Kyle's new thread @[H]
- Thread starter micron
- Start date
Doomtrooper
Veteran
Matt said:
Actually I don't, you had just changed to a P4 platform and was testing a Ti card, and still could not break 10,000 marks.
Since the old archives are destroyed, I can't prove it..but I saw it.
Hellbinder
Banned
Thats good for a laugh, since Carmack is completely pandering to Nvidia hardware in the First place doing everything he can to ensure they are the fastest. Otherwise they would be running the High Quality settings that R3xx cards are required to.
Perhaps a thread like this better belongs in 3D Graphics Companies than General Discussion? It's still related to 3D, if only tangentially.
As for Kyle's opinion, I'm getting worked up over it anymore. I'm focusing my energy on turning Anand from the grey side.
As for Kyle's opinion, I'm getting worked up over it anymore. I'm focusing my energy on turning Anand from the grey side.
Doomtrooper
Veteran
dksuiko said:
What were the reasons why I was not happy:
1) PS 1.4 was not allowed in scoring
2) Affected too much by FSB
3) LOD bias cheats allowed
4) Scoring was not accurate
All of which were fixed excpept number 4, ATI never 'declared war' on the old Madonion when they were not competive in that Benchmark either.
And it goes back to the David Kirk comments that Nvidia doesn't optimize for benchmarks.
Hellbinder[CE said:
Damn, you're throwing out accusations already? The game isn't even out yet. I think you're jumping the gun when it comes to crying foul. One set of benchmarks and already accusations are thrown. It'd be best to just wait for the game to come out, don't you think?
I don't see R3xx cards "required" to run HQ. They can run the R200 path if the user so desires, and I believe the R3xx's architecture makes it so that FP performs at about the same speed as FX, so there was probably no need to code another path that would result in lower IQ but the same performance. That has been said to not be the case with the NV30, thus the custom path.
Do you see me putting [H] down?....no, you dont. Like it or not, [H] is playing a role in the 3d graphics world, they are sending out a message. I think it's relevant to discuss whats going on in the community.dksuiko said:
But thank you for speaking for Anthony, he might appreciate it, but I dont.
Do not insult my godHellbinder[CE said:
You make that sound like JC is optimizing just for nvidias pleasure. Does he optimize for the GF FX? Yes he does. He certainly optimizes for different graphic chips too (as long as they have a significant market share) if there actually is something to optimize. As it turns out, there just isn't much he can do for the R3x0 - no fancy FX12/FP16/FP32 decisions, no depth_bounds OGL extension (which btw I think developers won't like too much but could make quite a bit of a performance difference - not sure if DoomIII uses that?).
micron said:
So you're saying that you didn't foresee the 'Yes, kyle sucks' posts that would surely come after yours? I think that other HardOCP thread already established that, not much more can be said. Doomtrooper gave the best advice to fix it, don't go there and let him talk to those who want to listen to his crap.
Hmm, I misread his post anyway (I somehow read it that he thought B3D would seem like elitist by putting continually down these sites, guess I read my opinion into it
woops). BTW, no need to get your ass in a knot about it, the world isn't out to get you. Relax. jjayb said:
It probably not that. Rather, not being an expert in graphics technology or coding, he bought all the accusations in the original anti-3DMark document by Nvidia, publicly declared that 3DMark was not valid and now cannot change his opinion in fear of losing his face.
It's much easier for a person like Kyle to continue bashing 3DMark than admit that he just lacks the technical knowledge to make a judgement.
But I agree that we are devoting too much attention on him. He is not that important, really, and there isn't much point in discussing all his weird assertions here. We've seen all that already.
I think I'm just bummed that he didnt change his tune. I liked his site, thats all. I apologize for starting this thread. I didnt mean it to be soley devoted to bashing him......I would like to add though, that we have an ongoing topic titled "Anandtech, then and now", on this same forum, so you cant really bash me for posting this thread here.
nooneyouknow
Newcomer
For those who claim that 3D Mark 2001 was good as it used a "real" game engine, I think there needs to be some clarification.
Sure, it used a scene from Max Payne and some Max Payne art assets, but 3D Mark 2001 covered DX7 and DX8 features. Max Payne had only DX7 technology, no shaders period. So please, do not use that angle here, it is invalid.
To take that further, who knows what "engine" Max Payne 2 will be using. Maybe it will even have Shaders this time, or heck, maybe it will be all DX9 Shaders, who knows. Would that make 3D Mark 2003 relevant then based upon the above arguments?
Sure, it used a scene from Max Payne and some Max Payne art assets, but 3D Mark 2001 covered DX7 and DX8 features. Max Payne had only DX7 technology, no shaders period. So please, do not use that angle here, it is invalid.
To take that further, who knows what "engine" Max Payne 2 will be using. Maybe it will even have Shaders this time, or heck, maybe it will be all DX9 Shaders, who knows. Would that make 3D Mark 2003 relevant then based upon the above arguments?
Doomtrooper
Veteran
I must admit I was taken aback when I read your comments.micron said:Hey...you know what? I would rather have the post deleted than have you lay that "your tainting the purity of B3D" guilt trip on me....Reverend said:Another "BTW".
I wish that you guys would stop posting a thread like this in this particular forum. In fact, I wish you guys would simply stop posting threads like this here per se. At the risk of sounding "elitist", I'd really appreciate it if we could return to the old, old Beyond3D Forum, where almost all threads are about 3D technology and that if you want to sound off about other website opinions, do it at other forums. Again, sorry if this sounds kinda "elitist" or pompous.
I'm not going to decide what to do with this thread... John can have the pleasure
Why do you long for the good old days so badly Reverend?
This website has become "the trusted authority" when it comes to 3d technology, and you played a part in making it so. Be proud of the way that it is today.....and yesterday.....
Also.....you really dont need to be such an elitist snob all the time....
I cant believe I'm saying that, but you are always making me feel like shit as a new member here..... Thanks buddy.
Anyway, you're entitled to your opinion of me, as do those that agreed basically with what I wrote.
I'm sorry if I make you "feel like shit" or feel "guilty" about what you post. That is not my intention. I think I worded my words politely and respectfully enough in a way that is an expression of my "wish" and not in an authoritative "Stop posting non-3D related stuff here" manner.
As for longing for the good old days -- it's just my preference, just like you may prefer the current forum's state. The "good old days" made it easier for me to learn about other people's thoughts about 3D -- it was more focussed on discussions about 3D which resulted in a forum reputation of "3D Technology focussed" which in turn registered in mind that "This is the place to go to read about folks' thoughts on 3D". At the forums' present state, I have found it much, much more difficult to find posts that are 3D-related. I'm sure Dave is thrilled that B3D readership has grown exponentially over the years... so am I... but I don't wish for this forum to get too diverse in its discussions... but that's not for me to decide (it's down to Dave).
Remember, I can't stop what anyone wants to post, and the fact that I said I don't know what to do with this thread (and left the decision to John) means that I do respect the fact that you guys wish to post your opinions on a variety of topics here at our forums.
I wish the B3D forums is more focussed on 3D tech discussions, that's all. I see no harm in expressing such a wish and again, if I sound elitist, I'm sorry. I didn't say "If I ever see non-3D threads here, I'll delete them and warn the poster".
It's not about "tainting the purity" of B3D -- it's about what I'd like to see more of (3D discussions) here, that's all.
I think the aggressive nature of your comments is misplaced.
Similar threads
