The Guru of 3D removing 3DMark from his arsenal?

[micron]

I really dont know what to think of his comments here, he's kinda dissin' 3DMark.. http://www.guru3d.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&threadid=54736
**EDIT** This might be old news, I just saw Wavey Dave over there discussing things, sorry.

 

[CI]

It seems that websites are excluding 3DMark results which makes me wonder... Has nVidia succeeded in achieving an aim of creating enough doubts so that there's a general perception that it could no longer be trusted as a benchmark? The fewer websites that use 3DMark to reflect poorly on GeForceFX, the better it'll be for nVidia.

 

[Cyberon]

Well, it seems Nvidia's hype is workin well here in the netherlands too.
In a short poll (closed after 5 minutes) 50 people voted.
40 > 3d mark2003 crapp
10 > 3d mark2003 great

that's 80% against 3Dmark2003
After some discussion, biggest complaint was that the cards with no DX9 support scored so low against the DX9-parts.

After some detectivework, i must sat they have a point i think.
Where my score at 3Dmark 2001 se is around 30% lower then a 9700Pro i recieve a huge penalty in 3Dmark 2003, 270% lower

So i think most of them (the crapp-family) feel the balance between the DX8 vs DX9 cards is out of proportion. And yet, i haven't seen much to argue that.

 

[AlphaWolf]

Well, it seems Nvidia's hype is workin well here in the netherlands too.
In a short poll (closed after 5 minutes) 50 people voted.
40 > 3d mark2003 crapp
10 > 3d mark2003 great

that's 80% against 3Dmark2003
After some discussion, biggest complaint was that the cards with no DX9 support scored so low against the DX9-parts.

After some detectivework, i must sat they have a point i think.
Where my score at 3Dmark 2001 se is around 30% lower then a 9700Pro i recieve a huge penalty in 3Dmark 2003, 270% lower

So i think most of them (the crapp-family) feel the balance between the DX8 vs DX9 cards is out of proportion. And yet, i haven't seen much to argue that.

I think you just bring up the point that webmasters need to do a better job of educating their readership of the purpose of 3dmark03. It seems a lot of people just run it and look at the number not taking the time to learn what the number means. I think futuremark should consider removing the 'score' from 3dmark03 and maybe people would focus more on the results of the individual tests.

 

[micron]

As far as the Guru of 3D goes, most of their forum members dislike 3DMark03, but love 3DMark01. The reason is obvious, most of them own Ti class cards that dont score well on a DX9 benchmark. They arent really looking at it as a useful tool for Hilbert to use in his reviews. Too bad.

 

[martrox]

It's pretty sad when knowledge takes a back seat to the "mine is bigger than yours crowd".

 

[jjayb]

After some detectivework, i must sat they have a point i think.
Where my score at 3Dmark 2001 se is around 30% lower then a 9700Pro i recieve a huge penalty in 3Dmark 2003, 270% lower

The funny thing is the same can be said about 3dmark2001. While a dx7 card may only have a 30% lower score than your card in 3dmark2000, it will have a 270% lower score than yours in 3dmark2001.

I just find it funny that the same people who had no problem with this in 3dmark2001 have a big problem with this in 3dmark2003.

It's a dx9 benchmark, you should incur a penalty for not being able to run the dx9 tests in my opinion.

 

[micron]

I just dont know what to think. If Nvidia wanted review sites to stop using 3DMark03, then they have succeeded in this particular case.

 

[YeuEmMaiMai]

the reason that nVidiots do not like 3dmark 2K3 is it makes their cards look like crap compared to ATi cards.

They state that they did not have the tools needed to check their driver hacks....hummm I wonder how many copies of a beta 3dmark 2K3 developer version nVidia had access to?

nVidia has a history of trying to cheat others

visiontek -> nvidia sold them crap parts

3dfx -> nVidia stole some of their multitexturing tech and bankrupted them with lawsuits

st/power VR -> Kyro II PDF released

General puplic -> anyone who bought a GFFX < 5900 Ultra.

 

[Cyberon]

the reason that nVidiots do not like 3dmark 2K3 is it makes their cards look like crap compared to ATi cards.

It goes beyond that, i fear. At our forum there are alot of ATi owners as well and they don't like 2003 also.
For me the numbers mean nothing, i don't care who gets the biggest "***".
I have 3 priorities: Crispy clear graphics(text), Stability (Rock solid performance, games must run without issues) and as last speed.

Also they dislike the new policy from Futuremark. As a DEMO-user you cannot compare like they used to, by graphics card and Cpu-performance.
Futuremark needs to cover it costs and try to sell their product, i have no problem with that. But i think they made a lot of people unhappy with this new policy. And the third reason i think is they don't have enough confidence in a company that clames to bring "objective" benchmarks while they recieve money from the GPU-makers.

 

[g__day]

I post there a bit and I was surprised and dissapointed when I heard that, so I started this thread a few days ago:

http://www.3dgpu.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?t=4984

I don't agree with an action that may be seen as punishing FutureMark to smack NVidia on the wrist - it sort of gives NVidia what they wanted in the first place. The mods there did respond to the questions I and others asked with their own points of view.

 

[micron]

I post there a bit and I was surprised and dissapointed when I heard that, so I started this thread a few days ago:

http://www.3dgpu.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?t=4984

I don't agree with an action that may be seen as punishing FutureMark to smack NVidia on the wrist - it sort of gives NVidia what they wanted in the first place. The mods there did respond to the questions I and others asked with their own points of view.

I went to your thread and read through it. I'm glad to see that you started it. I feel as though the battle is lost though. It's a shame, the whole concept of what Futuremark is doing is great, I know that there are some area's of the benchmark that could be improved, but that will never happen if the industry doesnt keep supporting it. If only board makers didnt cheat!

 

[Unit01]

Guru3d has been a nvidia biased site for so long it seems like they have always been. I remember when the fx5800ultra was released and they did a review of it on 23 pages which they touted as the ultimate review on the net with the real info. When in fact they were just talking the regular bullshit kissing nvidia's ass and as tomshardware "crowned the fx5800 the new king".
Don't expect anything out of a consumer perspective from the people at guru3d. They're not out there to give you advice.

 

[WaltC]

I think much of this was caused by FutureMark's second press release in which it retracted it's "cheat" statement while still maintaining its original audit report stands. That has done much to discredit them, unfortunately, in that it fosters the idea that they don't know what they are talking about. It isn't logically consistent to stand by the first audit report which plainly shows nVidia cheating, and then to also say nVidia didn't cheat their benchmark. Further, I think the statement about "considering vendor paths" within the benchmark simply adds to the idea that they are totally confused as to the kind of software they have written. If they are going to allow themselves to be controlled by any hardware company, especially a company which has quit their software program and ridiculed them publicly, I can't blame people for not using their software. They were doing fine up until the retraction-that-wasn't-a-retraction press releases they made. It's unfortunate, but at a time in which they needed to remain consistent they became inconsistent, and they'll have to live with the result.

Sure, this plays right into nVidia's trap, and certainly doesn't excuse nVidia, but I think it has damaged the credibility of the FM company from henceforth. If they ever do make statements in the future, who will listen? That's the sad thing about all of this.

 

[dksuiko]

As far as the Guru of 3D goes, most of their forum members dislike 3DMark03, but love 3DMark01. The reason is obvious, most of them own Ti class cards that dont score well on a DX9 benchmark. They arent really looking at it as a useful tool for Hilbert to use in his reviews. Too bad.

What about the reversal over here? A lot of the forum members here disliked 3DMark01, but love 3DMark03.

 

[micron]

As far as the Guru of 3D goes, most of their forum members dislike 3DMark03, but love 3DMark01. The reason is obvious, most of them own Ti class cards that dont score well on a DX9 benchmark. They arent really looking at it as a useful tool for Hilbert to use in his reviews. Too bad.

What about the reversal over here? A lot of the forum members here disliked 3DMark01, but love 3DMark03.

Most of the forum members here have DX9 cards!

 

[jvd]

I have never liked a 3dmark . Problem is most nvidia fans seem to be young males. So of course when something is showing them as the best they go with it. Once that light changes they go against it . God did i hate highschool haha .

 

[Quitch]

The really sad thing the Guru thread shows is just how thick most people really are. The nVidia cheat has been incredibly well documented and discussed... I can't think of anything that has attracted so much attention in the PC world for some time.

Yet, despite all this, we see people saying things like "Use games, 3D mark can be cheated on". This, even though it has been said so many times my ears are bleeding that the cheats used for 3DMark, can and MAY be being used in timedemos.

Frankly, these people are going to buy the card they deserve.

 

[micron]

The really sad thing the Guru thread shows is just how thick most people really are. The nVidia cheat has been incredibly well documented and discussed... I can't think of anything that has attracted so much attention in the PC world for some time.

Yet, despite all this, we see people saying things like "Use games, 3D mark can be cheated on". This, even though it has been said so many times my ears are bleeding that the cheats used for 3DMark, can and MAY be being used in timedemos.

Frankly, these people are going to buy the card they deserve.

Very nicely put. I agree with you 100%