Ops,"I" did it again. Why does Futuremark still ke

engall

Newcomer
Ops,Nvidia did it again. New drivers Dets 44.67 optimized for 3dmark03 patch 3.30.FX made much better scores again.
Why does Futuremark still keep silence?
3dmark03 now is meaningless, isnt it?
 
I don't think futuremark is meaningless. I think Nvidia benchmarks are meaningless. If you think that the same think isn't happening in quake, ut2003, or other benchmarks you have your head in the sand.
 
Improvement of benchmark scores does not mean there wasn't a legitimate and beneficial optimization.
 
Chalnoth said:
Improvement of benchmark scores does not mean there wasn't a legitimate and beneficial optimization.

And it just happened to bring scores to the same level as when NVIDIA was cheating? Talk about coincidences. Considering that in 44.65 we know NVIDIA is altering the shader code I don't see how they are getting similar scores without altering it in 44.67
 
Chalnoth said:
Improvement of benchmark scores does not mean there wasn't a legitimate and beneficial optimization.
Except that you can see obvious image quality problems (texture compression, fake trilinear, etc.)

Please stop being an NVIDIA apologist, Chalnoth.

-FUDie
 
Accepting this continued behaviour is quite damaging to FutureMark.
They lost a lot of public goodwill and interest already in nVidias initial attack against their product. They then proceed to alienate the substantial group who still saw value in the benchmark with their continued acceptance of nVidia and their shenanigans, making the benchmark useless for comparisons between IHVs, and generally reducing the value of their data base.

They are progressively loosing public interest in their products, and as they loose public interest, some of their revenue streams will eventually dry out.

IMHO, being passive and hoping that things will blow over just isn't an option at this point. The downward spiral is firmly in place, now it's simply a question of pace.

While it might be damaging to their short term financials, taking steps to ensure that their benchmark products can produce useful data might give the company some kind of long term viability. That way, they produce something that is actually interesting or even useful to some parties. It also provides a handle to turn the continued loss of public interest around.
Going down the other path, where they only produce benchmarketing material, is a dead end route when the public no longer cares about the numbers that are produced. Then they are useless even to the companies that have an interest in paying for benchmarketing to promote their wares.

Entropy
 
As of Monday NVIDIA rejoined the Beta program. As of Monday one of the most stand up guys I know left Futuremark.
 
DaveBaumann said:
As of Monday NVIDIA rejoined the Beta program. As of Monday one of the most stand up guys I know left Futuremark.

So it's official - Futuremark sold out to Nvidia. :devilish:
Nvidia couldn't be top of the test fairly, so they cheated, then threatened the company with court, and now have given a load of cash to Futuremark to keep quiet about the cheating. All for this "useless" benchmark.

What have the other 3DMark members got to say about this? Will B3D withdraw from membership of Futuremark? Will ATI introduce blatent cheats now that Futuremark have sanctioned such behaviour?

What are Nvidia apologist sites like [H] going to say now that Nvidia endorses 3Dmark, and even quotes their (cheating) results during their financial conferences? Will they start using 3Dmark results under pressure from Nvidia, now their masters tell them the test isn't "useless", even when the rest of us know it's more broken than ever?
 
Dave, if you have an accusation to make, just say it. Instead of making veiled inferences about Nvidia and FutureMarks integrity.

Why don't you interview this guy, and ask him the reasons why he left. At least thats proffessional.
 
DaveBaumann said:
As of Monday NVIDIA rejoined the Beta program. As of Monday one of the most stand up guys I know left Futuremark.

If that implies what I think it means.. I don't forsee myself buying Nvidia again, regardless of card quality and technology.
 
Fred, there was no accusations there, that was just two statements that I found out to be the case yesterday. However, it doesn't take a mind reader to to fathom that they are inevitably linked - take a look back at some of the posts by Rev over the history of this issue.

I'm expecting a call from Futuremark on Monday to find out some more details. As for an interview it wouldn't do much good because he'll inevitably still be bound by his NDA's - we already know far more about the situation than we can ever talk about publically.
 
Fred said:
Dave, if you have an accusation to make, just say it. Instead of making veiled inferences about Nvidia and FutureMarks integrity.

Agreed.

If you got something to say, just say it. If there's a connection, say so outright! If the two are unrelated, why even mention them together in the same post?

*G*
 
Fred said:
Why don't you interview this guy, and ask him the reasons why he left. At least thats proffessional.
Oh, come on.
How on earth can you suggest that "this guy" is at liberty to discuss the internals of Futuremark, never mind that it is hardly in his best interests to do so no matter what?

It has been bleeding obvious that there has been internal conflicts regarding how the situation with nVidia should be handled. Not surprising. Nor is it surprising that there might be individuals who feel that Futuremark may now be a less attractive place to spend their professional futures than, say, a year ago.

Dave is a human being, not only a representative of B3D. It is obvious that it was Dave-the-human who spoke above, about a guy he would seem to respect a lot.

Entropy

Edit: Dave beat me to it. There is nothing that says that everything he posts here must be checked and accepted by the legal and PR departments of various companies. Live with it.
 
Bouncing Zabaglione Bros. said:
DaveBaumann said:
As of Monday NVIDIA rejoined the Beta program. As of Monday one of the most stand up guys I know left Futuremark.

So it's official - Futuremark sold out to Nvidia. :devilish:
Nvidia couldn't be top of the test fairly, so they cheated, then threatened the company with court, and now have given a load of cash to Futuremark to keep quiet about the cheating. All for this "useless" benchmark.

What have the other 3DMark members got to say about this? Will B3D withdraw from membership of Futuremark? Will ATI introduce blatent cheats now that Futuremark have sanctioned such behaviour?

What are Nvidia apologist sites like [H] going to say now that Nvidia endorses 3Dmark, and even quotes their (cheating) results during their financial conferences? Will they start using 3Dmark results under pressure from Nvidia, now their masters tell them the test isn't "useless", even when the rest of us know it's more broken than ever?

Since when did Futuremark sanction cheating? I'd say they are turning a blind eye to it. I haven't yet seen them say "yes, NVIDIA's optimizations are acceptable." In fact, we've heard the opposite. That cheating or optimization, they are still invalid.

The question is, once NVIDIA launches some new official drivers which bring the scores back up, will Futuremark do anything or stay silent? I'm betting at this point that they will just keep quiet.
 
Grall said:
If you got something to say, just say it. If there's a connection, say so outright! If the two are unrelated, why even mention them together in the same post?
Why are you so upset? ;)
 
The question is, once NVIDIA launches some new official drivers which bring the scores back up, will Futuremark do anything or stay silent? I'm betting at this point that they will just keep quiet.

Unless of course Nvidia manages to get the scores back up without cheating. Something that doesn't seem very likely at this moment though. But i reserve my judgement until the next official drivers comes out. Maybe the're the drivers that B3D are testing now ?
 
Chalnoth said:
Improvement of benchmark scores does not mean there wasn't a legitimate and beneficial optimization.
While this is true in general, can you look at the facts of this whole nVidia/3DMark03-thing and still believe valid optimizations to be the cause for the recent re-alignment of 3DMark-scores?

DaveBaumann said:
As of Monday NVIDIA rejoined the Beta program. As of Monday one of the most stand up guys I know left Futuremark.
Very interesting info, thanks for sharing, Dave!

Bouncing Zabaglione Bros. said:
What have the other 3DMark members got to say about this? Will B3D withdraw from membership of Futuremark? Will ATI introduce blatent cheats now that Futuremark have sanctioned such behaviour?
Good questions, very good questions.

StealthHawk said:
Since when did Futuremark sanction cheating? I'd say they are turning a blind eye to it. I haven't yet seen them say "yes, NVIDIA's optimizations are acceptable." In fact, we've heard the opposite. That cheating or optimization, they are still invalid.

The question is, once NVIDIA launches some new official drivers which bring the scores back up, will Futuremark do anything or stay silent? I'm betting at this point that they will just keep quiet.
I don't see much of difference between sanctioning the suspect increases and just keeping quite about it while allowing scores to be entered into the ORB using suspect drivers.

cu

incurable
 
Back
Top