Well you probably all have witnessed the release of 3DMark03 patch 3.3.0 which disables all identified alterations Nvidia Detonator 43.51 and 44.03 introduced. For all of you interested in the details of the 'cheats' click read more. Futuremark identified an unusual 8.2% difference with Catalyst 3.4 on a Radeon 9800 Pro. Investigation continues...
Aren?t These Cheats Just Optimizations That Also Benefit General Game Play Performance? No. There are two reasons.
Firstly, these driver cheats increase benchmark performance at the expense of image quality. Only the user and the game developer should decide how a game is meant to be experienced, and not the hardware developer. An act by hardware developer to force a different experience than the developer or the user intended, is an act that may mislead consumers, the OEMs and the media who look to our benchmark to help them make purchase decisions. Secondly, in well-designed benchmarks like 3DMark03, all cards are instructed to do the same amount of work. Artificially reducing one card?s workload, for example, by using pre-set clip planes or using a lower precision shader against the program?s instructions, is only aimed to artificially manipulate the benchmark test result. Please note, that the cheating described here is totally different from optimization. Optimizing the driver code to increase efficiency is a technique often used to enhance game performance and carries greater legitimacy, since the rendered image is exactly what the developer intended. What Are The Identified Cheats? Futuremark?s audit revealed cheats in NVIDIA Detonator FX 44.03 and 43.51 WHQL drivers. Earlier GeForceFX drivers include only some of the cheats listed below. 1. The loading screen of the 3DMark03 test is detected by the driver. This is used by the driver to disregard the back buffer clear command that 3DMark03 gives. This incorrectly reduces the workload. However, if the loading screen is rendered in a different manner, the driver seems to fail to detect 3DMark03, and performs the back buffer clear command as instructed. 2. A vertex shader used in game test 2 (P_Pointsprite.vsh) is detected by the driver. In this case the driver uses instructions contained in the driver to determine when to obey the back buffer clear command and when not to. If the back buffer would not be cleared at all in game test 2, the stars in the view of outer space in some cameras would appear smeared as have been reported in the articles mentioned earlier. Back buffer clearing is turned off and on again so that the back buffer is cleared only when the default benchmark cameras show outer space. In free camera mode one can keep the camera outside the spaceship through the entire test, and see how the sky smearing is turned on and off. 3. A vertex shader used in game test 4 (M_HDRsky.vsh) is detected. In this case the driver adds two static clipping planes to reduce the workload. The clipping planes are placed so that the sky is cut out just beyond what is visible in the default camera angles. Again, using the free camera one can look at the sky to see it abruptly cut off. Screenshot of this view was also reported in the ExtremeTech and Beyond3D articles. This cheat was introduced in the 43.51 drivers as far as we know. 4. In game test 4, the water pixel shader (M_Water.psh) is detected. The driver uses this detection to artificially achieve a large performance boost - more than doubling the early frame rate on some systems. In our inspection we noticed a difference in the rendering when compared either to the DirectX reference rasterizer or to those of other hardware. It appears the water shader is being totally discarded and replaced with an alternative more efficient shader implemented in the drivers themselves. The drivers produce a similar looking rendering, but not an identical one. 5. In game test 4 there is detection of a pixel shader (m_HDRSky.psh). Again it appears the shader is being totally discarded and replaced with an alternative more efficient shader in a similar fashion to the water pixel shader above. The rendering looks similar, but it is not identical. 6. A vertex shader (G_MetalCubeLit.vsh) is detected in game test 1. Preventing this detection proved to reduce the frame rate with these drivers, but we have not yet determined the cause. 7. A vertex shader in game test 3 (G_PaintBaked.vsh) is detected, and preventing this detection drops the scores with these drivers. This cheat causes the back buffer clearing to be disregarded; we are not yet aware of any other cheats. 8. The vertex and pixel shaders used in the 3DMark03 feature tests are also detected by the driver. When we prevented this detection, the performance dropped by more than a factor of two in the 2.0 pixel shader test. We have used various techniques to prevent NVIDIA drivers from performing the above detections. We have been extremely careful to ensure that none of the changes we have introduced causes differences in either rendering output or performance. In most case, simple alterations in the shader code ? such as swapping two registers ? has been sufficient to prevent the detection. What Is the Performance Difference Due to These Cheats? A test system with GeForceFX 5900 Ultra and the 44.03 drivers gets 5806 3DMarks with 3DMark03 build 320. The new build 330 of 3DMark03 in which 44.03 drivers cannot identify 3DMark03 or the tests in that build gets 4679 3DMarks ? a 24.1% drop. Our investigations reveal that some drivers from ATI also produce a slightly lower total score on this new build of 3DMark03. The drop in performance on the same test system with a Radeon 9800 Pro using the Catalyst 3.4 drivers is 1.9%. This performance drop is almost entirely due to 8.2% difference in the game test 4 result, which means that the test was also detected and somehow altered by the ATI drivers. We are currently investigating this further. Source: 3DMark Audit Report
Aren?t These Cheats Just Optimizations That Also Benefit General Game Play Performance? No. There are two reasons.
Firstly, these driver cheats increase benchmark performance at the expense of image quality. Only the user and the game developer should decide how a game is meant to be experienced, and not the hardware developer. An act by hardware developer to force a different experience than the developer or the user intended, is an act that may mislead consumers, the OEMs and the media who look to our benchmark to help them make purchase decisions. Secondly, in well-designed benchmarks like 3DMark03, all cards are instructed to do the same amount of work. Artificially reducing one card?s workload, for example, by using pre-set clip planes or using a lower precision shader against the program?s instructions, is only aimed to artificially manipulate the benchmark test result. Please note, that the cheating described here is totally different from optimization. Optimizing the driver code to increase efficiency is a technique often used to enhance game performance and carries greater legitimacy, since the rendered image is exactly what the developer intended. What Are The Identified Cheats? Futuremark?s audit revealed cheats in NVIDIA Detonator FX 44.03 and 43.51 WHQL drivers. Earlier GeForceFX drivers include only some of the cheats listed below. 1. The loading screen of the 3DMark03 test is detected by the driver. This is used by the driver to disregard the back buffer clear command that 3DMark03 gives. This incorrectly reduces the workload. However, if the loading screen is rendered in a different manner, the driver seems to fail to detect 3DMark03, and performs the back buffer clear command as instructed. 2. A vertex shader used in game test 2 (P_Pointsprite.vsh) is detected by the driver. In this case the driver uses instructions contained in the driver to determine when to obey the back buffer clear command and when not to. If the back buffer would not be cleared at all in game test 2, the stars in the view of outer space in some cameras would appear smeared as have been reported in the articles mentioned earlier. Back buffer clearing is turned off and on again so that the back buffer is cleared only when the default benchmark cameras show outer space. In free camera mode one can keep the camera outside the spaceship through the entire test, and see how the sky smearing is turned on and off. 3. A vertex shader used in game test 4 (M_HDRsky.vsh) is detected. In this case the driver adds two static clipping planes to reduce the workload. The clipping planes are placed so that the sky is cut out just beyond what is visible in the default camera angles. Again, using the free camera one can look at the sky to see it abruptly cut off. Screenshot of this view was also reported in the ExtremeTech and Beyond3D articles. This cheat was introduced in the 43.51 drivers as far as we know. 4. In game test 4, the water pixel shader (M_Water.psh) is detected. The driver uses this detection to artificially achieve a large performance boost - more than doubling the early frame rate on some systems. In our inspection we noticed a difference in the rendering when compared either to the DirectX reference rasterizer or to those of other hardware. It appears the water shader is being totally discarded and replaced with an alternative more efficient shader implemented in the drivers themselves. The drivers produce a similar looking rendering, but not an identical one. 5. In game test 4 there is detection of a pixel shader (m_HDRSky.psh). Again it appears the shader is being totally discarded and replaced with an alternative more efficient shader in a similar fashion to the water pixel shader above. The rendering looks similar, but it is not identical. 6. A vertex shader (G_MetalCubeLit.vsh) is detected in game test 1. Preventing this detection proved to reduce the frame rate with these drivers, but we have not yet determined the cause. 7. A vertex shader in game test 3 (G_PaintBaked.vsh) is detected, and preventing this detection drops the scores with these drivers. This cheat causes the back buffer clearing to be disregarded; we are not yet aware of any other cheats. 8. The vertex and pixel shaders used in the 3DMark03 feature tests are also detected by the driver. When we prevented this detection, the performance dropped by more than a factor of two in the 2.0 pixel shader test. We have used various techniques to prevent NVIDIA drivers from performing the above detections. We have been extremely careful to ensure that none of the changes we have introduced causes differences in either rendering output or performance. In most case, simple alterations in the shader code ? such as swapping two registers ? has been sufficient to prevent the detection. What Is the Performance Difference Due to These Cheats? A test system with GeForceFX 5900 Ultra and the 44.03 drivers gets 5806 3DMarks with 3DMark03 build 320. The new build 330 of 3DMark03 in which 44.03 drivers cannot identify 3DMark03 or the tests in that build gets 4679 3DMarks ? a 24.1% drop. Our investigations reveal that some drivers from ATI also produce a slightly lower total score on this new build of 3DMark03. The drop in performance on the same test system with a Radeon 9800 Pro using the Catalyst 3.4 drivers is 1.9%. This performance drop is almost entirely due to 8.2% difference in the game test 4 result, which means that the test was also detected and somehow altered by the ATI drivers. We are currently investigating this further. Source: 3DMark Audit Report
