Futuremark has released a new patch and...

[nemesismk2]

This whole Futuremark situation is so funny, they used to be Nvidia's whore but when Nvidia stopped funding they suddenly became ATI's whore. It seems to me that Futuremark will support any video card maker providing they keep paying them which IMO doesn't make anything connected with them a reliable source of information.

 

[dguy6789]

I think it is pretty sad when a benchmark that is supposed to tell you how fast your card is can be altered so easily and will tell you false info.

 

[gururu]

what's sad is that there was a complete and utter breakdown of the scientific process. a zillion websites posted 3dmark results with the 5900U. At that time, the ONLY people that new that these results were fraudulent were Nvidia. How could they let these data, whether influential or not, go public?
Its freakin' nuts. It tells you how much they think of us end-users.

now I'm a scientist. the publication of false or contrived data is completely unacceptable. I see no difference here. they tried to FOOL us people. and in the process, they've made us doubt so much. benchmarks, websites, company ethics, etc. they are even dividing us enthusiasts. that freakin pisses me off.

ultimately, what is sadder is that ANYONE can come to the defense of nvidia or try to shift focus to previously addressed problems.

 

[nemesismk2]

Originally posted by: dguy6789
I think it is pretty sad when a benchmark that is supposed to tell you how fast your card is can be altered so easily and will tell you false info.

If 3dmark03 was a fair benchmark for ALL video cards then Nvidia wouldn't have to spend so much time thinking of ways to optimise their drivers. How much did ATI give Futuremark so that ATI video cards had an advantage right from the day of release?

The problem isn't Nvidia, the problem is that Futuremark are a bunch of whores!

 

[kylebisme]

i think it is pretty said when you fools don't understand that the whole damn industry aside from nvidia's bitch as work with futuremark. why? because they do a good job at making benchmarks.

also, any benchmark can be cheated, it is simply a matter of principle wether card manufactures will take the time to do so and unless people stand against such things it will continue to happen. :disgust:

 

[nutxo]

Originally posted by: nemesismk2
This whole Futuremark situation is so funny, they used to be Nvidia's whore but when Nvidia stopped funding they suddenly became ATI's whore. It seems to me that Futuremark will support any video card maker providing they keep paying them which IMO doesn't make anything connected with them a reliable source of information.

what he said

 

[Pete]

The only nVidia "whores" I see are two in this thread. It's obvious to me you two are not even trying to understand the crux of the issue, and instead just talk to hear yourselves talk.

nemesismk2, by your definition of "fair," is Doom 3 currently a "fair" benchmark for ATi cards?

 

[MegaCharger]

Then I guess the others who are in the beta, like Microsoft, Intel, Dell, Gateway... etc. is worthless to Futuremark?

 

[nemesismk2]

Originally posted by: Pete
The only nVidia "whores" I see are two in this thread. It's obvious to me you two are not even trying to understand the crux of the issue, and instead just talk to hear yourselves talk.

nemesismk2, by your definition of "fair," is Doom 3 currently a "fair" benchmark for ATi cards?

We are talking about 3dmark in this thread, anyway to answer your question. I don't consider Doom 3 to be a reliable benchmark because the version used wasn't the final version so the results can't be verified.

 

[MegaCharger]

Originally posted by: nemesismk2
This whole Futuremark situation is so funny, they used to be Nvidia's whore but when Nvidia stopped funding they suddenly became ATI's whore. It seems to me that Futuremark will support any video card maker providing they keep paying them which IMO doesn't make anything connected with them a reliable source of information.

Do you think the other members in the beta program such as Microsoft, Dell, Gateway etc. would not want to see Futuremark doing what you said they are doing?

 

[nRollo]

Where are those "NVIDIA did not cheat!"-folks now?

I never said they didn't but I've always said I don't care if they DID.

I wouldn't care if they released drivers that were named "Dupe the stupid publicDetonators" that dropped every 3rd frame, rendered only 1/5 pixels, and those with no EBM, etc. in 3dmark . I would still laugh and buy their products.

Know why? I don't play any 3dmark. It's a joke and always has been. Game performance is what I care about; furthermore; only the games I play.
(so if nVidia cheated in their drivers for Commanche, but not Doom3 and UT2003, I would laugh even harder)

Futuremark says their product is "important"? Gee, what a surprise.

I'm sure the guys working on Duke Nuke'm Forever say their product is "important" too, but unless I can/do play it- I don't care.

If they cheated at 3dmark, they could have cheated at other benchmarks too? Well, they could be selling babies on the black market too, but no one has shown me anything to lead me to believe they are? I forgot the logical fallacy here, but perhaps my favorite coffee achiever will point it out?

Beyond that, do you REALLY think after nVidia burned them so bad by leaking the Quack story, ATI and others don't look for nVidia driver cheats? Like someone else here pointed out, there's millions of dollars at stake, so where's the proof nVidia cheats at UT2003 or other common benchmarks?

Unless someone comes up with proof before I buy that nVidia is cheating at something I play like GTA or UT2003, I'll buy a 5900 Ultra. As things stand, it comes closest to running Doom 3 well, and I care about that a lot.
I concede the point that ATI runs 3dmark better, but when I'm playing Doom3 at 12X10 69fps, and the R9x00 guys are at 50fps, who will be having the better gaming experience? Of course, the ATI crew can always watch the 3mark demos loop. That's pretty fun too.

 

[nRollo]

Do you think the other members in the beta program such as Microsoft, Dell, Gateway etc. would not want to see Futuremark doing what you said they are doing

I don't care if MS/Dell, and Gateway get duped by nVidia at 3dmark. If they're dumb eough to base decisions based on a synthetic benchmark, I say they deserve to taken to the cleaners.

Same goes for people who buy based on 3dmark. Too bad, so sad. Should've checked things out on the games they play.

Even if no else is smart enough to catch nVidia cheating at UT2003, I can always turn on the framecounter and see how it's performing at UT2003 other that the benchmarks.

 

[kylebisme]

but you have to waist your time buying the card and taking it hope before you can do that. also, 3dmark has been the first and best way to test a cards performance using the latest build of microsoft's directx for quite some time, it has proven quite reliable in the past and microsoft's as well as the others continued involvement in the program is a testament to that. if you can't understand that then you are the one who is dumb.

 

[gururu]

Rollo,

I can't believe nvidia has convinced you that the 5900U is faster at Doom3. After having tried to lie
that it was also faster at 3dmark. Now please don't say that it was the websites that convinced you, because
they were fooled into publishing aberrant data; not because they were intellectually outmatched, but because they
were too busy sucking the big one once nvidia handed them a D3 demo.

We'll see comparable D3 speeds with the 9800 and 5900 once its out. but will it matter? because there will be even faster cards out by then, and I'm sure people with those cards will be having a "better gaming experience" than me and anyone with a 5900U.

gururu

 

[1ManArmY]

True, thats why I wont wont upgrade my 9700 PRO until after the release of Doom 3. It plays the alpha just fine and HL2 will be the one to put it to the test in October.

 

[nRollo]

Snowman:

if you can't understand that then you are the one who is dumb

Really? How many driver revisions do you think nVidia will have released before DX9 games are an issue for me? So, you think I should look at performance of a card that's not even out the door, on brand new drivers that are just starting to fix it's predecessor's issues (e.g. AF) on a Direct X build that no games currently use, and base my next month's buying decision on THAT?

As for Doom3, AFAIK the engine is done and the game is supposed to be out in the next 4-6 months? It will be Open GL, not DX9? What is coming up this year I should care about that is DX9? I don't know if I've ever had a VGA last me 1 year, so I think I'm pretty safe to totally disregard DX9.

One thing I don't see many here bring up is that ATI cheated on 3dmark2003 as well, and has even admitted it. Apparently the number of games cheated on must be the deciding factor for you? "Well, ATI didn't cheat as much, so they earn my trust"?

Gururu:

I can't believe nvidia has convinced you that the 5900U is faster at Doom3. After having tried to lie
that it was also faster at 3dmark.

The two are totally unrelated, it is a logical fallacy to believe they are. Carmack himself said the nV30 is a bit faster than the 9700, that he expects nVidia driver optimizations to make it much faster, and that he codes on an nV30 even though he hates the noise because he ran into the limits of the ATI of the R300. So why wouldn't I believe the nV35 could be faster? I'm sure ATI will put together some drivers that will bring them close in performance, but as I'm not really a big AA user, I don't see much reason to go ATI next month.

 

[Creig]

I wouldn't care if they released drivers that were named "Dupe the stupid publicDetonators" that dropped every 3rd frame, rendered only 1/5 pixels, and those with no EBM, etc. in 3dmark . I would still laugh and buy their products.

Know why? I don't play any 3dmark. It's a joke and always has been. Game performance is what I care about; furthermore; only the games I play. (so if nVidia cheated in their drivers for Commanche, but not Doom3 and UT2003, I would laugh even harder)

And what makes you think that Nvidia will stop at cheating at 3DMark to make themselves look better? I'll bet if they did same thing with your Doom3 and UT2003 you'd be singing a different tune.

 

[nRollo]

Creig:

I'll bet if they did same thing with your Doom3 and UT2003 you'd be singing a different tune.

As I said exactly that in the post you're quoting, that's a pretty safe bet, don't you think?

Of course I would, I'd be buy ATI if it turned out to be faster with the cheat worked around.

 

[Creig]

I'm just surprised by Nvidia. For such a big company they seem to be making some pretty big mistakes lately. First was the FlowFX on the 5800. Calling it a "badge of honor" to explain away the noise level and then basically calling the 5800 a goofup once the 5900 was release. Now they get caught cheating on benchmarks and saying that FutureMark is out to get them.

I wonder what they'll be saying about this situation later on. I'm worried that Nvidia is ignoring ethics in their rush to reclaim the #1 performing spot.

 

[Rogozhin]

Rollo

Your conclusion is that ultimately you cannot trust ANY benchmark posted by any VGA manufacturer-correct? That is what I've drawn from your last few posts.

Now

Your only option is to buy every new card that comes out and run it for yourself on your own system, this includes ati cards.

I believe this is what you are proposing.


So my concern with this is that the demographic of computer power users (themselves a small group) that can do this is tiny, so you're logic is flawed because the conclusion is irrelevant-because what your propose is practically meaningless.

Had you said: "I care about this fiasco and cheating by nvidia and believe that OEMs and computer users in general should work towards a benchmarking process based more on real games and new processes." you would have an arguement that is worthwhile, but the posts above are mostly drivel.

But that's your perogative.

Rogo

 

[nRollo]

Creig:

I'm worried that Nvidia is ignoring ethics in their rush to reclaim the #1 performing spot.

Err, sure dude. ATI gets caught cheating on the exact same benchmark and "nVidia has lost their way".

Rogo:

Your conclusion is that ultimately you cannot trust ANY benchmark posted by any VGA manufacturer-correct? That is what I've drawn from your last few posts.

You've misunderstood me then. I said:
1. nVidia cheated on 3dmark, doesn't mean they cheated on anything else
2. ATI cheated on 3dmark too, so they're no less guilty than nVidia (and they have been caught cheating before, which I can't remember nVidia ever has)

Your post is the drivel buddy, you read too much into what I say and jump to erroneous conclusions.

 

[Cesar]

Rollo

Nvidia fanboy:moon:

 

[Rogozhin]

Rollo

. "ATI cheated on 3dmark too, so they're no less guilty than nVidia (and they have been caught cheating before, which I can't remember nVidia ever has)"

Futuremark said they have yet to decide regarding this and most programmers and Tim Sweeney from epic don't believe this to be the case, they are saying that it is an optimization and not a cheat. I will post the links if you'd like but I had already started a thread about it.

I didn't draw illogically a conclusion from your posts, I took your posts to their logical conclusion.

rogo

PS

and I'm not your buddy

 

[Creig]

Err, sure dude. ATI gets caught cheating on the exact same benchmark and "nVidia has lost their way".

Excuse me, Rollo, but there's a BIG difference between a 1.9% drop in ATI and 24% from Nvidia when the ANTI-CHEATING version was run. If the ATI 1.9% is even found to BE cheating, which it hasn't. Unlike the Nvidia 24% drop has been PROVEN to be.

 

[nRollo]

LOL

You guys take this stuff waaaaayyyyyyy too seriously.
"Oh! Oh! Heaven's to Betsy! nVidia CHEATED on 3dmark for a card being previewed! Call the POLICE! I feel so violated!"

Like I said, I could care less if nVidia writes every single driver to totally cheat on every aspect of 3dmark.

Why do you care?

Are any of you OEMs being mislead? If you're just customers like me, what does it really matter? You don't play any 3dmark. No one has shown that they've cheated on any game or application. Their cheating costs you absolutely NOTHING unless your 3dmark score is why you buy a VGA, and if that's the case, I agree with you that you should buy ATI because they cheated less.

Most reviews I've seen have shown the 5900 Ultra to be either superior or equal to the 9800 at anything except 3dmark.
(oh, and Old Farts screenshot that I'm supposed to make a $500. decision on, LOL, don't think so)

I have news for you guys:
You don't have to trash nVidias products to feel good about your ATIs. Like I said in the other post, if vendors try to release the 5900 Ultra at $100 more than MSRP like they did with the 5800Ultra, I'll buy a 9800 and be perfectly happy.

I don't care who makes the card in my box, I care about the price/ performance, and sometimes just trying something new.

The fate of the world doesn't hang on 3dmark, although the people who make their living at Futuremark would like you all to believe it does.