment
|
Quinn1981 Unregistered |
#44475 Posted on: 06/03/2003 11:50 PM
I would comment on how two companies have bastardized their customers and fans, but who cares anymore? :-) |
Comment
|
hinkle Unregistered |
#44477 Posted on: 06/03/2003 11:54 PM
Since you don't seem to have it noticed: It's all about optimizations which don't change the way graphics look! Optimizations is wonderful thing when done correctly. |
Comment
|
hinkle Unregistered |
#44478 Posted on: 06/03/2003 11:57 PM
na, you have never been sain, so this doesn't matter... sickness can be cured, ask your local doctor for receipe |
Comment
|
GlowWorm Unregistered |
#44480 Posted on: 06/04/2003 12:03 AM
Ive been reading all the rants and bitching with some amusement on this subject, and at the end of the day who gives a toss about a benchmark & companies cheating... Welcome to the real world of marketing, companies making a profit and i'll sue your butt off (acusations of cheating = slander), which is what its really about and not the naieve opinions of relativly few enthusiasts..! Theres far more important things in the world then this...! |
Comment
|
DJ_MrM Unregistered |
#44481 Posted on: 06/04/2003 12:09 AM
So let me get this straight, If companyX said to you, yes YOU, that you can have a free 50% speed increase and you won't notice it in ANY game. You would turn that down, then ? God the world is full of A holes. Who gives a flying F**k about a clip plane that you WON'T see in ANY game, PERIOD !! You won't even notice it, but you'll get a huge boost in your frame rate. But of course, because NVIDIA done it, then it's all wrong. F**King hypocrites, especially the DigitalW, moron. You really do live in your own small little pathetic world, where you **think** you're actually someone important. Yet you are just another forum troll with a stupid anti Nvidia problem. Get out, get a life Better still, if you have any kids, let them post for you. Because I'm quite sure they could post in a far more understanding, and mature attitude than you. |
Comment
|
velocity319 Unregistered |
#44482 Posted on: 06/04/2003 12:15 AM
Ok some of the comments / replies are just ignorant. Everybody has the right to their opinions and should not be shot down for expressing it .... flaming someone is ignorant. I for one think optimizing drivers just makes the card better. This Cheat crap is ridiculous. Who says its cheating ?? Some of the guys here ... yes. Futuremark .. No ..... Nvidia..No. Hmm notice the trend here. BTW I love Nvidia and ATI cards I like to see the competition grow without all the crap. Have a nice day  |
Comment
|
velocity319 Unregistered |
#44483 Posted on: 06/04/2003 12:26 AM
Heheh Amen brotha !! |
Comment
|
BetrayerX Unregistered |
#44484 Posted on: 06/04/2003 12:28 AM
For once I'm happy I used a w@rez serial number. These people don't deserve my money, an the only NVidia hardware I'll buy n the future will be cheapo (that means all, right?) hardware for 2 rate PCs. I can't believe this. and I hope they both screw themselves. After all that NVidia said and did to discredit Futuremark, I wonder....HOW MUCH was it? You sold out like a cheap whore Futuremark. Hope you rot. As it is now Im removing 3Dmark software from my machine for the last time....not that it matters much since I never paid for it, but some people will appreciate the symbolism. |
Comment
|
El_Coyote Unregistered Posts: 503 Joined: 2002-12-18 |
#44485 Posted on: 06/04/2003 12:52 AM
in games you WILL se the clip planes cause they doesnt follow a specific path, the cheats is ONLY benchmarking, so they can sell more cards to OEM partners. the fact that image wuality gets severely degraded, doesnt seem to bother you. thats your problem, dont take it out on others. hell why dont you just replace the whole friggin test with a single static prerendered frame... then scores will be up and all will be happy... the speed increase wasnt in games.. only 3dmark03, wherein lies the problem. i have "stupid anti nVidia problems" too.. or is that a recentment against them doing things the way the 1930's mafia would have... |
Comment
|
curiophile Unregistered |
#44486 Posted on: 06/04/2003 12:53 AM
Fine - if those of you that want to believe that they are just optimizations, then what do you think would happen if ATi did the same 'optimizations' with their drivers? Well two things would happen: 1) nVidia would get their asses handed to them in a sling by the 9800 Pro 2) Everyone would be dis-serviced by the fact that the word 'benchmark' does not equal 'standard' any more. |
Comment
|
El_Coyote Unregistered Posts: 503 Joined: 2002-12-18 |
#44487 Posted on: 06/04/2003 12:54 AM
you read and UNDERSTOOD what nVidia did? i think not.. then your'd propably not be so unbiased. artificially reducing IQ in favor of speed is a big no no! |
Comment
|
curiophile Unregistered |
#44488 Posted on: 06/04/2003 12:55 AM
Fine - if those of you that want to believe that they are just optimizations, then what do you think would happen if ATi did the same 'optimizations' with their drivers? Well two things would happen: 1) nVidia would get their asses handed to them in a sling by the 9800 Pro 2) Everyone would be dis-serviced by the fact that the word 'benchmark' does not equal 'standard' any more. |
Comment
|
curiophile Unregistered |
#44489 Posted on: 06/04/2003 12:57 AM
sorry, replied to the wrong statement - doh! |
Comment
|
El_Coyote Unregistered Posts: 503 Joined: 2002-12-18 |
#44490 Posted on: 06/04/2003 01:38 AM
except nVidias DO change the way the gfx look, ATi's dont. |
Comment
|
velocity319 Unregistered |
#44493 Posted on: 06/04/2003 01:59 AM
I think the new NV35 will give the Radeon 9800 Pro 256 a run for its money  look forward to seeing the manufactured cards go head to head |
Comment
|
velocity319 Unregistered |
#44494 Posted on: 06/04/2003 02:00 AM
doh sorry for the DP |
Comment
|
BigBerthaEA Unregistered |
#44496 Posted on: 06/04/2003 02:03 AM
While I am not one to defend dw by any stretch of the imagination, your attack here does not lend any credibility to your statements. If you really feel this way, why not join one of the forums dw is a member of and send him a PM stating how you feel. |
Comment
|
hinkle Unregistered |
#44497 Posted on: 06/04/2003 02:08 AM
yeah, like the Quack issue... come one, let's get over with both issues and move on to the real thing |
Comment
|
El_Coyote Unregistered Posts: 503 Joined: 2002-12-18 |
#44498 Posted on: 06/04/2003 02:22 AM
or use the pm function of this site? |
Comment
|
DJ_MrM Unregistered |
#44499 Posted on: 06/04/2003 02:41 AM
Did anyone actually notice a clip plane in 3dmark ? NO, it took some serious investigations, and a developer copy, and some source code. Look at how E.T. went about their findings, it didn't come from just sitting there and the thing suddenly popped up in front of their faces. |
Comment
|
DJ_MrM Unregistered |
#44500 Posted on: 06/04/2003 02:48 AM
To what you me, or joe average would see with their own eyes. Christ sake, grow up and take your ATI loving head out of your ATI coloured a$$ If you sat there and watched the 3dmark demo, you wouldn't see the clip plane. If they optimise, or "Cheat" as you say, then if it's done without an IQ issue then I'd take that rather than forking out for ANOTHER freaking video card. Take HSR, do you see an IQ drop in HSR ? IS that a cheat ? I don't think so. Perhaps FP16 IS a cheat IF you can spot the difference like night and day. If you have to take a stupid screenshot, blow the thing up 4x and scrutinize 2 shots side by side, then you need some serious help. |
2 pages 1 2
