{Sniping}Waste
Regular
http://www.gamersdepot.com/hardware/video_cards/leadtek/a380u/001.htm
Looks like no one cares about approved drivers.
Looks like no one cares about approved drivers.
Gamersdepot with a review with 3DMARK 03 and 53.03
- Thread starter {Sniping}Waste
- Start date
That would require them to be paying attention.
Note that this is the third or fourth thread on the subject that's been started here and notice the total lack of any response from any FM types?
I've taken a hint and just given up on FM. They ain't interested in defending their benchmark, they're just interested in not making waves and keeping the checks rolling in from the IHVs.
I've taken a hint and just given up on FM. They ain't interested in defending their benchmark, they're just interested in not making waves and keeping the checks rolling in from the IHVs.
Joe DeFuria
Legend
digitalwanderer said:They ain't interested in defending their benchmark, they're just interested in not making waves and keeping the checks rolling in from the IHVs.
They are interested in defending the benchmark...It' just, as I've seaid before, they're not going to be succssful with the approach they've taken to do it. (Tell webistes not to publish with non-official drivers, rather than produce cheat defeating patches.)
I've seen no sign sign of them defending it anywhere. If they're doing it behind the scenes they're doing a god-awful job of it.Joe DeFuria said:digitalwanderer said:They ain't interested in defending their benchmark, they're just interested in not making waves and keeping the checks rolling in from the IHVs.
They are interested in defending the benchmark...It' just, as I've seaid before, they're not going to be succssful with the approach they've taken to do it. (Tell webistes not to publish with non-official drivers, rather than produce cheat defeating patches.)
Ever since AJ left futuremark... I think FM has been a lot different. They aren't interested about keeping their benchmark reliable and impartial anymore. Yea they are trying to fake it but actually they're not interested in anything but keeping their business running with maximum money, cash, m00l4h, whatever...
I think integrity of FM walked with AJ.
I think integrity of FM walked with AJ.
He's only comparing different nVidia cards though, so it doesn't really matter what driver he's using (as long as he's using the same one for all the cards of course).
Granted, that still doesn't change the fact that he broke the EULA, but meh who reads those things anyway, right?
Granted, that still doesn't change the fact that he broke the EULA, but meh who reads those things anyway, right?
I admit I don't really read EULAs either. Due to my oversight, I am left wondering about something concerning the EULA for 3dmark before the patch.
Was there any provision in the old EULA similar to the one FutureMark is quoting with regards to using proper drivers in reviews? What exactly is the part of the current EULA being infringed upon by not using certified drivers in a review?
If there wasn't anything concerning benchmarking before the patch, then it really only lowers my opinion of FutureMark further. Since it took Nvidia all of three seconds to circumvent the changes (the incomplete ones that were made anyway), perhaps the patch wasn't so much intended to really shore up the benchmark as much as it was to foist a new EULA on people. Is it that FM doesn't have the intestinal fortitude to push back against Nvidia, but perhaps was more willing to push around reviewers?
Was there any provision in the old EULA similar to the one FutureMark is quoting with regards to using proper drivers in reviews? What exactly is the part of the current EULA being infringed upon by not using certified drivers in a review?
If there wasn't anything concerning benchmarking before the patch, then it really only lowers my opinion of FutureMark further. Since it took Nvidia all of three seconds to circumvent the changes (the incomplete ones that were made anyway), perhaps the patch wasn't so much intended to really shore up the benchmark as much as it was to foist a new EULA on people. Is it that FM doesn't have the intestinal fortitude to push back against Nvidia, but perhaps was more willing to push around reviewers?
Actually FM is showing that it doesn't have the intestinal fortitude to push around ANYONE lately, or even raise their voice about it.3dilettante said:Is it that FM doesn't have the intestinal fortitude to push back against Nvidia, but perhaps was more willing to push around reviewers?
RIP FM.
kkevin666 said:
Maybe we're looking at this all wrong. After all, the big bucks don't come from users, but from the IHVs that buy into the beta program.
Futuremark is probably doing a very good job in maintaining its livelihood, at least in the short term, being that it is pretty much owned (or "pwned", if you like the term) by the companies whose products it seeks to rate. Perhaps we shouldn't knock Nvidia for its optimizations, since it seems the company did pay FutureMark's price for its integrity and backbone.
Of course, that just makes the benchmark company even less worthy of the effort in defending. Look at all the wasted breath being used to stand up for FutureMark against Nvidia, when the former is still on the latter's dime.
I can see why some reviewers might be steamed about getting called up by FutureMark concerning using "unapproved" drivers. I can only imagine how insulting it must be to be told by FutureMark to "stop giving into Nvidia".
Either I'm mellowing with age or I'm all distracted by my hair started to grow back, take your pick.ByteMe said:digitalwanderer said:I've seen no sign sign of them defending it anywhere. If they're doing it behind the scenes they're doing a god-awful job of it.
I realized that a week or so ago. You are getting slow Dig.
{Sniping}Waste
Regular
I posted a thread on the 18th and still no reply.
Its in the articles feedback forum.
Its in the articles feedback forum.
I fear it is over. Futuremark has abandoned us, so I think it's time that we abandon them.{Sniping}Waste said:I posted a thread on the 18th and still no reply.
Its in the articles feedback forum.
Waste,digitalwanderer said:I fear it is over. Futuremark has abandoned us, so I think it's time that we abandon them.{Sniping}Waste said:I posted a thread on the 18th and still no reply.
Its in the articles feedback forum.
I have replied in other threads about the same topic before. I don't have that much more new information.
DW,
Now now, don't be so dramatic. Nobody has abandoned anyone. At least I haven't. I have been pretty busy with my other work lately, so I haven't had much time reading & writing in various forums. But the same applies here, I have told you guys about things we are working on in order to make the whole situation (hopefully) better. Just hang in there.. 8)
worm[Futuremark said:
I'm not really worried if FM employees post up responses to people asking why so many sites are using the wrong drivers either accidentally or purposefully, I really wish you folks would just do something about it all instead of just saying "Just wait a bit longer guys, trust us".
FM has used up all it's trust, show us something.
{Sniping}Waste
Regular
worm[Futuremark said:]Waste,digitalwanderer said:I fear it is over. Futuremark has abandoned us, so I think it's time that we abandon them.{Sniping}Waste said:I posted a thread on the 18th and still no reply.
Its in the articles feedback forum.
I have replied in other threads about the same topic before. I don't have that much more new information.
DW,
Now now, don't be so dramatic. Nobody has abandoned anyone. At least I haven't. I have been pretty busy with my other work lately, so I haven't had much time reading & writing in various forums. But the same applies here, I have told you guys about things we are working on in order to make the whole situation (hopefully) better. Just hang in there.. 8)
What ever it is, I hope its soon. I hope its a new patch that can't be bypasted by newer drivers or one that wont run if the drivers are not approved.
Similar threads
