nVidia Q&A posted

[BFG10K]

Sorry. Hell, I didn't even run the benchmarks. Kristof did.

Did you check the review before it was posted? Did you agree with his methods? If you did it makes no difference who ran the benchmarks. The best thing you could have done is added in a disclaimer like I suggested. Then it would be entirely Kristof's fault for his method of testing and you would be in the clear.

I mean if i worked for a company that kept getting raped by nVidia Id want to try and hype up my crappy-ass product.

Well the thing is Dave was not working for 3dfx when that review was put up (I think). This makes it even more bizarre.

 

[Weyoun]

you guys have no shame do you? dave is one of the most, if not *the* most knowledgable person around here. Try to show him *some* respect...

As for benchmarking methods, I think settings should be analysed a bit more, along with image quality - what each setting does and how it affects the engine as a whole.

Benchmarking needs to, seriously, have a good look at itself. They don't involve things like image quality, stability, features etc etc. 3DMark, as a standalone benchmarking program does an appaling job in this department. Dave's benchmarking method, is legitimate to the degree where both systems could be optimised to hell and back, but I don't think *any* of us here but Dave have the info on the nVidia setup he used. Oblige us?

 

[DaveB3D]

It doesn't matter if I agree with his methods or not. I do, but Kristof knows more about graphics than anyone on this message board, plus some. That includes myself. So if I didn't agree with him, chances are my feelings on the subject would be wrong.

 

[BFG10K]

if not *the* most knowledgable person around here.

Nobody's denying that Weyoun. Dave is certainly very knowledgeable and knows his stuff. I just dislike that biased test that he carried out.

By your definition, turning on AA is tweaking.

My definition of tweaking is having two video cards at the same settings and then changing one card's settings to make it faster. A good example of tweaking is running an FSAA x4 test and setting one video card to FSAA x2 on the basis that "you can't see a difference between x2 and x4" and that the competitor's card only provides the x4 setting. That's a more extreme example but it's the general thrust of what happened in your review.

If there aren't corresponding settings either don't run the benchmark or add in a note that explains the results.

 

[BigToque]

<< What you should be saying is &quot;at high resolutions a tweaked V5 is as fast as an untweaked GF2&quot;.[/b]

I dont believe that for a second. Just to prove which card is more powerful, we should get Anand to put to cards up against each other, with each card 'tweaked' to the max of their ability.

Get the GeForce 2 card running Q3 at the highest quality settings with sound and every single option that a regular user would use. Get the V5 550 running at max quality, in Glide mode, with the same options.

run at 640, 800, 1024, 1280, 1600 resolutions.

Under the exact same hardware setup, I guarentee you that the GeForce 2 doesnt whip the v5 around (IE, beating a card by 4 frames per second doesnt mean jack sh!t to 95% of the people that would buy one card or the other)

 

[bluemax]

BFG has just hated 3dfx (for some reason) for a long time now. Chalk him up as an nVidia fanatic and move on.
Seriously... Is it worth this much effort?
I just wish there was one card that did it all...
FSAA as good as 3dfx with the speed of a Geforce2 GTS.

Let's see what the companies bring out in 2001, eh?

 

[BigToque]

I hate fanboys, they are so idiotic and stand blindly by their companys.

The 2 worst:

nVidia fanboys
Playstation fanboys

 

[BFG10K]

I dont believe that for a second.

That's irrelevent what you believe. I can provide you with links to at least 10 independant hardware sites who prove I am correct and all have results very close to each other.

with each card 'tweaked' to the max of their

Each tweaked in the same way you mean? Otherwise the results are meaningless.

I hate fanboys, they are so idiotic and stand blindly by their companys.

Pot-kettle-black.

BFG has just hated 3dfx (for some reason) for a long time now.

That is irrelevant to this discussion. If somebody carried out a test with a tweaked GF and an untweaked V5 and made no mention of the tweaks you would complain about it too, wouldn't you?

 

[actiontec]

&quot;It doesn't matter if I agree with his methods or not. I do, but Kristof knows more about graphics than anyone on this message board, plus some. That includes myself. So if I didn't agree with him, chances are my feelings on the subject would be wrong.&quot;


-Sorry, but that is just kiddie talk. Sounds like a little 12 year old boy defending his little friends. I can't imagine any higher ups at 3dfx reading this thread and not thinking ... *oh my god, what a mistake hiring this fool*

 

[AngelOfDeath]

DaveB3D: Why don't you stick that biased sh|t up your @ss. First off all I don't buy a vid-card based on the name or brand. If 15+ sides tell me that Geforce kicks @ss then I buy that and ofcourse if the opposite shows then I buy a 3dfx. How hard can it be?.

If you are that stupid to believe that 15+ sitez shows that GTS2 at the moment are the best then you have a problem not us.

By the way, by making a reference to us like we are 12 years old makes your statement even more stupid 'cause you are the one acting like a 12 year.

Just my opinion

AoD

 

[bluemax]

Actually, BFG, I kinda' agree with you. I'd need to know more details before I comment on THIS thread- but theoretically I'd be upset with &quot;skewered&quot; results. ESPECIALLY since people like me NEED these reviews to make a purchasing decision!

And I take back my previous comment about you... that was rash. I read another thread where you were the first to RECOMMEND a 5500 because of its good FSAA and 2d features. You can't be TOO biased then...

 

[Doomguy]

Many nvidia card fans have owned 3dfx cards in the past. The same cant be said for most 3dfx fans. I started out with a voodoo 1 and was amazed by it. My next choice was a voodoo 2 or tnt. I picked the tnt because it was faster than a single voodoo 2 and had look MUCH better. I'm sure many people on this forum did the same thing. 3dfx has released any products that are superior to nvidia's so I havent bought any of their products. If ATI's next product is faster than nvidia's next product and has good driver support i'll buy the ATI card.

 

[BFG10K]

ESPECIALLY since people like me NEED these reviews to make a purchasing decision!

My point exactly. We can't have techie guys posting stuff that is misleading. It's unfair to the general readers of their website.

 

[Mikewarrior2]

DaveB3d has been in the past, and still is, one of the most technically knowledgeable people on this BBS(among many others). You may or may not agree with his opinion(i sometimes don't) is not the real issue here.

Even if he has a slight 3dfx bias(which i've only seen on one occasion in a previous thread), he has knowledge that everyone can and should benefit from. Granted he has one post which can be categorized as antagonistic, but I can't honestly say it wasn't justified at least partially.


Mike

 

[NFS4]

DOH!

 

[BFG10K]

Whoops! I think you cross-posted a bit there NFS4!

Hehehe!

 

[NFS4]

??

 

[BFG10K]

??

NFS4 it's really nice of you to be talking about the pricing of a V5 6000, but you should be doing that in the other thread!

 

[NFS4]

DOh!!

 

[BurnedNIU]

Ignore me! yay!

RyanH
Burned

 

[BFG10K]

DOh!!

Hehehe!

Don't worry, I've done that once myself. I posted right into the middle of a heated argument and made a total fool out of myself because I was talking about something completely different to everyone else!

 

[BurnedNIU]

Sorry i was a little late on that last post...

Anyways, the ONLY fair way to benchmark two cards is to use DEFAULT driver settings. You are reviewing what they give you, yes?
And I would have to think that overclocking is a tweak provided my nvidia. I dont think there is any rules that regulate how you get to the tweak, i mean, its in the drivers. So, if you are going to tweak one board in drivers you had better tweak the other.
Actually, the esiest way to do it is this:

A) side by comparason of competing cards using default driver settings
then
B) side by side comparason of the video card your reviewing's tweaked and un tweaked setting.

Its not fair to have two cards competing one tweaked and one not tweaked.

RyanH.
*Burned*

 

[Fandu]

First of all, you have to benchmark with the default settings. Period. Just because one manufacturer offers overclocking in their drivers you can't overclock one card and not another. Both cards much have a level playing field. If you want to tweak one card to see what it really can do, by all means do it, but you must clearly state that you've altered the settings and these are not benchmarks you would see out of the box. Then post your tweaks so others can verify your findings. Or better yet, tweak each card as much as you possibly can squeeze out of it and put em head to head, post your tweaks and everyone will be happy.

Dave: You guys have posted some results that we have tried to reproduce and failed to do so. And without stating that you have changed any settings, we have to assume that everything is default. Which leads us to assume that ether your not too good at benchmarking, or your biased. I'm not saying you are ether, but one must assume that when you don't state otherwise. I do see where these guys are coming from here, they do have merit.

 

[Wingznut]

Currently, websites that use benchmarks comparing hardware are doing an atrocious job.

When doing benchmarks, they should set up the hardware to the best of it's ability withough sacrificing visual quality (at the highest possible detail options, of course.) That means enabling T&amp;L (if possible) for GeForce cards, using Glide for V5 cards, setting up the options that the drivers provide, etc... Basically, doing what the end user would do. They don't turn off the sound when playing Q3. They don't run UT in D3D on their V5. Most don't overclock. The majority don't run at 640x480 low quality (I sure didn't spend $300 to run at crappy resolutions.) Nobody plays 3dMark for fun.

I'm just asking for relevant and realistic comparisons. And not just video card stuff. This applies for every hardware comparison.

BFG, setting the options that came with the manufacturer's drivers, certainly isn't tweaking. I'll spare the analogies.

 

[kombatmud]

As far as I know in order to overclock an nVidia card, you need to alter a registry setting, and nVidia does not tell you how to do that. I would not consider that an &quot;option offered by nVidia drivers&quot;. Additionally, not all boards will overclock to the same amount, or even similarly. So overclocking a board is not a good practice for benchmarking. Personally, I would be most interested in seeing the optimal settings each board has that are reproducable in all boards, so if nVidia offers an option in their drivers that makes them faster, and 3dfx offers a completely different option, or multiple options, then I think they should all be used, provided that they don't degrade image quality. This gives a good representation of the best real world performance each of these boards would provide. If on the other hand, nVidia does not offer any options, and 3dfx does, then I think the 3dfx options should be used, and a statement should be made listing all the options used, so that a person looking to buy that board will be able to reproduce the same performance level. It would be nice to also see a comparison of that board without the options enabled versus having the options enabled, but that's neccessary in my opinion, because if I buy the board, I'm going to enable any options that result in performance increases without any drawbacks.
It's nice to see a comparison of beta drivers next to release drivers, but I don't think beta drivers should be used in a benchmark, without specifically stating that they are beta drivers, and providing release driver results as well, since beta drivers are almost always unsupported by the manufacturer, whereas options provided in release drivers are not unsupported.