Motherboards.org uses 53.03 benching 3dm2k3?!?

Discussion in 'Graphics and Semiconductor Industry' started by digitalwanderer, Jan 18, 2004.

  1. Hanners

    Regular

    Joined:
    Jul 12, 2002
    Messages:
    816
    Likes Received:
    57
    Location:
    England

    I also noticed this:

    How anyone can end up with the same 3DMark03 score using the 52.16 and 53.03 drivers is beyond me. I can only conclude from that that he wasn't even using the 340 patch. :roll:
     
  2. Quitch

    Veteran

    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2003
    Messages:
    1,521
    Likes Received:
    4
    Location:
    UK
    Why does "Editorial" tend to stand for "Drivel written by head of site proving how little he knows"?
     
  3. Martin Eddy

    Regular

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2003
    Messages:
    491
    Likes Received:
    4
    Location:
    Australia,Brisbane
    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.
     
  4. Mariner

    Veteran

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2002
    Messages:
    1,604
    Likes Received:
    243
    But, bizarrely, some people have claimed that Valve themselves have been 'cheating' when creating HL2 because the initial benchmarks showed the performance of nVidia cards to be somewhat behind that of their ATI counterparts!
     
  5. cthellis42

    cthellis42 Hoopy Frood
    Legend

    Joined:
    Jun 15, 2003
    Messages:
    5,890
    Likes Received:
    33
    Location:
    Out of my gourd
    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?
     
  6. Quitch

    Veteran

    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2003
    Messages:
    1,521
    Likes Received:
    4
    Location:
    UK
    This is probably due to the about turn of Futuremark, which I don't think a lot of people have ever forgiven them for. Their situation is VERY different from that of id and Epic, in that they rely on the benchmark feature; it is their softwares only purpose.
     
  7. Mark0

    Newcomer

    Joined:
    Jun 1, 2003
    Messages:
    105
    Likes Received:
    1
    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!
     
  8. Magnum PI

    Veteran

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2002
    Messages:
    1,054
    Likes Received:
    12
    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 :?
     
  9. ByteMe

    Banned

    Joined:
    May 27, 2003
    Messages:
    136
    Likes Received:
    7
    Not what I see. FM started out correctly by calling nvidia a cheater. Then the laywers got involved and FM backed off. So now FM is their own worst enemy.
     
  10. Mariner

    Veteran

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2002
    Messages:
    1,604
    Likes Received:
    243
    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! :twisted:
     
  11. digitalwanderer

    digitalwanderer Dangerously Mirthful
    Legend

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2002
    Messages:
    17,276
    Likes Received:
    1,788
    Location:
    Winfield, IN USA
    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.)
     
  12. Brent

    Regular

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2002
    Messages:
    584
    Likes Received:
    4
    Location:
    Irving, TX
    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? :shock:
     
  13. digitalwanderer

    digitalwanderer Dangerously Mirthful
    Legend

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2002
    Messages:
    17,276
    Likes Received:
    1,788
    Location:
    Winfield, IN USA
    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. :roll:

    As for clicking on [H], I don't. :)
     
  14. Brent

    Regular

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2002
    Messages:
    584
    Likes Received:
    4
    Location:
    Irving, TX
    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.
     
  15. Tim

    Tim
    Regular

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2003
    Messages:
    875
    Likes Received:
    5
    Location:
    Denmark
    HardOcp (Kyle) has put out an immense amount of lies and misinformation about 3dmark03, even if you have the right to say what you like. It is still both immoral and bad journalism.
     
  16. Doomtrooper

    Veteran

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2002
    Messages:
    3,328
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Ontario, Canada
    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.
     
  17. digitalwanderer

    digitalwanderer Dangerously Mirthful
    Legend

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2002
    Messages:
    17,276
    Likes Received:
    1,788
    Location:
    Winfield, IN USA
    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. :(

    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.)
     
  18. Brent

    Regular

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2002
    Messages:
    584
    Likes Received:
    4
    Location:
    Irving, TX
    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.
     
  19. THe_KELRaTH

    Regular

    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2002
    Messages:
    471
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Surrey Heath UK
    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.
     
  20. John Reynolds

    John Reynolds Ecce homo
    Veteran

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2002
    Messages:
    4,490
    Likes Received:
    262
    Location:
    Westeros
    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.
     
Loading...

Share This Page

  • About Us

    Beyond3D has been around for over a decade and prides itself on being the best place on the web for in-depth, technically-driven discussion and analysis of 3D graphics hardware. If you love pixels and transistors, you've come to the right place!

    Beyond3D is proudly published by GPU Tools Ltd.
Loading...