nVidia's Problems

[CaiNaM]

Originally posted by: reever
Cainam, please go read up on the UT2k3 issue, it has been explained to death and actually was solved before toms stupid interview with developers about problems, it's a problem between the ati drivers and the ut2k3 ini and can be fixed with a single line of code.

fair enough, but please post a link, i did

Most of what your saying is nothing more than what you think, some feel Nvidia faster in some games (yes even some reviews), some feel Nvidia has better graphics... to me it just looks as your after a flame war.

And some Nvidia users on certain messageboards feel that every single driver release Nvidia releases raises their image quality without lowering framerates, or when the framerate goes down, they swear it's because the IQ is up, and they say this when EVERY new release comes out, without any proof[/quote]

well, this really isn't supposed to be an nv vs ati theread anyway, so those who want to argue and compare the two should really start another thread.

 

[reever]

http://www.elitebastards.com/page.php?pageid=2397&head=1&comments=1 #2

The fix is editing a .ini variable

http://particle.4t.com/main.html

 

[Keysplayr]

In the mood for stupid arguments? Well look no further! Your at Anandtech! Home of the pointless and pitiful nitpicking arguments!
Here you will find every flavor of technical befuddlement that has ever graced the internet. Come on in. Stay for a while.. Enjoy yourself as you argue!!

 

[BFG10K]

I never agreed they were alone on that one, or that it was a bad thing for end users. I wasn't arguing the fact that they did it or not.

Huh? Let's look at your bullet point in this thread:

Per app optimizations can create confusion on how the boards will perform across the board

Yet in the other discussions we've had you claimed that application detection is a valid form of optimization and that there's nothing wrong with it. So why list it in a thread titled "nVidia's problems"? How can a genuine optimization create confusion?

ATi does render several things in Halo quite differently then nV, the flashlight has improved with latest drivers, although still not quite right, but that was clearly inferior for some time

So renaming the executable and/or running a form of anti-detection on ATi's drivers produced different results? If not then they're highly likely to be bugs, not cheats. Possibly game issues too.

(which indicates those elements are GearBox issues, not ATi's).

Exactly so why bring it up as a cheat?

 

[BFG10K]

umm.. first, you've never been "outspoken" regarding ati's cheat, however you like to bring up nv "cheating" at every opportunity..

Because there's plenty to bring up, unlike ATi who have only had one verified cheat in the last twelve months or so (which was also promptly removed too). That's a far-cry from nVidia's issues.

then you go on to say "yea the both cheat, but it's not the same"..

It isn't the same. If you've been asleep for the last twelve months and missed everything that's been going on then I'm certainly not going to educate you. If you lack understanding about the issues then don't argue with me.

as for tom's, it wasn't so much tom i was quoting, rather the developers, which is why their comments were highlighted in bold.

Tom is irrelevant in this disussion; the issue was that it was never proven to be a cheat because anti-detect/renaming executable strings was never tried out and found to produce different results. Compare this to nVidia who have been caught out many times by the former methods.

Unwider found over forty application detection strings inside nVidia's drivers and running the anti-detect routines often produced significantly reduced benchmark numbers from nVidia. The same thing when custom demos were run instead of built-in demos. Hell, take a look nose-dive nVidia too in 3DMark03 after Futuremark defeated nVidia's detection routines; now contrast this to the other vendors who experience zero performance loss with the same build.

cheating is cheating.

Yes it is and again I never claimed that ATi never cheated.

if you are caught cheating on a test, are you held less accountable for cheating on one question than 2? or 5?

No, but cheating in one test and being sorry about it isn't as bad as bad as cheating in twenty tests and never planning to stop. Or do you think that if someone kills one person they are equally as bad as a person who killed twenty people? Would you expect both to be handed out identical sentences?

i'm sorry, your whole "cheating" premise is absurd and lacks credibility.

No it isn't. OTOH your whole "they've both cheated so they're both bad" is both a simplistic and ridiculous approach to take. You are ignoring key issues and facts in a vain attempt to lump the two vendors together.

 

[CaiNaM]

Originally posted by: reever
http://www.elitebastards.com/page.php?pageid=2397&head=1&comments=1 #2

The fix is editing a .ini variable

http://particle.4t.com/main.html[/q

thanks reever

edit: hmm.. well, i read the links, and the aquamark seems to have been explained well. not sure about ut and halo however, as there are still questions.

the second link shows some screenshots, however there seems to be no explanation. sure, one pic shows the what appears to be the correct LoD, however that doesn't really explain why it didn't render properly in the first place.

thanks again tho, intersting stuff which i probably never would have found without your help

 

[CaiNaM]

an no bfg, your're rationalizing the degrees of "cheating" and that's BS. cheating is cheating, and to claim or assume one who has been caught cheating multiple time is now "not cheating" simply because they haven't gotten caught is nieve at best. however, this while line of thining it out of context for this thread anyways, so if you really want to continue on this path start another thread, i'll be happy to join in, but it doesn't belong here.

 

[BFG10K]

an no bfg, your're rationalizing the degrees of "cheating" and that's BS. cheating is cheating,

And crime is crime, whether you steal a loaf of bread or you cut someone's head off with an axe.

They're both equal right? Both crime?

and to claim or assume one who has been caught cheating multiple time is now "not cheating" simply because they haven't gotten caught is nieve at best.

So I should instead believe that someone is cheating despite there being no proof of it?

Can you not see how ridiculous your comments are?

 

[CaiNaM]

you rationalizing again.

yes stealing is stealing. murder is murder.

stealing, however is not murder. cheating is still cheating tho.

maybe we can argue the "degree of ridiculousness" next by discussing the quality of your analogy?

 

[VIAN]

And crime is crime, whether you steal a loaf of bread or you cut someone's head off with an axe.

They're both equal right? Both crime?

How do you compare something like that. I could get fined for stealing bread, compared to life in prison. They are totally different. For all you know anyway, not saying that this is true, ATI could be the sneakiest cheaters on the planet. Nvidia could just be clumbsy. But, anyway the rules were unclear, so to say that it is cheating is not correct. In a test, the rules are clear. No copying. What were the rules here?

 

[Ronin]

I'm wondering why it is that Ben decided it was necessary to start another thread (albeit an extremely biased one), when he had a failed argument in another one about the same issue?

Ben, you really should let it go. Everyone has their opinions, and there will always be debates, but if you want to find a place to vent your frustrations, try to do it somewhere other than here. It's the same old thing, over and over and over again..why start ANOTHER thread?

 

[Pete]

I don't understand you meaning of the phrase "gung ho." Can you clarify.
Enthusiastic.

Most of what your saying is nothing more than what you think
That's just not true.

Ben decided it was necessary to start another thread (albeit an extremely biased one)
I don't think the "extremely biased" label is justified, either. His choice of adjectives may be overly strong, in keeping with the nature of this thread (rants, not raves), but his points are valid.

your
your
your
YOU'RE.

 

[BenSkywalker]

Yet in the other discussions we've had you claimed that application detection is a valid form of optimization and that there's nothing wrong with it. So why list it in a thread titled "nVidia's problems"? How can a genuine optimization create confusion?

I don't think there is anything wrong with per app optimizations, and both ATi and nVidia do them largely for the benefit of their customers(self serving of course, keeping the customers happy keeps them reccomending/buying your product). As far as a genuine optimization creating confusion, look how much it has confused you. You now kneejerk any decent sized performance bump must be a cheat, this creates a lengthy argument regularly. Stating it that their optimizations create confusion makes things a lot simpler.

So renaming the executable and/or running a form of anti-detection on ATi's drivers produced different results?

Yes.

If not then they're highly likely to be bugs, not cheats. Possibly game issues too.

I was stating that Tom has no crediblity, or he is blind(same end effect), nothing to do with cheating. Some of the differences at the time he posted that were drastic, and some of them were driver bugs at the time(flashlight was a perfect circle and looked poor- this has been pretty much fixed with the Cat 4.2s).

Ronin-

I'm wondering why it is that Ben decided it was necessary to start another thread (albeit an extremely biased one), when he had a failed argument in another one about the same issue?

Extremely biased about what exactly? I want to make sure I know what side of the fence I'm supposed to be on currently. BTW- what other thread are you talking about and what issue?

Everyone has their opinions, and there will always be debates, but if you want to find a place to vent your frustrations, try to do it somewhere other than here.

What frustration exactly....?

Pete-

His choice of adjectives may be overly strong

Have you ever known me to post any other way?

 

[Regs]

Originally posted by: vfibsux
If you ask me I think both of these guys are getting too far ahead of the software with their technology. I think this is where the problems are coming in.

-----------
This is what the software industry needs. A nice kick in the butt to deliver the goods and create a higher customer base for the PC industry. If you look at the upcoming games coming out spring and late spring (and I wont even mention HL2 since the game seems no existent), you will see games are going to be a lot more taxing on the hardware.

Plus you have people who want the best of everything. Like a nVidia 5900 or a 9800 etc. So they can plays these games at high res and max detail. That's what they pay $$$ for.
---------------

As for nVidia's problems... I don't really count their problems. The only reason why I didn't bye a 5900u is because the 9700p's where all ready out and kicking but while the old model 5800 was blowing dust. I think that is when a lot of the resentment for nVIdia started growing and why there was a lot of "fan boi" fights. Because a lot of ATI customers are still holding grudges on how people said the old 5800 was better or even comparable to the 9700 and this carried on to newer models like the new 5800u, 5900, 5950 etc..

I was impressed by the 9700/9800, wasn't so much by nVidia at the time. nVidias timing was just a little off, but people 'loyal' (as in used their products with ease before) stuck with them on the FX's or just simply waited longer to upgrade. I , like many others, just wanted what was best at the time.


nVidia's biggest problem this year, in my opinion, was timing. After all the driver rehashes and engine optimiziations, my 9800 was still sitting pretty in my case and I had not a worry at all.

 

[VIAN]

The 5800 Ultra was a pretty good card. I don't think it was as quick as the 9700 Pro, but still very fast. And the cooling looked pretty cool. The only problems it had were bad drivers and loud inefficient cooling. The 5900 hardware tweak was barely an upgrade at all. The 5900 gets bested by the 5800 in most tests. But the 5900 Ultra bests the 5800 Ultra in most if not all tests. There is very little difference in performance. Makes you wonder why they even did the tweak. The only section the 5900 excels over the 5800 is in AA and some shadow calculations.

 

[cm123]

Honestly I'm not being a smart a@#, but what makes a driver change for more speed a cheat? and of course when does it not become a cheat? I could care less which company we are talking about.

Then, should a standard not be made as to what a cheat is, then as to what's not? That would end so many flames would it not?.

Would we then say that becaues of one companies choice to render a graphic different or use a different method, that may too be a cheat?

Seriously, someone explain this to me, if possible based on facts & standards.

 

[Genx87]

Cheat- When the card you dont like gets faster.
Optimization- When the card you do like gets faster.

Simple as that.

 

[VIAN]

This is why I say that There were no rules for a cheat to be called. You can only cheat if you break rules. There were no rules or the rules were not clear.

One argued cheat: Nvidia keeps turning on their optimizer for 3dmark03. Is it all possible that Futuremark doesn't realize that it isn't a cheat and that it is an honest optimization. Why would Nvidia's compiler technology be a cheat anyway.

No consistancy is a problem. Many people have different opinions on what a cheat is. Rule breaking is the simplest form. There needs to be rules and there needs to be competition for cheating to happen.

Cheat- When the card you dont like gets faster.
Optimization- When the card you do like gets faster.

Simple as that.

May be true in many situations.

 

[bpt8056]

Originally posted by: Genx87
Cheat- When the card you dont like gets faster.
Optimization- When the card you do like gets faster.

Simple as that.

So true. This is why we'll never have any consensus on what is considered cheating. God bless America for free speech.

 

[Pete]

Cheat: only improves speed in benchmarks, not gameplay.
Optimization: improves speed in gameplay and, coincidentally, benchmarks.

But I can dig Genx87's more cynical answer.

 

[SilverTrine]

Originally posted by: CaiNaM
an no bfg, your're rationalizing the degrees of "cheating" and that's BS. cheating is cheating, and to claim or assume one who has been caught cheating multiple time is now "not cheating" simply because they haven't gotten caught is nieve at best. however, this while line of thining it out of context for this thread anyways, so if you really want to continue on this path start another thread, i'll be happy to join in, but it doesn't belong here.

I hope ATi sues you for defamation, trust me 3dmark2003 is not detected by ATi drivers and is by Nvidia. We can say 100% that Nvidia cheats and ATi doesnt.

 

[VIAN]

There's that new feature in the Forceware drivers where you can set driver preferences for games. Won't they be using app. detection then. I guess that it a cheat. App. det. isn't a cheat in itself. You aren't breaking any rules. I matters only what you do with the app. det. ability.

 

[cm123]

Originally posted by: VIAN
There's that new feature in the Forceware drivers where you can set driver preferences for games. Won't they be using app. detection then. I guess that it a cheat. App. det. isn't a cheat in itself. You aren't breaking any rules. I matters only what you do with the app. det. ability.

I happen to like that option, been working for me great! cheat or not. Everyone keeps telling what they think is a cheat, where in the hell is it listed or a spec on what's a cheat or not, else its all just what each may think whatever that may be that is a cheat.

What we need is more games like MS Rise of Nations that show the Frame Rate (as a option) in game play exactly how we each choose to play the game, plus could make for much more true game benchs, the rest would only be the quality of graphics, that easy to show.

 

[BFG10K]

yes stealing is stealing. murder is murder.

But they're both crimes, just like both companies have cheated. However the degree of cheating is most certainly not the same, just like the degree of crimes isn't the same.

How do you compare something like that.

The same way that someone compares ATi's cheating to nVidia's.

For all you know anyway, not saying that this is true, ATI could be the sneakiest cheaters on the planet.

We could speculate what they could be or we could look at the evidence that states what they are.

But, anyway the rules were unclear, so to say that it is cheating is not correct.

Please, don't start this stupidity again. We've already been over this many times. You're simply making up rubbish.

What were the rules here?

As a consumer you have a right not to get deceived and ripped off. But I forgot that you enjoy waiving your rights every time you attempt to justify nVidia's actions.

So I guess by your low standards nVidia have a right to do as they please and you'll happily take whatever they give you.

 

[BFG10K]

I don't think there is anything wrong with per app optimizations,

Then again I have to ask why even list it in this thread as a "problem". Again I'll ask: (1) how many of those bullet points do you actually agree with and (2) what is the point of this thread?

and both ATi and nVidia do them largely for the benefit of their customers(self serving of course, keeping the customers happy keeps them reccomending/buying your product).

ATI doesn't do application detection. However it appears to be company policy for nVidia

As far as a genuine optimization creating confusion, look how much it has confused you.

Are you trying to patronize me?

You now kneejerk any decent sized performance bump must be a cheat,

That is utter rubbish and you know it. I've admitted many times that not all performance gains on nVidia's part are cheats and I've even listed several of their actions that I class as genuine optimizations.

Yes.

So renaming the executable string produced different results? Or are you saying that you tricked the game into rendering a different way?

I was stating that Tom has no crediblity,

To be honest I think he only commented on the UT2003 issue; I can't remember his findings in Halo.

In any case, a lot of the benchmark games were having issues on nVidia boards too (including AquaMark, ironically even while nVidia was pointing the finger at ATi).