More Nvidia cheating ? 3Dmark2001 now!

[squidman]

I had a 3dfx 6000!!! It was stunna, but it died because of power jolt, which ONLY affected the card with its stupid ass external power connector. Curses.

 

[Jeff7181]

Blah blah blah... blah blah blah blah... blah blah... we've heard it all 63,000 times before... blah blah blah... find something else to talk about

 

[Schadenfroh]

Originally posted by: squidman
I had a 3dfx 6000!!! It was stunna, but it died because of power jolt, which ONLY affected the card with its stupid ass external power connector. Curses.

give the parts to schadenfroh

 

[Blastman]

Jeff7181? ?don?t crash my thread and tell people to shut up. It?s not your forum, if you don?t like the thread or discussion don?t enter it. A lot of people have used and still use 3dMark2001 as a general gage of performance. An on this on this point I happen to think 3Dmark2001 is a fairly decent overall gage of performance. Is it the end all be all of benchmarks? No. But it is pretty good tool if it?s not corrupted by the idiots at NV. Everyone knows your mileage may vary.

originally posted by Yozza

They have made an outright denial of any wrong-doing, and continued cheating to cover up for technical deficiencies in their products, which has now been revealed to date back to 3D Mark 2k1 when they were strongly in support of the benchmark.

Exactly. And we should take them to task for it or they will just keep doing it.

look at the hundreds of benchmarks done in REAL GAMES.

So are you still under the impression that the scripted benches that hardware sites have been using are good benches and NV didn?t cheat on them either? Better think about that again. Nividia has potentially corrupted our ? ?REAL?? game benchmarks so what is one going to use now? Do people have to buy a card and take it home to test it before they find out it stinks?

When I look at some of the ? ?off-the-beaten-track? ? real game benchmarks like those run at hardware france on the 5600U 400/400 (racing sims), I sure hope the 5600U is a better overall card than those pathetic scores.

 

[Vonkhan]

ban benchmarking! fry all the fanboys :evil: lettuce gamers be!

 

[Jeff7181]

Hehe... the natives are restless... seriously though, give it up... this horse died and people continued to beat it with sticks until pieces of it came off... now you're beating the pieces with sticks... lets set it on fire!

 

[Richdog]

Originally posted by: squidman
Yall, dont be hatin on blastman. He done nothing wrong. he wanted to share, is all. THat being said, i would agree with megatomic: you do dramatize. Almost sounds like nVidia snatched your breakfast (makes me mad ). Cmon - let it go. Its marketing. Does intel care that fools spent tons of $$$ on like top of the line PIII 933, which went down once the 1 gig pIII came out? Do i care that i spent 300 bux on geforce 2 gts and 350 (!!!) on 1 stick of 256mb pc 133 ram in july 2000? Naw! If i did, i'd go along saying "taiwan earthquake cheated us all!". Just bad timing, is all.



Thats the most sense Ive heard yet, enough said. :beer:

 

[ViRGE]

If you're just now realizing Nvidia optimized for 3DMark2001, you're a moron. Where did you think all of those 3DMark increases in previous drivers came from? It wasn't just general driver optimizations(although those have had a big effect), it was Nvidia optimizing for 3DMark2001. The question is now whether they did clip planes and other stuff that screwed with IQ, or if these are "pure" optimizations, which considering the Nature numbers, may very well be the case.

 

[Ketchup]

You know it's funny how just a couple months ago, everybody was slamming people for saying "my 3dmark score is too low." Why? 3dmark, although not quite meaningless, will not give you the same score every time, and is subject to driver optimizations as the manufacturers see fit.

Blastman, I hate to tell you this, as you probably will take it with a grain of salt, but this thread of yours (yeah, I'll let you claim it, I don't see how anyone else would want to) is pointless, and the thread you linked it to is just as silly. All they did was take away the Pixel Shader optimizations nVidia introduced in the Detonator 40's. These are optimizations, not cheats. If you knew what was really going on here rather than blindingly passing off a link you saw as complete truthfulness, you probably wouldn't have posted this.

 

[MercenaryForHire]

/enters thread, late as usual
/takes deep breath

REPOST REPOST REPOST REPOST REPOST REPOST REPOST REPOST REPOST REPOST REPOST REPOST REPOST REPOST REPOST REPOST REPOST REPOST REPOST REPOST REPOST REPOST REPOST REPOST REPOST REPOST REPOST REPOST REPOST REPOST REPOST REPOST REPOST REPOST REPOST REPOST REPOST REPOST REPOST REPOST REPOST REPOST REPOST REPOST REPOST REPOST REPOST REPOST REPOST REPOST REPOST REPOST REPOST REPOST REPOST REPOST REPOST REPOST REPOST REPOST REPOST REPOST REPOST REPOST REPOST

/rant
/seethe
/eats Blastman's face
<rabies>

itchy

//. tasty

no0blAr

</rabies>

- M4H

 

[nick1985]

::tear comes to eye::

i love you mercenary

 

[AEB]

this whole thread could have been avoided if a) people would use more than 1 benchmark b) play more games

People always accuse everyone else of cheating, the truth is just because you lose doesnt mean someone else is cheating

 

[Schadenfroh]

Originally posted by: nick1985
::tear comes to eye::

i love you mercenary

 

[Jeff7181]

Originally posted by: AEB
this whole thread could have been avoided if a) people would use more than 1 benchmark b) play more games

People always accuse everyone else of cheating, the truth is just because you lose doesnt mean someone else is cheating

and c) USE THE SEARCH BUTTON

 

[squidman]

Y'all make peace. Cmon, fighting ON FORUMS is not cool! Even being a witness of such doings makes me feel like my masculinity is compromised. And i really, really dislike that.

So i say, bury 3dmark, bury them bad feelings, and forget the hostility!

:beer: for eveybody!

 

[Blastman]

Read the header ... MFH ...this is not a repost. This is about 3DMarK2001...not ....3DMark2003.

 

[MercenaryForHire]

Originally posted by: Blastman
Read the header ... MFH ...this is not a repost. This is about 3DMarK2001...not ....3DMark2003.

This entire subject is a repost. nVidia's cheating in 3DMark2001 was already p00ped upon when the 3DMark03 issues were brought up.

Just because the titles are different doesn't mean the content isn't.

Now get off my Internet before I eat your face.

- M4H

 

[Pete]

Originally posted by: MercenaryForHire

This entire subject is a repost. nVidia's cheating in 3DMark2001 was already p00ped upon when the 3DMark03 issues were brought up.

I followed the ruckus pretty closely, and I didn't see anything about the current 3DM01SE info back then. If this is a repost, can someone link the original thread that referenced the B3D post about the new shader file findings?

At the very least, now we know to question whether the performance gains we became accustomed to with subsequent nVidia driver releases are due to optimizations or cheats.

 

[RobsTV]

Originally posted by: ketchup79
O wait, 3dmark isn't a game? 3dmark is very easy to make optimizations for, because it isn't a game, everything that happens in 3dmark is predictable. ATI does it, nVidia does it. It is not cheating, it's making optimizations. Think about this, you say that "adjusted" the 8500 is as fast as a ti4200. Can you think of any game where the 8500 is even close to the speed of a ti4200? No? Then these adjusted scores are invalid in my book.

I agree.
If you only look at one of anything to base a decision on, then it is you that made a mistake.
Take a look a many things to determine accuracy.
For video cards, Tom's Hardware does a nice job of showing many different benchmarks.
Most others sites post similar results.
Those charts do show one thing about 3dm2k1se, and that is NVidia is NOT cheating!!!!!

If NVidia was cheating then explain this.

Tom's show's the 4200 is:
50% faster than the 8500 in Aquanox.
23% faster than the 8500 in Dungeon Siege.
45% faster than the 8500 in UT 2003 Antalus.
and finally, as it relates to this thread:
18% faster than 8500 in 3dm2k1se!!!!!

So how did NVidia cheat in 3dm2k1se??????
If this shows anything, it is that ATi is drastically cheating in 3dm2k1se, much worse than NVidia did in 3dm2k3
(note: the above was with Intel CPU, and if comparing with AMD, the gap is even wider, as ATi did worse.)

 

[Schadenfroh]

loving ati will not overcome the hardware limitations a 8500, like it or not, a 4200 IS faster. you can see by the hardware specifications that it is superior. sameway with the 5800 ultra versus 9700, and the 5900 versus the 9800. it may have other problems, but the hardware IS faster.

 

[NYHoustonman]

Tom's show's the 4200 is:
50% faster than the 8500 in Aquanox.
23% faster than the 8500 in Dungeon Siege.
45% faster than the 8500 in UT 2003 Antalus.
and finally, as it relates to this thread:
18% faster than 8500 in 3dm2k1se!!!!!

8500, like it or not, a 4200 IS faster

EXACTLY. To me, if that is all true, then the 8500 has some serious optimizations going as well.

 

[Jeff7181]

Originally posted by: NYHoustonman

Tom's show's the 4200 is:
50% faster than the 8500 in Aquanox.
23% faster than the 8500 in Dungeon Siege.
45% faster than the 8500 in UT 2003 Antalus.
and finally, as it relates to this thread:
18% faster than 8500 in 3dm2k1se!!!!!

8500, like it or not, a 4200 IS faster

EXACTLY. To me, if that is all true, then the 8500 has some serious optimizations going as well.

In my opinion, I heard the same thing (joke from another thread... just thought I'd lighten the mood)

 

[Blastman]

Since Nvidia is detecting a lot more ? ?applications? ? than just 3Dmark2001/2003 their cheating potentially goes a lot farther, which is of course is the point --- and this seems to be lost on some people. If the cheating goes deep how do you know which ? ?game? ? benches and benchmark tools are a fair representation of performance? You don?t.

If you read those same THG VGA charts the 4200 performs very close to the 9500pro. But as soon as one uses some game benchmarks away from the? ?scripted? ? ones where Nvidia has potentially cheated --- the 9500pro is 46% faster ? hardware.fr So, which is the fair representation of performance?

I sure hope your GF4 cards are as fast as Nvidia has led you to believe. It seems some people like being misled or simply don?t care about it. In all this I kind of feel sorry feel sorry for the Hardware sites because I imagine for the most part they want to provide reasonable and fair reviews, and Nvidia is making their job a lot harder.

 

[squidman]

YO, why wasnt I Cheated by nVidia???!!! Why did I get only 4556 3dmarks with my geforce 2GTS??! WHY??! OH HORROR! :frown: :brokenheart:

But Blastman is right - results from the sites that use different games to benchmark are quite different from the "popular benchmarkers set": UT2K3 Antalus, Botmatch, Serious Sam 2, Aquanox, etc.

I also read international websites and their reviews (knowledge of German, SPanish, Russian and French helps ). And their results are more lifelike. Eg: they use UT2:the awakening, or Postal2 (same engine, really hard on graphics system) - and the results are more lifelike. At highest graphic settings, 1024x768 the 4200 is just above 50fps. But on "Hell" map in U2:the awakening its on 20fps!!! Now how did it get 80 in U2K3? hmmm...
They also use MOH:AA to test the AA and AF, BF1942 (kick-ass for benchmarking, since its so graphic subsystem-dependent), IL2 Sturmovik, Command and Conquer Generals, SoF2, etc...
Brilliant. Actually these websites gave an answer why i wasnt able to squeze more than 50 fps on my 9700 non pro in U2 with 2xaa and 4af...

I might agree that threads like these are titing, but cmon, bashing blastman? If you are tired of threads like this - dont reply. I still like it, cuz i hear different opinion, and pratice my written english

 

[Blastman]

Here?s another example of what happens when a hardware site doesn?t use the traditional scripted Quake3 benchmark that everyone uses because it?s convenient --- and instead uses their own benchmark. Firingsquad just tested a 5900 and used a couple new benches to test. Typically the Nvidia cards have dominated the Q3 benchmark ? whereas now they are getting beat handily.

firingsquad?



EDIT: Add ...Compare those results to Anandtech? who ran the typical scripted benchmark.