Motherboards.org uses 53.03 benching 3dm2k3?!?
- Thread starter digitalwanderer
- Start date
Martin Eddy
Regular
Why do people continue to blame futuremark for the actions of others?
I don't see people blaming epic or id or valve because nVidia cheats on their games.
I don't see people blaming epic or id or valve because nVidia cheats on their games.
Indeed, in the same way Quake 3 must "cheat" I suppose, and Doom 3 likely will be... I mean, it's impossible that different architectures perform at different levels to differently-programmed software, right?
I think this is the result of how FutureMark choose to manage the situation, and a confirmation of the concerns like the ones expressed by DigitalWanderer (about how easy to misunderstand the whole driver / approved thing).
In perspective, a clear "not approved" watermark on every shot / graph generated, and the inability to submit those results to the ORB, will have been much better to clearly express the "truth" (and/or where the bad faith really is!), IMHO.
Maybe isn't too late for FutureMark to rectify the situation...
Bye!
tech report does test with both 52.16 and 53.03
http://techreport.com/reviews/2003q4/geforcefx-5900xt/index.x?pg=9
quoting:
what an imaginative way of seeing things :?
http://techreport.com/reviews/2003q4/geforcefx-5900xt/index.x?pg=9
quoting:
what an imaginative way of seeing things :?
Now the question is, what happens when 3DMark2004/3DMark2003SE is released?
I'm guessing here that such a benchmark supporting PS/VS 3.0 will be released around the same time as the NV40 and R420.
If the NV40 happens to (legitimately) provide higher figures in such a benchmark, does 3DMark suddenly become the darling of the on-line media once again?
I actually quite hope that such an event happens because it will be very amusing to see the change in stance towards synthetic benchmarks from some sites!
I'm guessing here that such a benchmark supporting PS/VS 3.0 will be released around the same time as the NV40 and R420.
If the NV40 happens to (legitimately) provide higher figures in such a benchmark, does 3DMark suddenly become the darling of the on-line media once again?
I actually quite hope that such an event happens because it will be very amusing to see the change in stance towards synthetic benchmarks from some sites!
DAMN IT!!!
The level of bloody ignorance surrounding this issue is just depressing as hell....do these people just not want to get it? :?
BTW-I still can't believe [H]'s attitude towards 3dm2k3, is that just foolish pride in action or what? :|
(Sorry if this is too cranky, I'm still below my proper morning caffeine leves.)
The level of bloody ignorance surrounding this issue is just depressing as hell....do these people just not want to get it? :?
BTW-I still can't believe [H]'s attitude towards 3dm2k3, is that just foolish pride in action or what? :|
(Sorry if this is too cranky, I'm still below my proper morning caffeine leves.)
digitalwanderer said:
I don't see what's so hard to understand here?
HardOCP has stated that 3dmark03 is not a good benchmark for us to use to evaluate video cards. Indeed external things have been happening to it to influence that, among other things, but the end result is that it is not a reliable benchmark and not a benchmark that aligns with our focus.
At HardOCP we have stated we will only use games to evaluate video cards and the gameplay they provide. That is just what we have chosen to do.
If you don't like it, fine. I am sure there are lots of other sites that will continue to use 3dmark03 and other synthetic tests if you wish to see results in those applications. B3D does some most excellent reviews and typically includes those kind of applications, I myself read them. But we have a different focus at HardOCP, we just do games. Yes, we actually do things differently, heavin forbid. If you want to see how the cards perform in current games come read the reviews. If you don't, then don't, no one is forcing you to.
If it bothers you so much that all we use is games then don't click the site?
It's your lack of reasons to support your site's decision that 3dm2k3 is "not a good benchmark for us to use to evaluate video cards", or at least your site's lack of the honest reasons it came out so adamantly against 3dm2k3.Brent said:digitalwanderer said:
I don't see what's so hard to understand here?
HardOCP has stated that 3dmark03 is not a good benchmark for us to use to evaluate video cards. Indeed external things have been happening to it to influence that, among other things, but the end result is that it is not a reliable benchmark and not a benchmark that aligns with our focus.
At HardOCP we have stated we will only use games to evaluate video cards and the gameplay they provide. That is just what we have chosen to do.
If you don't like it, fine. I am sure there are lots of other sites that will continue to use 3dmark03 and other synthetic tests if you wish to see results in those applications. B3D does some most excellent reviews and typically includes those kind of applications, I myself read them. But we have a different focus at HardOCP, we just do games. Yes, we actually do things differently, heavin forbid. If you want to see how the cards perform in current games come read the reviews. If you don't, then don't, no one is forcing you to.
If it bothers you so much that all we use is games then don't click the site?
As for clicking on [H], I don't.
digitalwanderer said:It's your lack of reasons to support your site's decision that 3dm2k3 is "not a good benchmark for us to use to evaluate video cards", or at least your site's lack of the honest reasons it came out so adamantly against 3dm2k3.Brent said:digitalwanderer said:
I don't see what's so hard to understand here?
HardOCP has stated that 3dmark03 is not a good benchmark for us to use to evaluate video cards. Indeed external things have been happening to it to influence that, among other things, but the end result is that it is not a reliable benchmark and not a benchmark that aligns with our focus.
At HardOCP we have stated we will only use games to evaluate video cards and the gameplay they provide. That is just what we have chosen to do.
If you don't like it, fine. I am sure there are lots of other sites that will continue to use 3dmark03 and other synthetic tests if you wish to see results in those applications. B3D does some most excellent reviews and typically includes those kind of applications, I myself read them. But we have a different focus at HardOCP, we just do games. Yes, we actually do things differently, heavin forbid. If you want to see how the cards perform in current games come read the reviews. If you don't, then don't, no one is forcing you to.
If it bothers you so much that all we use is games then don't click the site?
As for clicking on [H], I don't.
If you understand the focus of our site when it comes to evaluating video cards now you will see that decision makes sense. We cater to the gamer, and to the gamer the only thing that relates game performance are games themselves. Our goal is to evaluate gameplay experience, and that can only be done with games. That is what HardOCP has chosen to do.
Doomtrooper
Veteran
As long as custom timedemo's for games are used that are not available to be downloaded for clipping plane driver hackers I don't see a big loss in not using 3Dmark.
I get sick of the politics of 3Dmark, it is also very annoying to watch a company let cheating go on in their benchmark and constantly release patches just to counter Nvidias cheating ways. I don't agree Futuremark has done enough to stop the misinformation.
In fact Worm and myself used to debate about the 'politics' of 3Dmark 2001, I always claimed Nvidia was cheating back then, and they were (of course I was always accused of conspiracy theories).
I removed the benchmark the day Furturemark backed down, and until I see Futuremark do the right thing, will never be installed on this hardrive.
So not seeing it in a review is fine with me, there is other synthetics out there.
A real miss on reviews today is the lack of benchmarking with the actual tech demos written by ATI and Nvidia although not to many Nvidia demos run on ATI hardware there is still a opportunity to use Dawn with a fraps log.
Futuremark owes it to its customers to ensure the ORB is honest, yet the only thing they have done is put a approved driver list up, I'm sorry that doesn't cut it.
I get sick of the politics of 3Dmark, it is also very annoying to watch a company let cheating go on in their benchmark and constantly release patches just to counter Nvidias cheating ways. I don't agree Futuremark has done enough to stop the misinformation.
In fact Worm and myself used to debate about the 'politics' of 3Dmark 2001, I always claimed Nvidia was cheating back then, and they were (of course I was always accused of conspiracy theories).
I removed the benchmark the day Furturemark backed down, and until I see Futuremark do the right thing, will never be installed on this hardrive.
So not seeing it in a review is fine with me, there is other synthetics out there.
A real miss on reviews today is the lack of benchmarking with the actual tech demos written by ATI and Nvidia although not to many Nvidia demos run on ATI hardware there is still a opportunity to use Dawn with a fraps log.
Futuremark owes it to its customers to ensure the ORB is honest, yet the only thing they have done is put a approved driver list up, I'm sorry that doesn't cut it.
Sure, but that ain't what I find annoying. Like the above poster I'm rather perturbed by the way [H] tried/tries to discredit 3dm2k3 based on non-factual arguments.Brent said:
Your site "caters" to newbs, idiots, and fanboys anymore...but that's just a personal opinion. I've found that most "closed" sites tend to turn that way. (By "closed" I mean the members tend to only go to your site and don't view a number of sites and get a more balanced perspective, like an inbred community or something in an internet sense.)
I appreciate and respect everyone’s opinions on the matter and acknowledge that you don’t agree with some stuff. I know that some people will disagree, and some people will agree, and some people just won’t say anything.
I’m not asking you to agree with us; all I am asking is that you understand our focus and how we are evaluating gameplay performance and IQ to make up the gaming experience.
We use games, and use FRAPS, and actually play the game. If we can create a recorded demo in the game we do so for accurate results, but we do not share the recorded demo. In fact, take for example Tomb Raider AOD, I created a recorded demo in it that only I have, it only exists on my hard drive, not even Kyle has it. So we keep these recorded demo's private. In the case that a game can't create one we do a manual run through in a certain place where we can guarantee the same results over and over again. These things about gameplay performance and IQ we take very seriously in our reviews.
I’m not asking you to agree with us; all I am asking is that you understand our focus and how we are evaluating gameplay performance and IQ to make up the gaming experience.
We use games, and use FRAPS, and actually play the game. If we can create a recorded demo in the game we do so for accurate results, but we do not share the recorded demo. In fact, take for example Tomb Raider AOD, I created a recorded demo in it that only I have, it only exists on my hard drive, not even Kyle has it. So we keep these recorded demo's private. In the case that a game can't create one we do a manual run through in a certain place where we can guarantee the same results over and over again. These things about gameplay performance and IQ we take very seriously in our reviews.
THe_KELRaTH
Regular
When all the Nvidia cheating erupted I had expected that that FutureMark would have altered 3Dmark03 to require an auth code per driver so that ONLY drivers that are approved could be used when running the full benchtest.
Guys,
Do not turn this into a [H] bashing session. Express your viewpoints, but please do so politely or else I'm going to be clicking on the edit/delete buttons.
Do not turn this into a [H] bashing session. Express your viewpoints, but please do so politely or else I'm going to be clicking on the edit/delete buttons.
Similar threads
