Futuremark has problems here.

[digitalwanderer]

Yeah, but Terry did apologize later for even considering going down that slippery slope. He really does care about his job and how he represents his company.

I wonder if ATI (and any others) offered to pay for the legal expenses.... would FM fight then? (Of course this would be a very sad thing for ATI to have to do, instead of FM doing it on their own).

It has been proven that Nvidia can be beaten, just as M$ can be beaten. It might not be fun or pretty. But sometimes it is just the right thing to do.

Someone could start a legal fund for FM, enthusiast supported. If FM approves of this fund (and fights) I'll donate $1,000 USD.

I don't think it'll work, I'm in an argument with some Futuremark people over in this thread over on FM's boards and they apparently hold the position that there is no problem and they've done more than enough already to make people aware of what drivers are approved and what aren't and that any opinions to the contrary are just reactionary crazy talk.

(BTW-Don't even bother registering over there BM, you wouldn't last more than 3 posts. )

It's depressing the hell out of me that they just don't seem to realize there is any problem.

URL text

 

[ByteMe]

I don't think it'll work, I'm in an argument with some Futuremark people over in this thread over on FM's boards and they apparently hold the position that there is no problem and they've done more than enough already to make people aware of what drivers are approved and what aren't and that any opinions to the contrary are just reactionary crazy talk.

(BTW-Don't even bother registering over there BM, you wouldn't last more than 3 posts. )

It's depressing the hell out of me that they just don't seem to realize there is any problem.

URL text

I hope your view about their opinion is NOT correct. If it was correct I can NOT see how anyone could put up with their stupid shit anymore. Talk about being your own worst enemy.

No I will not register there, but I expect you will be pointing out their mental and ethical deficiencies.

 

[digitalwanderer]

I don't think it'll work, I'm in an argument with some Futuremark people over in this thread over on FM's boards and they apparently hold the position that there is no problem and they've done more than enough already to make people aware of what drivers are approved and what aren't and that any opinions to the contrary are just reactionary crazy talk.

(BTW-Don't even bother registering over there BM, you wouldn't last more than 3 posts. )

It's depressing the hell out of me that they just don't seem to realize there is any problem.

URL text

I hope your view about their opinion is NOT correct. If it was correct I can NOT see how anyone could put up with their stupid shit anymore. Talk about being your own worst enemy.

No I will not register there, but I expect you will be pointing out their mental and ethical deficiencies.

Honest, I'm trying to be nice about it but it's like talking to a freaking brick wall! I really wish a few more of these sites would have a few members who cross-post at more than their homeboard, there REALLY seems to be an inbreeding type of problem...more sites need more perspective.

On the brightside, someone tried to insult me with the following picture:

But it cracked me up too hard and instead I'm gonna have fun sharing it all over!

 

[ByteMe]

OMG I read the thread. If the FM members that posted in that link represent the offical FM stand then FUCK them. FM has taken a bad situation and made it worse. I hope FM employee's are looking for a different job to get away from that POS company.

There you have it. My official stance on FM is that they suck and deserve to die (as in go out of business).

I would suggest that everyone stop supporting them in any way, shape or form. I would also suggest that everyone email their favorite sites and tell them to stop using FM. Kinda weird how [H] is right but for the wrong reasons.

That is my last FM rant.

 

[digitalwanderer]

The worst part for me is SSV is a buddy of mine from a couple of other forums under a different name and I really like him as a friend so I can't just tear into him, and if I cut loose on any admins there or cross ANY lines they'll jump at the chance to close the thread.

So I'm stuck with reason and tenacity, and I'm pretty sure I got lots of one of 'em at least.

 

[ByteMe]

The worst part for me is SSV is a buddy of mine from a couple of other forums under a different name and I really like him as a friend so I can't just tear into him, and if I cut loose on any admins there or cross ANY lines they'll jump at the chance to close the thread.

So I'm stuck with reason and tenacity, and I'm pretty sure I got lots of one of 'em at least.

I wish ya luck. Maybe someday I'll go off on them again. But for now I am done with them.

Isn't it funny what things will give you a bias on what you do or do not do? This is why I treat everyone like shit.

 

[digitalwanderer]

Yeah, but even I got me limits...an admin there just told me they sent an e-mail to the reviewers about the 53.03 set.

Anyone know every single reviewers e-dress? I'd like to ask 'em all a question....

I just can't see how they can't see there is a problem, I just can't....it's getting annoying.

 

[eRacer]

On the brightside, someone tried to insult me with the following picture:

But it cracked me up too hard and instead I'm gonna have fun sharing it all over!

I'm disappointed. I thought you'd be able to tell the difference between an insult and a joke. Do with it as you please. Don't forget to include this top secret picture of nVidia's next-gen hardware specially designed for better DX9 framerates:

 

[digitalwanderer]

On the brightside, someone tried to insult me with the following picture:

But it cracked me up too hard and instead I'm gonna have fun sharing it all over!

I'm disappointed. I thought you'd be able to tell the difference between an insult and a joke. Do with it as you please. Don't forget to include this top secret picture of nVidia's next-gen hardware specially designed for better DX9 framerates:

Dude, with the way people seem to be so missing the obvious over there I figured you meant it literally and not sarcastically! Sorry, my bad and I hope I didn't cause you offense.

I like this one too, BTW.

 

[engall]

]

You mean IHV drivers can have 3dmark03 specific optimization to gain the theoretical score, dont you?And these drivers can be approved by Futuremark?

Did I say that, or did you just try to put words in my mouth? No, of course we do not allow any 3DMark specific optimizations, not for any of the tests. Read the pdf's found here:

http://www.futuremark.com/products/3dmark03/

Look to the left under "SUPPORT & RESOURCES".

If not , why could Forceware 52.16 be approved by Futuremark?
As you said, Forceware 52.16 still have 3DMark specific optimizations.

 

[dan2097]

The futuremark forum is pretty pro Nvidia just because all madonions like more marks and cheating drivers obviously give more marks

 

[cthellis42]

I wonder if ATI (and any others) offered to pay for the legal expenses.... would FM fight then? (Of course this would be a very sad thing for ATI to have to do, instead of FM doing it on their own).

Amusing concept, but then of course anyone who's already on one particular side will accuse them of being "bought out" by ATi, which only reinforces the perceived "anti-nVidia" position (just like they were in 3DMark2001, I swear! ), so I can't see them going that route. The only single entity I see able to step in and make a huge difference now is Microsoft; and the funny thing is they DID to a fairly large degree, but since it doesn't address the situation directly (not actively run their tests) so it pretty much gets glossed over that the whole Game Advisor is done in connection with Futuremark.

Far as I can tell, as the controlling entity of the API being tested, they're the only one who can put their foot down and stop the situation in its tracks.

 

[digitalwanderer]

The futuremark forum is pretty pro Nvidia just because all madonions like more marks and cheating drivers obviously give more marks

It's pretty much overwhelmingly of the opinion that everyone knows which drivers are approved and which aren't and that if there is any problem about it it's obviously the lousy reviewers fault for not better edumacating themselves.

JEEZE! :?

 

[MrBond]

yeah i think he does... A little dissapointing but what can you do I really think ATI should just give up and cheat as well, I mean that way at least it would be a little more fair, both companies could optimize all they want as long as they didn't fuck up the bench IQ wise. I wonder what score ATI would be able to pull off...

If ATI starts cheating, then everyone in the industry would cheat and sacrifice IQ for FPS in all programs.

ATi won't start cheating in their drivers as long as Terry Makedon is in charge of the catalysts, he totally opposes that idea and I respect him for it.

I'm really glad that Terry is fully in support of a no-cheat policy.

BUT, on April 1, can't he just get a little silly with it? Like, produce a "BenchmarkCatalystDetonator 52.17" non-WHQL edition driver set, with all sorts of ridiculous driver settings to try and get a higher score? Dig, you know it'd be funny

 

[digitalwanderer]

BUT, on April 1, can't he just get a little silly with it? Like, produce a "BenchmarkCatalystDetonator 52.17" non-WHQL edition driver set, with all sorts of ridiculous driver settings to try and get a higher score? Dig, you know it'd be funny

I tried SOO hard to get him to release that set of drivers with the ATi logo replacement with the exact same reasoning, as well as I thought it would make an excellent point of the issue of cheating...but Terry argued (and in hindsight rightly so) that it was flat-out wrong and not something he wanted to do or endorse in any way. No matter what the reason for doing it, it was spending time focusing on just a benchmark that wouldn't be of any real-world benefit for ATi's customers so it would be a waste of time & resources.

I think Terry has to live in a bit more of a suits world than you or I, and suits don't have quite the geek sense-o-humor.

(I couldn't even convince him to slip me a copy to leak and claim that a friend of mine had made! I figured that would sort of cover 'em... )

 

[eRacer]

The futuremark forum is pretty pro Nvidia just because all madonions like more marks and cheating drivers obviously give more marks

It's pretty much overwhelmingly of the opinion that everyone knows which drivers are approved and which aren't and that if there is any problem about it it's obviously the lousy reviewers fault for not better edumacating themselves.

JEEZE! :?

Futuremark forum members pro-nVidia? The Futuremark forums are quite pro-ATi just like the majority of educated video card buyers are. Looks like some Beyond3D forum members need a bit of edumacating so they don't make assumptions which aren't accurate.

 

[Althornin]

If not , why could Forceware 52.16 be approved by Futuremark?
As you said, Forceware 52.16 still have 3DMark specific optimizations.

ah, you still dont get it do you?
The optimizations affect only the technology/feature tests, and NOT THE FINAL SCORE.

 

[Bouncing Zabaglione Bros.]

ah, you still dont get it do you?
The optimizations affect only the technology/feature tests, and NOT THE FINAL SCORE.

What about those websites that claim tha final score is not really useful, and quote the individual test scores - like the ones that Nvidia managed to sneak cheats through?

 

[digitalwanderer]

ah, you still dont get it do you?
The optimizations affect only the technology/feature tests, and NOT THE FINAL SCORE.

What about those websites that claim tha final score is not really useful, and quote the individual test scores - like the ones that Nvidia managed to sneak cheats through?

Well according to Futuremark it's the reviewers fault for not being aware of their driver policy.

 

[engall]

If not , why could Forceware 52.16 be approved by Futuremark?
As you said, Forceware 52.16 still have 3DMark specific optimizations.

ah, you still dont get it do you?
The optimizations affect only the technology/feature tests, and NOT THE FINAL SCORE.

ah, you still dont get it ,do you?
I asked before
IHV drivers can have 3dmark03 specific optimization to gain the theoretical score, dont you?
And these drivers can be approved by Futuremark?

So you should read carefully.