nVidia discrepancies in FarCry benchmarks?

No, i don't have the numbers, you will have to wait for tomorow i suppose ;). Well, Driverheaven it is the same site with those great decoveries on LOD differcies on the 6800? 8)

PS: HFR is www.hardware.fr :)
 
Evildeus said:
Well, tomorow all will be clear 8)
Click to expand...

That, i doubt.

First previews on most sites are just copy/paste the PR speech they got with the cards. We always need some time to start to see the tricks if any.
 
PatrickL said:
Evildeus said:
Well, tomorow all will be clear 8)
Click to expand...

That, i doubt.

First previews on most sites are just copy/paste the PR speech they got with the cards. We always need some time to start to see the tricks if any.
Click to expand...
Yeah, that's why you like and come over B3D :rolleyes:
 
Evildeus said:
No, i don't have the numbers, you will have to wait for tomorow i suppose ;). Well, Driverheaven it is the same site with those great decoveries on LOD differcies on the 6800? 8)
Click to expand...

Yep... That's the site that provides the reader with hard numbers, and screenshots of differences, to support their claims. Unlike a certain person in this thread reacting to their findings.... :rolleyes: ;)



Regardless what you think of DH, because they give all details, the reader can decide if they care about the LOD differences, and can decide wether a fps difference is significant... I admire a site that tries to dig into the matter, turning every stone in stead of just running the PR stuff they receive. The fact they produce are interesting. Doesn't mean I agree with their conclusions or opinions.
 
Well you can admire it, but from my point of view if they doesn't understand what's they are doing, which they don't, i find this really disapointing, un-professional and un-faithful. But well, suppose it's just me
 
A friend of mine posted this shot on a local forum.
It's obtained with Far Cry (without patch), ForceWare 61.11 on GF4-4200 (maybe later he will take another one on a 5900):

FarCr_89.jpg


(if the shot don't show, try reloading - I can't mirror it on my webspace at the moment).

Added:
Mirrored.

Bye!
 
Evildeus said:
Well you can admire it, but from my point of view if they doesn't understand what's they are doing, which they don't, i find this really disapointing, un-professional and un-faithful. But well, suppose it's just me
Click to expand...

Bashing sites without showing ANY evidence yourself.... Now, that's something *I* call disapointing and un-professional. o_O

If you have different figures, show them!
If you have a different interpretation of the figures, spill it out!
 
Ok :rolleyes:
http://www.techreport.com/onearticle.x/6668
The explanation for the rendering differences is GeForce 6800's new isotropic filtering algorithm: It differs from that of the reference rasterizer. There is an analysis of this available at Digit Life (http://www.digit-life.com/articles2...40-part1-d.html). Based on all information we have, it seems that this algorithm is applied consistently the same way regardless of the application, i.e. it is not application specific and it is not targeting 3DMark specifically.
We also contacted Microsoft about the difference between the rendering of the reference rasterizer and NV40: "The DX9 reference rasterizer does not produce an ideal result for level-of-detail computation for isotropic filtering, the algorithm used in NV40 produces a higher quality result. Remember, our API is constantly evolving as is graphics hardware, we will continue to improve all aspects of our API including the reference rasterizer."
Click to expand...
 
You know damn well we're talking about Farcy Evildeus.
About the difference that occur when running 9800 and 6800 in NV3.x path, or DX9 path, and the conclusions we can draw from that.

If I might just remind you to:

Evildeus said:
there's no significant differencies in FPS with Nv3* or R3** ^path with the 6800U,
Click to expand...

Still waiting for you to back up your claim with numbers... Haven't heared anything yet, beside bashing DH on topics having nothing to do with Farcry.
 
Well, the numbers are on the next review of the X800. I tld you to wait for today 3:00pm. What can i do more for you? Hacking of a site? :?

Now you will have to take the word of the reviewer:
Avec le path R300 la 6800 ne perd que quelques miettes niveau performances et tous les petits bugs de qualité disparaissent.
Click to expand...
http://forum.hardware.fr/hardwarefr/Hardware/sujet-570655-301.htm
and
+12% dans Far Cry par rapport aux 60.72
Click to expand...
http://forum.hardware.fr/hardwarefr/Hardware/sujet-570655-302.htm
and
Tridam> des bugs visibles avec les 61.11 dans Farcry?

Pas plus qu'avec les 60.72.
Click to expand...
http://forum.hardware.fr/hardwarefr/Hardware/sujet-570655-303.htm
 
Evildeus said:
Well, the numbers are on the next review of the X800. I tld you to wait for today 3:00pm. What can i do more for you? Hacking of a site? :?
Click to expand...

For starters, you could have mentioned that your numbers came from using a different set of drivers :!:
That puts things in a completely different perspective, doesn't it...

In stead, what you did was starting to attack DH, saying that they don't know what their doing, and that their numbers are not to be trusted...
That's not acceptable. You don't go attacking other people if you have nothing to show yourself.



PS. Look here and tell me which image has better quality. ;)
 
Well, i don't trust a site that doesn't know the basic, and want revenge from past action. And moreover, that's not with 2 differents drivers, but with the same.

The 2 last quotes were to get rid of a certain rumor over here.
 
You call rumor the bug list for Far Cry given by Nvida ?

And damien did not day that there were no bug in 6.11 but NOT more.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top