[H] Benchmarking Future Ed.

[MrGaribaldi]

if he would have actually used the word "cheat", would it have made a difference in your eyes? I think it's a step in the right direction for him.

I hope you are right, and that he really is coming around, though it is plausible that he added that part to sound more objective than he really is...

They don't deserve that much attention IMO.
Simply ignore them.

That is one way of dealing with it...
But how many people do you think will/is ignoring them?

IMO, it would be better if any/all inconsistencies of that (and other) editorials were (for lack of better word) uncovered....

By doing that, more people will become aware of the "problem", and will get a better understand of what is really going on...

And even if such a discussion won't take place on many forums, that it happens here will at least give us somewhere to point people should they take everything at face value...

 

[WaltC]

if he would have actually used the word "cheat", would it have made a difference in your eyes? I think it's a step in the right direction for him.

Yes, of course it would have, because "cheat" is accurate--"optimization" is not. Some of the things nVidia did relative to shader performance *might be* considered legitimate optimizations. The things it did with respect to unrendered frame segments, clip planes, and buffer overruns could never be considered as legitimate optimizations as they were deliberate attempts to scale back the default workload the benchmark mandates merely to inflate performance scores. That's cheating.

Kyle can take all the steps in the right direction he wants to--until he *arrives* he's still in the same place, IMO.... His defense of nVidia on this point is indefensible. Here's the distinction for me:

optimization: reordering the workload for more efficiency on your hardware

cheating: eliminating a portion of the workload so that your hardware appears to run faster than it actually can when running the default workload

My e-dictionary defines the two thusly:

optimize: make as perfect, effective, or fundamental as possible

cheat: act of deceiving

You can see why one term should never be confused with the other.

 

[micron]

if he would have actually used the word "cheat", would it have made a difference in your eyes? I think it's a step in the right direction for him.

Yes, of course it would have, because "cheat" is accurate--"optimization" is not. Some of the things nVidia did relative to shader performance *might be* considered legitimate optimizations. The things it did with respect to unrendered frame segments, clip planes, and buffer overruns could never be considered as legitimate optimizations as they were deliberate attempts to scale back the default workload the benchmark mandates merely to inflate performance scores. That's cheating.

Kyle can take all the steps in the right direction he wants to--until he *arrives* he's still in the same place, IMO.... His defense of nVidia on this point is indefensible. Here's the distinction for me:

optimization: reordering the workload for more efficiency on your hardware

cheating: eliminating a portion of the workload so that your hardware appears to run faster than it actually can when running the default workload

My e-dictionary defines the two thusly:

optimize: make as perfect, effective, or fundamental as possible

cheat: act of deceiving

You can see why one term should never be confused with the other.

I agree 100% with everything you just said.

 

[WaltC]

I agree 100% with everything you just said.

Come on..."everything"....? (Nah, just kidding...)

 

[micron]

Kyle can take all the steps in the right direction he wants to--until he *arrives* he's still in the same place, IMO....

I agree with even that part. I have the oppinion personally though, that I do hope Kyle and his site return to being at least semi respected.

 

[John Reynolds]

I can solve the problem add this line to your HOSTS file
127.0.0.1 www.hardocp.com

I dont get it.

Hosts files deal with DNS name resolution (and LMHOSTS are for WINS). That line won't allow your system to ever resolve Hardocp's IP address since 127.0.0.1 is your own loopback addy.

 

[Unit01]

So we're now going to grade graphics card not on performance but how fancy the cooling system is according to NV/[T]ardocp (well common, what's the use writing them in two seperate words. Their the same thing anyway, almost)

 

[Reverend]

Kyle like games, so does Beyond3D. Kyle likes 3D, so does Beyond3D.

The difference is in the knowledge of using games and knowledge of 3D to write reviews that are more informative than reviews with just charts. Anyone can do the latter. Not everyone has the focus and interest to do the former.

The "trend", as Kyle correctly reads it in his piece, is that readers are becoming more demanding... because there are websites out there providing the additional info... info beyond just charts and "CardA runs GameX better than CardB (duh)". He doesn't like this trend for a reason, which isn't mentioned in his piece (and of which I won't mention here as well because if I do, then he may take exceptio to it, but it is my honest opinion). Suffice to say it has to do with availability of 3D technology expertise.

I will never dispute the fact that currently available games will be the primary criteria for the success of a video card, because that's all a reviewer can use most of the time. But the real "issue" here is one of focus and interest -- I truly believe that if Beyond3D never uses games and only synthetic benchmarks to investigate a piece of hardware, that B3D's content will have a niche audience. Whether this niche audience is as large as the "gamers audience" may not actually be important to Beyond3D, if such is the scenario.

In summary, I do not find any interest at all in Kyle's piece -- he's just basically telling you that different websites have different interests. It is up to you to see which website provides you with the information you seek.

 

[indio]

it tells your network connection Hardocp is located at 127.0.0.1 which is your computer effectively blocking the URL .

 

[RussSchultz]

it tells your network connection Hardocp is located at 127.0.0.1 which is your computer effectively blocking the URL .

I just do it on his ad server.

 

[micron]

So we're now going to grade graphics card not on performance but how fancy the cooling system is according to NV/[T]ardocp

?????.....huh?

 

[Unit01]

Well i just read it. And i don't get the point he is trying to make. Except the obvious that he knows as little or less than me about 3d. The cold hard facts part was just ridicoulus like this one

If these synthetic benchmarks are as valuable as some might have you to believe, then why can’t those people use those utilities to conclusively tell me what is going to be the best card to play Half Life 2 or DOOM3?

He must be hallucinating or something. Noone has told him that any synthetic benchmark is the all and be all. Then he goes on to assume that synthetic benchmarks are supposed to tell future performance of future (not made yet) game engines.
Honestly i know very little in this world of 3d. But that guy seems to know less. If people take what he says to brain then there are indeed lots of sheep to hurdle

 

[digitalwanderer]

ROFL!

Well, I will not visit the site so I can't read the whole article. But based on the blurb that was copied, here is my translation:

Heh-Heh...Pretty funny... I couldn't resist adding my enlargements in brackets:

******

"Here at [H], we already have our pre-conceived notion of how cards A and B should run pixel shading games and applications, or future titles in general. We won't tell you where this preconceived idea came from, or provide you with any relevant data which supports our preconceived notion. You aren't smart enough to understand it. [And we know this because if we at [H] aren't smart enough to understand it there's no way you are.]

In a nutshell, any tests that don't agree with our preconceived notion of performance, simply will not be shown by us here at [H]. That would just be counter productive and confusing, wouldn't it? We basically believe that you, our readership, are a bunch of mindless idiots. You cannot possibly be trusted with being given ALL the information, and making up their own mind and drawing your own conclusions. [We at [H] want to ensure that we remain as mindless and idiotic as our audience and so we work hard to stay that way--all for you.]

Our mission at [H] is not to give you all the information possible to make an informed assesment. Our mission is to only give you whatever information there is that agrees with our unsupported yet preconceived idea of how things should turn out, and forget the rest. [Well-considered information is at best a burden we at [H] want to lift from your shoulders, and we're proud of how we reinterpret and reorder, "optimize" if you will, information so that it is suitable for the digestion of the common man.]

Here at [H] we've done the thinking for you! [To that end we have decided to publish a Mac-centered, Apple-oriented web site in addition to our current pages, for we share many philosophical values with the Apple corporation.]"

Thanks, your bracketed translations DID add another level of humor to it that I got a good coffee spitting belly laugh off of.

 

[John Reynolds]

In summary, I do not find any interest at all in Kyle's piece -- he's just basically telling you that different websites have different interests. It is up to you to see which website provides you with the information you seek.

That's a nice way of putting it, but even with a gamer-oriented perspective Kyle is using an illogical piece of thinking (because a synthetic's DX9 shader performance fails to equate with an OGL game scores using vendor specific code paths it must be trash) to promote a blatantly obvious anti-Futuremark agenda.

I also find it distasteful how it's never mentioned that those Doom 3 scores were derived from workstations supplied/built by Nvidia. So he's not only using a very illogical argument but he's also building it on a potential house of cards.

 

[nelg]

I sincerely hope that PowerVr will release a card that compete's with ATI's R3XX series and that it is based on the same ISA as that of ATI's. Then reviewers could compare apples to apples to lemons. Game dev's could spend more time developing games a apposed to creating code paths and could just ignore the lemons. Somehow I get the feeling that Nvidia likes the idea of dividing the development community. The divide and conquer tactics (if successful) would allow them to wrestle the future of ISA's away from Microsoft.

 

[martrox]

And, this, children, is an example of just why drugs are bad for you........

EDIT: where's that damn spelling checker.........

 

[Evildeus]

LOL

 

[Himself]

All this foolishness reminds me of professional wrestling.

 

[CorwinB]

If [K]yle thinks he's going to keep his readers with that kind of editorials, he obviously has smoken something hallucinogenic too. It seems to be becoming something quite usual in this industry...

 

[micron]

An [H] forum member wrote...

Beyond 3D
You'll find many more informed opinions over at that site than you will anywhere.

Kyle wrote

Actually I think you can find more informed opinions in a Yahoo chatroom.

I like how your "experts" resort to name calling, conspiracy theories, picking apart hypothetical example, and simply discussing how they refuse to read the whole thing, but continue to comment on it like they know what the article states.

Here are some great quotes from your experts.

"Surprise! Surprise! Did he get $50,00 for this one? "

"Garbage, as usual "

"The real danger to Kyle with all of the nonsense he's spouting here is that people will begin to see how little he apparently understands about the very topics on which he opines... "

"That dood either need to stop doing drugs or start doing drugs because something is wrong with his brain."

"I'm just disapointed in myself for even reading the first page of that editorialmercial and giving that tool Kyle even 1 hit from me. "

"Well, I will not visit the site so I can't read the whole article. But based on the blurb that was copied, here is my translation: "

"He must be hallucinating or something. "

"And, this, children, is an example of just why drugs are bad for you........ "


I somehow am not as impressed by their expert opinions as you are. Sounds like fanboys riding their little radio flyer bandwagon around looking for someone to actually give them attention. But that is just my opinion.

Though Kyle doesnt post here anymore, he deffinately remains here with us. Hi Kyle