nVidia's Problems

[CaiNaM]

nope.. am just trying to see what you guys are so "gung ho" about. i mean, it's a nice card, but...

6 months w/ a 9700pro. best card out at the time i thought. 5900 came along, better performance, better 2d (they both offer "crisp" text @ 1600x1200, however the contrast is different, with for instance the black text standing out more on a dark background), better color (sorry, the 9700 seemed "washed out" compared to it, like the gamma or contrast was too high or something). not a glaring difference mind you, but enough that they "felt" different. dunno how else to explain it.

9800pro comes along at $199, and I just couldn't help myself.. it's faster than my 9700pro, about the same as my 5900, but having installed it, it's output, both 2d and 3d, still has the "look" of the 9700pro. again, i'm not trashing the ati.. hell, i have 3 dx9 parts and 2 of them are ati. they're both great cards, and i'm keeping all of em, but for my main pc (and i have to stare at it all damn day long), i prefer the 5900 for the time being.

i play daoc on it at 1280x1024, 4xaa/8xaf, and it just looks better on the 5900. ut2004 looks about the same, i probably couldn't tell you which one was which if you were to hide it from me.. but ut2004 also moves ALOT faster than daoc; it's a different game.

yet i get all this about all these sights say it has better aa and higher quality af and blah blah.. but i just want to see it on my pc! maybe it takes more tweaking, i dunno.. but like i said before, i just don't see it..... so i'm gonna take another look. besides, i finally got the pc version of halo to install, and i have to bench it w/ that 9800 anyway

 

[VIAN]

Allright! I can't take it anymore. WTH is daoc? Please tell me.

 

[Ackmed]

I guess all those reviews showing the 9800 Pro being faster than the 5900NU are wrong. I mean, since the 5900NU is faster for you and all.

 

[Pete]

You want the opinion of an armchair quad-back? Read on.

One size doesn't fit all, but the 9700 Pro sure looked like it could according to initial reviews, and especially after initial 5800 reviews. We saw a card that more than doubled the previous gen's with max IQ, was designed for the next gen of games, and shipped with good drivers. The fact that ATi came up with the spiritual sucessor to 3dfx's unparalleled AA despite nV having bought the company was icing on the seemingly flawless cake.

The 5900 evened the tables in current benchmarks, but all signs still seem to point to the 9800 offering better AA and the continually reaffirmed promise of better next-gen performance (or, more correctly, less performance degradation with next-gen effects). So the 9800 still seems to come off better than the 5900 in reviews, though the field seems much more even now. Both cards excel in certain games, and each have their strengths. Now that the 3DM03 flap has subsided, we seem to be seeing a return to the usual: nV is faster an' uglier with better drivers, while ATi is slower an' prettier with finicky drivers. The gap between the two has decreased in both respects and isn't as even, but it still seems to be there. nV does look better in certain games, and ATi looks faster in others. But, from my perspective there's just greater potential associated with ATi's cards, and it's borne out by DX9 benchmarks (be they synthetic or real, commercial or educational). I also tend to excuse the odd ATi effect glitch (saber in JK:A) or lower quality (SC) as a result of nV's dominance for the past few generations. I don't think we'll be seeing as many problems with ATi cards from about now mainly because ATi has now shown they've got market-leading hardware, good sales numbers, and will be in Xbox 2.

Cainam, with respect to your particular needs, most people assume both the 5900 and 9800 are good enough when it comes to 2D quality, so they tend to focus on 3D. I don't think your experience with two games is reason enough to doubt a lot of the reviews out there. But they're your eyes, and I can't really argue with what appeals to you more.

I don't see the "gung ho" that makes you want to give your 9800P another go. If anything, the responses have been "gung ho" for nVidia. In fact, the three people who've bothered to Fisk Ben's starting points (you, VIAN, and vg0) all seemed to try to dismiss or marginalize most of them--and not too convincingly, IMO.

Why not lay aside the defensive attitude and try to investigate Ben's points? If Ben is serious, that is. This whole thread may just be a defensive effort on his part to establish his nV-hatin' street cred, to counter some of the "fanboy"'s tossed his way recently. I kid, I kid! Oy....

Sorry for the further tangent, Ben, I'll butt out now. Let's get this out of everyone's system, so valid new issues aren't plagued by the ghosts of annoyances past.

Edit: DAoC = Dark Age of Camelot (it's only a model). Google could have told you that, though.

 

[CaiNaM]

Originally posted by: Ackmed
I guess all those reviews showing the 9800 Pro being faster than the 5900NU are wrong. I mean, since the 5900NU is faster for you and all.

well, first of all the reviews (with a couple exceptions) always compare at stock speeds. you rarely read what you reply to anyways (i was talking 9700pro, but you would have know that had your brain been quicker than your mouth), as has been pointed out by people other than me. second of all, you've proven several times your posts are often.. hmph.. less than accurate. but hey, no sense going on, as whenever you've been show to be umm.. inaccurate.. you've shown that your style is to tuck you tail between your legs and run.

at any rate, just got done wtih the halo timedemo, and the oc'd 9800pro spanked the oc'd 5900 fairly decisively.

 

[vfibsux]

Originally posted by: VIAN
Allright! I can't take it anymore. WTH is daoc? Please tell me.

Dark Age of Camelot, an mmorpg that came out a few years ago. Was a great pvp game until they added so much crap to it and nerfed the hell out of one of the realms and ruined it

 

[CaiNaM]

Originally posted by: Pete
You want the opinion of an armchair quad-back? Read on.

heh.. i always enjoy reading your posts, even when your opinion is at odds with mine. but you have a genuine interest and seem to see strengths and weaknesses in both products, and in general you seem to always have a point and you present them in a logical manner. that's the whole point of discussing something.

One size doesn't fit all, but the 9700 Pro sure looked like it could according to initial reviews, and especially after initial 5800 reviews. We saw a card that more than doubled the previous gen's with max IQ, was designed for the next gen of games, and shipped with good drivers. The fact that ATi came up with the spiritual sucessor to 3dfx's unparalleled AA despite nV having bought the company was icing on the seemingly flawless cake.

agreed. it was my main card for over 6 months, and i have no regrets. the nv 5800 series was not even in the same league.

The 5900 evened the tables in current benchmarks, but all signs still seem to point to the 9800 offering better AA and the continually reaffirmed promise of better next-gen performance (or, more correctly, less performance degradation with next-gen effects). So the 9800 still seems to come off better than the 5900 in reviews, though the field seems much more even now. Both cards excel in certain games, and each have their strengths. Now that the 3DM03 flap has subsided, we seem to be seeing a return to the usual: nV is faster an' uglier with better drivers, while ATi is slower an' prettier with finicky drivers.

well, i think that's an exaggeration (nv is not really faster nor really uglier.. it just depends), but we'll run with it..

The gap between the two has decreased in both respects and isn't as even, but it still seems to be there. nV does look better in certain games, and ATi looks faster in others. But, from my perspective there's just greater potential associated with ATi's cards, and it's borne out by DX9 benchmarks (be they synthetic or real, commercial or educational). I also tend to excuse the odd ATi effect glitch (saber in JK:A) or lower quality (SC) as a result of nV's dominance for the past few generations. I don't think we'll be seeing as many problems with ATi cards from about now mainly because ATi has now shown they've got market-leading hardware, good sales numbers, and will be in Xbox 2.

you know.. i am not sure aquiring 3dfx was such a great thing for nvidia.. i mean.. they seem to have inherited the qualites of the "new" 3dfx, not the one that accomplished so much in so little time with the voodoo 1 & 2 series of cards. you could list a lot of comparisons, but here's a couple quick ones:

3dfx: yea, the card is HUGE, but hey....
nv: yea, the card is HUGE, and it takes 2 slots, but hey...

3dfx: look we render in 24bit color, but display in 16bit. there's NOOO difference. really.
nvidia: look, you don't need 24fp precision with shaders.. we offer either 32 or 16, and 16 NOOO different in quality than 24. really.

one could go on, but hopefully you see the point

Cainam, with respect to your particular needs, most people assume both the 5900 and 9800 are good enough when it comes to 2D quality, so they tend to focus on 3D. I don't think your experience with two games is reason enough to doubt a lot of the reviews out there. But they're your eyes, and I can't really argue with what appeals to you more.

well, it's never been a "those reviews are wrong, look at this!" kind of a thing, but rather just my observations on living with these cards as an "enthusiast" meaning overclocking, bang for the buck, etc. I freely admit that these have been limited to a couple of games, but i'm not trying to do an "all encompassing" review here, but rather just sharing results as i go....

I don't see the "gung ho" that makes you want to give your 9800P another go. If anything, the responses have been "gung ho" for nVidia. In fact, the three people who've bothered to Fisk Ben's starting points (you, VIAN, and vg0) all seemed to try to dismiss or marginalize most of them--and not too convincingly, IMO.

not sure what "Fisk" means, however it's not a matter of "marginalizing" them, but simply responding to them as i see them.

Why not lay aside the defensive attitude and try to investigate Ben's points? If Ben is serious, that is. This whole thread may just be a defensive effort on his part to establish his nV-hatin' street cred, to counter some of the "fanboy"'s tossed his way recently. I kid, I kid! Oy....

attitude? well, i have shown one towards Ack!Med!, however that's simply been a case of him tossing garbage at me, and my tossing it back twofold. have i shown an attitude when responding to any of your posts where our views differ?

Sorry for the further tangent, Ben, I'll butt out now. Let's get this out of everyone's system, so valid new issues aren't plagued by the ghosts of annoyances past.

bleh.. you're fine. honestly, i haven't seen too much of "fanboyism" in these threads.. and cindy22 is nowhere to be seen

 

[CaiNaM]

Originally posted by: vfibsux

Originally posted by: VIAN
Allright! I can't take it anymore. WTH is daoc? Please tell me.

Dark Age of Camelot, an mmorpg that came out a few years ago. Was a great pvp game until they added so much crap to it and nerfed the hell out of one of the realms and ruined it

lol.. well the biggest problem is CC rules supreme, and 2 realms have an advantage in even numbered fight. maybe frontiers and an ra system overhaul will help, but i'm not holding my breath as mythic still seems clueless. if they simply removed albion, rvr (different from pvp imo) might be fun again

 

[Pete]

Thank you, Cainam, and same to you. It's nice to participate in a discussion/debate that sets out for a conclusion, rather than from one. Or that doesn't set out. Or is already there. Gah, you get the point.

I didn't so much mean "ugly" as I did plain. I was thinking mainly of 3dfx's T-buffer-enabled AA. "Fisk" is a result of following politics too closely, and just means an almost line-by-line rebuttal. And I meant "attitude" as in disposition, and it was meant for many of the skeptical thread posters so far--you included, but not exclusively. Although Ben asked for disagreement, I though some of it was unfounded. But he also specifically asked for nV owners, not article/forum regurgitators, so I'll stop blabbing and start respecting his wishes now.

 

[VIAN]

I don't see the "gung ho" that makes you want to give your 9800P another go. If anything, the responses have been "gung ho" for nVidia. In fact, the three people who've bothered to Fisk Ben's starting points (you, VIAN, and vg0) all seemed to try to dismiss or marginalize most of them--and not too convincingly, IMO.

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

 

[BenSkywalker]

BFG-

Because we've already argued many of these issues in 20 page discussions before and you certainly didn't show much agreement with me there.

Read everything I say carefully, I haven't argued against any of these points(go ahead and check ), this also overwhelmingly isn't about in relation to ATi unless explicitly noted. Some of the things I listed are not relevant to the end user, but they are all valid points and shortcomings in nV's architecture/drivers.

VIAN-

PS2, Idk, just know its DX9, which would then mean that they have been falsely advertising their product.

PS/VS 3.0 are in the DX9 specs and have been since launch, none of the current boards are close to fully DX9 compliant. nVidia is missing that feature however, and there is a game scheduled to use it that is going to be a huge hit when it launches.

It improves performance but isn't like bilinear at all. I think this was a smart move, but they should have given it another name instead of redefining trilinear and given an option to turn it on.

In terms of execution it is. Overwhelmingly people may not notice it, but it isn't proper trilinear.

Noone said that they couldn't do that.

Static clip planes...? I'm not talking about general optimizations, static clip planes are way over the line by anyone's standards.

Virtualgames0-

Mostly because of precision differences. NV running at higher precision than ATI... NV running at mixed mode runs pretty much on par to ATI.

Not really. Even in mixed mode nV still gets whipped badly in a lot of tests. They are doing much better then they were in the past, but they still have clearly inferior PS 2.0 performance compared to the competition.

It does work AFAIK, just not with NV3x path.

HDR doesn't work, forget HL2, you can check using the MS SDK.

You can use RGSS AA, or the OGSS, but only with DX games. 4xS and 6xS AA is RGSS. Yes it doesn't perform as well, but it's quality you are talking about here.

And 6xS can't touch ATi's 6x in terms of quality for newer titles.

Where exactly did you hear NV3x line has worse AF quality than NV2x? Go get a clue before you come on here making wild claims.

It is a point of fact, the NV2X is hands down the best series of chips for anisotropic filtering quality that we have seen to date. The NV2X did not adapt and scale back samples, it did not improperly adjust the LOD bias in some instances, it did not revert to other filtering tricks to boost performance when it was in use. You don't need user perspective on this one, run through tests that display exactly what boards are doing and no matter what the NV2X is d@mn near perfect- nothing else comes too close in terms of accuracy. Now, due to the enormous performance hit it took you may not have been able to enjoy it in too many games, but in terms of quality the NV2X was and remains the best part ever for anisotropic filtering.

Yeah NV cheated here.. in one game... one driver release.. I don't think this is still a problem

Brilinear was forced on by default in all DX games with the 53.03 drivers whenever you used anisotropic.

I don't think this is a problem. I believe the problem is 3DMark03 being utter crap.

3DM2K3 may very well be utter crap, but nVidia inserted static clip planes in one of their old driver builds. That is blatant cheating.

Pete-

I love how many people have come in and attempted to refute Ben's list almost point by point. And you were worried about ATi fans, Ben?

Read what they are saying, don't just note that they replied point by point. There has been one post that I've seen that attempts to refute all the points, the rest have been degree based issues or agreement.

Why not lay aside the defensive attitude and try to investigate Ben's points?

That's what I'm looking for. I want everything out here and now, additions or subtractions to the list as the case may be, and then we can drop these points in to the 'given' category and stop wasting time talking about them.

This whole thread may just be a defensive effort on his part to establish his nV-hatin' street cred, to counter some of the "fanboy"'s tossed his way recently.

Every one of the points I listed in this thread I've stated previously, most of them numerous times There are three of them that are important to me, important enough that I hadn't bought a FX based board yet(and I've made those points clear multiple times in the past on these boards).

 

[ErikS]

My list of Nvidia "hits"

The NV3X cards can only do 16bit VS2.0 in DX9.0...only in OpenGL can it do 32bit VS2.0 this makes all NV3X cards non-DX9.0 compliant as far as I'm concerned....but since when does the card run in 32bit PS2.0 anyway (AFAIK it's not in the spec for PS2.0).

the NV30 can do either 2 text units "OR" 1 FP units per pipe....not both. When doing 8 text units and 8 FP units...it takes 3 clocks. This means it's a 4x2 GPU in DX8 & a 4x1 GPU in DX9.

They hung their hat on integer calc's & texels when they KNEW that FP & shaded were the future.

Mostly because of precision differences. NV running at higher precision than ATI... NV running at mixed mode runs pretty much on par to ATI.

Not really, see above. It can only do FP32 in OGL AND it can't do the FP24 which is the DX9 spec = crappy DX9 performance w/ NO hope of improvment IF they truly use the spec. They CAN get around this by dropping to FP16 (PS1.1).

AA quality @ 4x and higher sucks compared to ATi

Their approach os just not as good, it takes more of a performance it - that's just a fact. Not much they can do about it. Truthfully I can't see the difference, but the performance hit is there.

'Brilinear' hack to improve performance

Just plain sad & makes them look silly - did they really think they'd get away with this?

I'm glossing over the issues, but if you mosey over to www.beyond3d.com you'll find more than you ever wanted to know about the deficiencies of the NV3x core. It WILL take a new core to fix the problems.

 

[Mem]

I`ve not much to say on this matter being I own an old GF2 Ti in my backup PC and 9700NP in my old main rig,the main problem I`ve with Nvidia is why are they taking longer and longer to release new drivers?Ati is on a monthly update while to me Nvidia is just taking longer and longer between updates.

I can`t really say anything bad about ATi or Nvidia from my personal experience ,being that both are running great,well that`s it, another boring post by me .

 

[cm123]

Originally posted by: BenSkywalker
Alright let's get all of nV's issues grouped together-

Pixel Shader 2.0 performance is horrible

Missing some of the PS 2.0 level features in their drivers, HDR as an example which is going to be used by HL2

Driver bugs completely screwing up the fog in several titles(MOH as an example)

AA quality @ 4x and higher sucks compared to ATi

Gets their @ss kicked in some games embarassingly so(Mafia as an example)

Dropping AF quality compared to the NV2X line while ATi is making huge gains

'Brilinear' hack to improve performance

Cheats in 3DMark2K3 with static clip plains with older drivers

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

Am I missing any here? Are there any that nV users disagree with? It would be nice if we could just get all of this out so it doesn't have to be repeated ad nauseam.

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.

Some Nvidia fans would/could say most all the same back... both have fine tuned drivers before etc...

 

[Ackmed]

Internet arguing rule #1: When you're wrong, just call the other party names to make up for your lack of being correct.

CaiNaM has that down pat. Another thread to be ignored.

 

[CaiNaM]

Originally posted by: Ackmed
Internet arguing rule #1: When you're wrong, just call the other party names to make up for your lack of being correct.

CaiNaM has that down pat. Another thread to be ignored.

once again you completely avoid anything relevant, and once again you misquote and use misinformation. where, again did i call anyone names? a very poor attempt on your part. are you capable of no better?

ahh.. but now you run once again, having nothing intelligent so counter with. doesn't that grow tiring?

 

[CaiNaM]

Originally posted by: VIAN

I don't see the "gung ho" that makes you want to give your 9800P another go. If anything, the responses have been "gung ho" for nVidia. In fact, the three people who've bothered to Fisk Ben's starting points (you, VIAN, and vg0) all seemed to try to dismiss or marginalize most of them--and not too convincingly, IMO.

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

hmm.. overly enthusiatic? supportive beyond reason? somewhat akin to the term "fanboy" however to a much lesser degree.. something along those lines.. does that help?

 

[SilverTrine]

Iraqi Information Minister: Geforce 5900 is fastest GPU ever available, reviews showing 9800pro is far faster are lies. Nvidia is creator of best and fastest gpu's ever.

 

[BFG10K]

I love how many people have come in and attempted to refute Ben's list almost point by point.

What's even more disturbing is the amount of incorrect information being posted in these attempted refutations. There are some individuals who keep repeating the same incorrect information even after i've corrected them repeatedly.

Read everything I say carefully, I haven't argued against any of these points(go ahead and check ),

Well as an example: application detection. I said many times that one of the problems with it is that it shows unrealistic performance accross the board but you never once agreed with me.

In any case this thread isn't really what you expected since it appears that nVidia fans are attempting to argue with your points, rather than ATi fans coming in and agreeing with you. I think I might just sit back and enjoy the show for once.

 

[CaiNaM]

Originally posted by: SilverTrine
Iraqi Information Minister: Geforce 5900 is fastest GPU ever available, reviews showing 9800pro is far faster are lies. Nvidia is creator of best and fastest gpu's ever.

dear mr troll,

unfortunately your statement has nothing to do with our discussion, as we are not talking "speed", and definatley not comparing the the 9800pro to anything here, nor are we dicussing the 5900 specifically. so your feeble attempt to encite a flamewar is utter failure.

if your attempt was simply to be humerous, that has failes as well, as you are too far off the subject matter for any of us to be amused, although some of us are chuckling under our breath regarding the utter failure of your attempt.

we feel bad that you are lost and/or disoriented, however we do not understand you trolls so we won't try and give you directions, but rather just wish you well and good luck in your journey.

have a nice day

 

[CaiNaM]

"What's even more disturbing is the amount of incorrect information being posted in these attempted refutations. There are some individuals who keep repeating the same incorrect information even after i've corrected them repeatedly."

and of course, you are always correct

"Well as an example: application detection. I said many times that one of the problems with it is that it shows unrealistic performance accross the board but you never once agreed with me."

actually, i agree with you on that one, however this is hardly an issue of one company doing it and not the other as you always seem to present it as. as an example, a quote from tomshardware:

Earlier this year, NVIDIA drew a lot of flak over a number of questionable optimizations in their drivers for 3DMark 2003 - optimizations which could definitely be called cheats. It was in response to this that NVIDIA came up with the guidelines pertaining to performance optimizations mentioned above. Laudably, we haven't been able to make out any "violations" of the new rules in the new driver v52.16 - at least so far.

ATi, on the other hand, repeatedly claimed that their drivers implemented no illegitimate optimizations. The accusations leveled against ATi at NVIDIA's Editors' Day two days ago thus become that much more serious. Epic's Mark Rein confirmed that in some cases, high-res detail textures were not displayed in some areas by ATi´s drivers and that standard, lower-res textures are used instead. Randy Pitchford of the Halo development team also mentioned that there were optimizations present in ATi's drivers which are detrimental to Halo's image quality. However, Randy didn't want to go into more detail here. Finally, Massive's new DX9 benchmark, AquaMark 3, also displayed some irregularities of ATi drivers in the overdraw test.

the fact is, people can argue to death about who's cheating at what, but it's always been done by both, and it's been done for years. both ATI and NVIDIA have been accused of "cheating" in their drivers dating back years and many different situations, and this will probably continue well into the future.

 

[BFG10K]

and of course, you are always correct

Not always.

this is hardly an issue of one company doing it and not the other as you always seem to present it as.

I've never once claimed that ATi never cheated.

as an example, a quote from tomshardware:

Neither UT2003 nor Halo were tested for application detection on ATi's part, unlike the changes nVidia was observed to experience when anti-detect routines and/or patches were used on them; even a simple application executable rename often triggered visible changes. Because of this fact it's difficult to make the claim that ATi were doing it on purpose. Not only that, but Tom's hardware themselves said they couldn't find any evidence of either of the allegations in their tests.

You want to talk about attitudes to cheating? We can start with the ludicrous optimization guidelines nVidia put out, all of which were broken in the next driver release. Then we can move on to ATi's response to detecting 3DMark (we don't do it because it's unfair to our customers) vs nVidia's response (it's our product and it's our right to hack 3DMark any way we see fit).

Yes, both companies have cheated in the past but to claim that they're somehow similar with respect to cheating is completely inaccurate.

 

[BenSkywalker]

Well as an example: application detection. I said many times that one of the problems with it is that it shows unrealistic performance accross the board but you never once agreed with me.

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.

Not only that, but Tom's hardware themselves said they couldn't find any evidence of either of the allegations in their tests.

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- they are also missing some effects although by using 3DAnalyzer you can force the game to think it's a 5900 and it will render most effects properly(which indicates those elements are GearBox issues, not ATi's). I'm not saying this to drag ATi in to this conversation, more to point out Tom was either full of crap or he is blind.

 

[CaiNaM]

Originally posted by: BFG10K

and of course, you are always correct

Not always.

this is hardly an issue of one company doing it and not the other as you always seem to present it as.

I've never once claimed that ATi never cheated.

as an example, a quote from tomshardware:

Neither UT2003 nor Halo were tested for application detection on ATi's part, unlike the changes nVidia was observed to experience when anti-detect routines and/or patches were used on them; even a simple application executable rename often triggered visible changes. Because of this fact it's difficult to make the claim that ATi were doing it on purpose. Not only that, but Tom's hardware themselves said they couldn't find any evidence of either of the allegations in their tests.

You want to talk about attitudes to cheating? We can start with the ludicrous optimization guidelines nVidia put out, all of which were broken in the next driver release. Then we can move on to ATi's response to detecting 3DMark (we don't do it because it's unfair to our customers) vs nVidia's response (it's our product and it's our right to hack 3DMark any way we see fit).

Yes, both companies have cheated in the past but to claim that they're somehow similar with respect to cheating is completely inaccurate.

umm.. first, you've never been "outspoken" regarding ati's cheat, however you like to bring up nv "cheating" at every opportunity.. then you go on to say "yea the both cheat, but it's not the same"..

do yes, you DO show bias, and your rebuttal only confirms that.

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.

you can't say "they both cheat but it's okay for this company" or "their cheating is worse" (which is subjective anyway). cheating is cheating.

if you are caught cheating on a test, are you held less accountable for cheating on one question than 2? or 5? at what point is cheating more honarable.. if i only cheat on 2 things? 3? where is the line drawn?

and who knows how many time both companies have cheated w/o being caught?

i'm sorry, your whole "cheating" premise is absurd and lacks credibility. bottom line is they both do it, they've both been caught doing it, and you can bet there's been other instances where they've done it and haven't been caught.

 

[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.

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