What can be done about [H], Anand, & THG's BS regarding

[digitalwanderer]

Damn it, I SO want to do something to let everyone know just what the hell kind of drivel is being spoonfed to the masses out of "the big 3 hardware sites"...but I'm clueless as to what.

Even my own site is scared of the idea of doing a negative story on [H], which I JUST DON'T GET! :?

Is there anything anyone can do, I mean aside from getting pissed off on the boards?

[zurich]

What's wrong with Anands? Despite putting out an article once in a blue moon ofcourse..

He did raise hell over the NV30 after all. Not that I enjoyed ATI's massive Radeon 9700 banners that plastered all corners of the site during the Radeon 9700 review ;)

[digitalwanderer]

He had the 5900 graphs up for months that misrepresented it's performance even thought there were multiple threads started about it in his forums and it was an obvious error. (The card got the exact same framerates at 1024x768-1600x1200 or whatever.)

The first few threads about it in his forums were mysteriously deleted, and the one that stuck had some mods putting up some absolute BS in about why Anand didn't address the problem...for WEEKS!

He still ain't addressed the issue. :(

[Doomtrooper]

When people stop visiting and giving hits is only when the IHVs won't be 'obligated' to ship review cards. Heck, the quality of the reviews anymore on the net..with recent time demo optimizations and only a couple of sites have used a custom time demo.
A 10 year old could do better reviews.

Just don't go there, that is a start.

[digitalwanderer]

I'm thinking of a grassroots campaign or something of getting some chalk and writing "nVidia LIES!!!" on the street/sidewalk/wall or something...but having people do it all over the world so it makes it into the news just out of the sheer curiousity factor.

If I owned a farm right now I'd mow a "crop circle" that said it. ;)

[Dave Baumann]

I met Anand for the first time over the weekend and he presented some very good insights. I hope I meet him again sooner or later and get the opportunity to chat with him further.

[Reverend]

I met Anand for the first time over the weekend and he presented some very good insights. I hope I meet him again sooner or later and get the opportunity to chat with him further.
Even without ever having met Anand (i.e. via emails... he nevers fails to compliment me, although this has no influence on what I have to say... I just wish I have the opportunity to meet him, more than any other reknowned web personnels in this 3D industry because he'd said we must meet sometime back), I can tell he is a young and matured fella, who knows exactly what's happening.

Sometimes, when you're in a business and you're just handling a lot of things, things just get extra touchy and sensitive and you need to decide how to handle it as best you can... mostly from the POV of not jeopardizing your money-making concern.

[Mariner]

Sometimes, when you're in a business and you're just handling a lot of things, things just get extra touchy and sensitive and you need to decide how to handle it as best you can... mostly from the POV of not jeopardizing your money-making concern.

Perhaps so, but this doesn't do much for the people who buy their graphics cards on the basis of his sites erroneous reviews and failure to mention 'optimisation/cheating' driver scandals.

[Pete]

Dave, did you talk at all about his 5900 article? More specifically, about the attitude of his reviewers and the extreme delay (um, still ongoing, as some questionable text is still intact) in correcting some benches? Is he, like Brent, "too busy" to do a proper review of his review? Is he concerned about the disservice he's doing to his readers? I haven't heard a single word out of him regarding the large fracas in AT's forums over his article and his non-reaction to our concerns.

This virtual stonewalling is all the more puzzling because he's probably the online reviewer I respect the most, if not in terms of video card review competence, at least in regards to personality and maturity--he seems like a genuinely nice guy.

[digitalwanderer]

Dave, did you talk at all about his 5900 article? More specifically, about the attitude of his reviewers and the extreme delay (um, still ongoing, as some questionable text is still intact) in correcting some benches? Is he, like Brent, "too busy" to do a proper review of his review? Is he concerned about the disservice he's doing to his readers? I haven't heard a single word out of him regarding the large fracas in AT's forums over his article and his non-reaction to our concerns.

This virtual stonewalling is all the more puzzling because he's probably the online reviewer I respect the most, if not in terms of video card review competence, at least in regards to personality and maturity--he seems like a genuinely nice guy.
Damn it, you posted up the questions I was going to post! :p

I agree I like/respect Anand as a person, but the compromises he is making if he is aware of what's going on for the sake of his business would sort of tank his credibility with me. :(

What are we supposed to do, take him seriously when he tells us the truth and forgive him when he fudges the facts to make a bigger profit?

[nggalai]

Hi there,
Not that I enjoyed ATI's massive Radeon 9700 banners that plastered all corners of the site during the Radeon 9700 review ;)On a side note, it seems as if Anand is just the most obvious of the major reviewing sites regarding that bit. In "traditional" media, it's the usual thing to publish a review or "article" on a topic and have the "winning" party know beforehand what's in it to secure further ad places. You'd be surprised how many "articles" and "reviews" in print magazines are actually written by the company's marketing department and signed by a magazine's editor. Be especially careful if you see a "free journalist" sign an article . . .

In that respect, Anand seems just ahead of the game. Be prepared to see more such "funny" correspondences in the not too distant future, on the web. It's not as if marketeers were totally stupid or very imaginative.

93,
-Sascha.rb

[YeuEmMaiMai]

I do not visit toms or anand for that matter and [h] is just entertainment only............

[zurich]

What I don't get about using custom timedemos, is that won't they only prevent clipping optimizations/cheats? If the drivers say, disable trilinear or mess with the mip levels, whats a custom timedemo going to do to stop it? These occur on the game engine level, not the demo.

[tEd]

Hi there,
Not that I enjoyed ATI's massive Radeon 9700 banners that plastered all corners of the site during the Radeon 9700 review ;)On a side note, it seems as if Anand is just the most obvious of the major reviewing sites regarding that bit. In "traditional" media, it's the usual thing to publish a review or "article" on a topic and have the "winning" party know beforehand what's in it to secure further ad places. You'd be surprised how many "articles" and "reviews" in print magazines are actually written by the company's marketing department and signed by a magazine's editor. Be especially careful if you see a "free journalist" sign an article . . .

In that respect, Anand seems just ahead of the game. Be prepared to see more such "funny" correspondences in the not too distant future, on the web. It's not as if marketeers were totally stupid or very imaginative.

93,
-Sascha.rb

well that's scary

[Pete]

I believe the correct term is "synergy." ;)

[K.I.L.E.R]

Reviews I most trust are found at Envynews and Beyond3D.

[StealthHawk]

I have to voice a different take on the issue. At least sites like Tom's and [H] have ignorance on their side. But if Anand knows exactly what is going on, yet says absolutely nothing about it, that is truly despicable. I can understand why he said nothing about 3dmark03, as obviously NVIDIA does not admit to cheating there, looking at ExtremeTech and Tom's their official position seems to be that the oddities were driver bugs :roll:

However, something like what NVIDIA is doing in UT2003 is completely unexcusable. Major hardware sites don't need to say NVIDIA is cheating. They don't need to imply it or make that conclusion. But they should present the facts(IQ is being decreased, whether it be a cheat or a bug). I have to say, that despite [H]'s latest review making glowing comments about UT2003 performance, [H] is going in the right direction by not just feeding readers graphs and results, but by also including commentary on how games actually played. Certainly this is a step forward from what we've seen in the past.

The fact is, that any unusual behavior experienced in tests run for the review should be noted clearly in said review if that knowledge is known to the reviewer.

[Unit01]

Well to answer the topic
Stop visiting the sites to stop give them hits.
I've already stopped visiting Anandtech, waiting til they fix their 5900u review. But i will return there in time
Stopped visiting [H], don't trust them. Even if they did use custom timedemo's it would be "unknowingly" leaked and a driver release from a certain IHV would be released before the review
Still visiting toms. Maybe they'll get better or maybe not

[swanlee]

I honestly think a class action lawsuit should be filed against Nvidia for years of consumer fraud by cheating in ways that make their product look better than it actually is. They have been doing this for years as what we've found out lately it goes all the way back to 3dmark 2001, and timedemo's in nearly every game used as a benchmark.

I also think sites like Hardocp should be included in this as it's pretty freakin obvious they have helped Nvidia spread the lies about their video cards and are more than likely getting direct payments from them as an extension of their marekting department.

If this happened in a laymans industry i.e. non technical and easily understood by the public, the lawsuits would be flying, and this industry would be shaklen to it's core and I'm sure the feds would get involved considering the amount of money this industry generates and how many millions of dollars Nvidia has pretty much stolen from it's customers by cheating their way into people's wallets.

Has Nvidia ever really been the video card leader? have they ever produced a product that was the fastest best card out there without cheats? We will probably never know but people bought there cards because they were lied to into thinking that Nvidia was the best choice.

I do hope the law eventually gets involved and tries to regualte this type of crap as this is consumer fraud in it's purest form.

[saf1]

Easy way to deal with them is by not visiting the site(s). In short, ignor them. Sooner or later as interest passes, so does the income.

[kkevin666]

hi all

Digitalwanderer why dont you collate some links to the proof of nvidia not allowing trilinear when the app asks-

I will then give you my time to join and post these links/proof at every major graphics card and public news sites

Hey we get enough people doing this we gotta start making a difference
right as the problem is not enough exposure of this major deception nvidia is selling to the public - a lot of news sites ARE impartial to this unlike certain card review websites.

If your serious and want some help im in sir.

[digitalwanderer]

hi all

Digitalwanderer why dont you collate some links to the proof of nvidia not allowing trilinear when the app asks-

I will then give you my time to join and post these links/proof at every major graphics card and public news sites

Hey we get enough people doing this we gotta start making a difference
right as the problem is not enough exposure of this major deception nvidia is selling to the public - a lot of news sites ARE impartial to this unlike certain card review websites.

If your serious and want some help im in sir.
That ain't a bad idea at all, and it ain't even illegal! :D

As soon as I get my other 'puter back on her feet and get me kids in bed I'll get right on it, for now I think it's pretty well summed up by a post I put up that's been overlooked at EB, here's a cut-n-paste:

I was gonna just toss this up to have something to toss up, but then I thought I'd at least give it an hour in the staff lounge for any approvals/disapprovals/recomendations. ;)


START-

Ok, a couple of three weeks ago there was a bit of an uproar in the graphics world community when it came out that nVidia was blatantly "optimizing" their drivers to get a higher score at popular benchmarks. If you missed it, you can catch up with the story so far over here at this excellent summary over at Tech Report (http://www.tech-report.com/etc/2003q2/3dmurk03/index.x?pg=1) and get yourself up to speed in a hurry.

It was later discovered that both nVidia & ATi were still optimizing for benchmarks (http://www.beyond3d.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=6480) and it was looking like nVidia was even optimizing for some time-demos of real-world games. Unwinder posted a bit about the upcoming article at FutureMark (http://discuss.futuremark.com/forum/showflat.pl?Cat=&Board=techdisplayadapters&Number= 2396896&page=0&view=collapsed&sb=5&o=0&fpart=1) too, in addition to a thread about nVidia cheating at Shadermark over at nVnews (http://www.nvnews.net/vbulletin/showthread.php?s=&threadid=13494 ).

nVidia's reaction to the soon-to-be published article was a refreshing surprise in a disbelievably arrogant kind-o-way, they went out and basically said that they were the industry standard for 9 out of 10 games, soon to be 10 out of 10 (http://www.beyond3d.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=132574&highlight=#132574). ATi's Richard Huddy kindly differed with that statement in what I thought was a well thought out and eloquantly spoken bit (http://66.224.5.66/board/showthread.php?s=&threadid=33693303&perpage=20&pag enumber=1) that I think rings a whole lot more true. :lol:

Then the beta post 3.4 catalyst set was leaked (http://66.224.5.66/board/showthread.php?s=&threadid=33693287) and ATi wasn't happy. It later turns out that there are optimizations in the beta post 3.4 set for 3dm2k3 still (http://66.224.5.66/board/showthread.php?s=&threadid=33693394), which ATi had said they were going to be removing in their next official Catalyst release.

Which was announced for tomorrow, Monday.

So tomorrow is a BIG day for ATi. They're releasing a new set of Catalyst drivers sometime tomorrow, and the tech world is going to go over them with a fine-toothed comb for cheats. It's feeling like a bit of a make or break moment, and I just wanted to see if'n anyone else thought so too.

Feel free to share your opinions in our forum.

(Or something like that, it was a pain to dig that up! ;) )

[kkevin666]

Hmmm

I was thinking more along the lines of getting technical details from nvidia themselves about their cards performance whilst using trilinear filtering-
(if any exists)

Then assembling proof using various whql certified driver sets (this is where the problems start) as to the lack of trilinear filtering in ut2003 using these drivers.

This can be accomplished with time and effort as dave b showed in his excellent article on the subject.

Nvidia then have to be approached showing them the proof to see what their response is-after all it could be a bug lol

If nvidia decline to comment on this issue then this can be stated- what is important is that proof not opinion can show that when using certain driver sets nvidia drivers lower the filtering output quality even if you tell the card not to - this is what the crux of the problem is.

Review sites that benchmark compare any cards from nvidia that use the triless driver sets need to be made aware that this is the case - they may honestly not know whats happening - this is another problem area.

Unless you can show these sites by direct links to proof you wont get anywhere.

On a lighter note nvidia are doing themselves more damage in the long run by this simple future prediction - when Half Life 2 is released wait for the shockwave of all the fx owners when they try running it in dx9 and realise what theyve brought LOL

[digitalwanderer]

Ok, I can't work on it then...I ain't got any nVidia cards anymore. :)

On a lighter note nvidia are doing themselves more damage in the long run by this simple future prediction - when Half Life 2 is released wait for the shockwave of all the fx owners when they try running it in dx9 and realise what theyve brought LOL
I'm already feeling bad for all those people, it would truly suck if'n the FX series can't do AA with that game. (It would suck more if me 9700 Pro can't do it by the time it comes out... ;) )

[kkevin666]

Apparently the hl2 engine as it stands at the moment does not allow any AA . I read the problem is dx9 related ; to overcome the problem is hardware that only radeons have but cant be used as of yet?

Theres a thred about it on futuremark

If you havent got a card know anybody thats got one?

[kkevin666]

LOL

According to warp2search and [T]ardocp nvidia have released statements they wont CHEAT anymore

LOL

[dream caster]

I can only say that since the good old days (i began reading internet pages around 1999) there has been an steadily diminishing good content in websites.
Those fan sites that were bought by big companies i dont care to read them by now (sharky's for instance); i lost all interest in them and later i found that the founders where not running them; those sites that still are owned and managed by those fans most of them have turned to something very similar and the worse of them is the present stage of Anand's, it's almost nothing now.

A very special memory for me is one article by Tom Pabst, now only a distant hidden manager of his site and once a very lively writer ( that probably was respected and feared by hardware makers) in wich he confessed himself disenchanted about hardware sites, hurt by harsh sayings about himself and not wanting to participate in this scene anymore ( written with occasion of the problems between AMD and a very popular benchmark program that I don't remember the name about 1 or 2 years ago). Kyle is the one that looks as retaining more of its enthusiasm but why is he so dumbly backing Nvidia is mistery to me; I read his page and forum at least once a day but because of this attitude ( and some distrust to PayPal) i did not send money for his new server.

This is sad to me, but all this sites appear to be falling into a gray impersonal, tasteless, unresponsible marketing scheme; Tom's seems a bit different though. In "the good old days" there was a sense of participating in the big adventure of new hardware creation, at least by reviewing and thinking about it. Now that rests only in "enthusiast sites", this one for video cards, http://www.asusboards.com for motherboards for instance.

[THe_KELRaTH]

Maybe the answer lies in the creation of a web database comprising of all the review sites that has information on each journalist and his qualifications.
If you're going to read a technical review it would be nice to know it's by someone with say an electronic engineering background rather than - "I built my own PC once"

[Hanners]

Maybe the answer lies in the creation of a web database comprising of all the review sites that has information on each journalist and his qualifications.
If you're going to read a technical review it would be nice to know it's by someone with say an electronic engineering background rather than - "I built my own PC once"

I don't think that necessarily follows - Have a qualification in engineering doesn't automatically mean you are good at reviewing video cards. Similarly, not having any formal qualifications doesn't make you a bad reviewer.

As far as I'm concerned a lot of it is about research, pure and simple. When you look at the number of sites that still don't know about the filtering issues in UT2003 with GeForceFX cards, even in the wake of [H]'s article, it's shocking. Similarly, sites are still running Splinter Cell benchmarks with AA enabled on R3x0 and NV3x cards.

[Pete]

Oddly, there are otherwise sensible reviews that include gems like this:

]The Ti-4600 has dual RAMDACs (random access memory digital to analog converter) @ 350 MHz and the 5600FX has Dual @ 400 MHz. a difference of 11.4 % overall which should even out the scales some what in the performance arena.

:D

[Tim Murray]

Oddly, there are otherwise sensible reviews that include gems like this:

]The Ti-4600 has dual RAMDACs (random access memory digital to analog converter) @ 350 MHz and the 5600FX has Dual @ 400 MHz. a difference of 11.4 % overall which should even out the scales some what in the performance arena.

:D
Holy Crap, I'm in 1992!

[WaltC]

Hi there,
On a side note, it seems as if Anand is just the most obvious of the major reviewing sites regarding that bit. In "traditional" media, it's the usual thing to publish a review or "article" on a topic and have the "winning" party know beforehand what's in it to secure further ad places. You'd be surprised how many "articles" and "reviews" in print magazines are actually written by the company's marketing department and signed by a magazine's editor. Be especially careful if you see a "free journalist" sign an article . . .

In that respect, Anand seems just ahead of the game. Be prepared to see more such "funny" correspondences in the not too distant future, on the web. It's not as if marketeers were totally stupid or very imaginative.

93,
-Sascha.rb

Exactly. Your comments are absolutely correct. I've been frustrated many times in the past by incomplete and misleading hardware reviews as published in the paper trade press. I expect a lot better from the epress, though, because of the immediacy of the media. I sometimes wonder if I should...;)

Anand, Tom'sH, and [H] (HardOCP) all started out as sites primarily or exclusively dealing with motherboards, core-logic chipsets, and cpus. Tom's H and [H] also did a lot of overclocking stuff. It's when they started branching out into other areas, such as 3D coverage, that they began to have problems. At least that I saw.

The paper trade press has always been split between its loyalties of keeping its advertisers happy and keeping its reading public interested, because of course they receive income from both sources. But non-subscription based web sites receive no money from subscribers and so must depend primarily on advertising income. These sites all began as "hobbyist-enthusiast" sites and Anand started up while still a teenager (I remember one nVidia spokesperson years ago who, when asked about someting or other Anand had disclosed in a review about its products, said something to the effect of "*snicker*--Who cares what a 16-year-old says"...? Although the remark didn't win the guy any points, there were a lot of people surprised to learn Anand was 16 years old...;))

I much preferred the content of these sites when they were generally enthusiast sites--there was a lot more basic information imparted at that time than there is today. Anand can do and is capable of very good hardware reviews. His only problem of late is one of inconsistency and frequency. I am also sure that he is busy with other areas of life that supercede his web site--he's still a growing lad, don't ya' know--although *certainly* not 16 any longer...;) [Ah, if only I could go back to that age knowing what I know now!...:)]

Also, much of the focus of these sites has shifted to "news" coverage which often is just the recycling of rumors and innuendo among these sites. I don't know how many times I see web sites list an Inquirer article as a "news" item and have followed the link to discover the story has no attribution and is purely speculation without sources (that are named.) Much of what is termed "news" these days is not.

Anyway, the concept of "big" is more of a matter of individual perception than anything else, as far as a web site is concerned. For me, B3d is "bigger" than [H], TomsH, and Anandtech combined, because it offers something more than any of these other sites do. I also have chatted back and forth with the guys here running B3d in other forums and under other handles in coversations that date back several years--and I respect them as people and have an admiration for their approaches that hasn't grown stale with time. I see in them a degree of consistency and sense of purpose that's just not that apparent elsewhere. That's a very refreshing commodity among hardware Internet sites these days.

The great thing about the Internet is that anybody with the "right stuff" who persists and is consistent can be "big"--and B3d has a lot going for it because most people don't care for fluff pieces on the Internet any moreso than they care to read them in the paper press. The only potential problem I see for web sites as opposed to paper press is the fact that if you want to make a business out of it your primary source of income are the companies whose products you review, most of the time. Some of the things we see, and don't see, at other web sites are the product of this conflict of interest, IMO. Don't see that changing anytime soon.

[THe_KELRaTH]

Hanners, I was just keeping it brief and electronic engineering was just one example. How about we just start with being a trained technical journalist or a tech product manager in a previous career :!:

[dream caster]

Hanners, I was just keeping it brief and electronic engineering was just one example. How about we just start with being a trained technical journalist or a tech product manager in a previous career :!:

:mrgreen: What if we just start a sticky record of HIV cheatings, starting with the lately really infamous Nvidia :mrgreen:

[THe_KELRaTH]

Dream Caster....

Hehe.. I'm not sure there's a site big enough to cope :lol: