Gooooooooooo 3dmark. Looks like its days of being THE benchmark are going down the tubes...What do you guys think?
Printable View
Gooooooooooo 3dmark. Looks like its days of being THE benchmark are going down the tubes...What do you guys think?
What it is all going to come down to in the end is which one floats your boat. ATI has been a very nice looking graphics card for a few years, while the nVidia has always been more about performance. ATI has stepped it up a little in the speed dept and they are in a heated battle to see who can toss the most data out the window (I mean optimize the drivers) to be the fastest without people really saying that it looks like crap. In the end you are still probably going to buy from the same manufacturer regardless of 3 fps. I stick with ATI because nVidia doesn't have crap for AIW type cards. Thank God it is a pretty fast card regardless. If Matrox got their heads out of their asses one of these days I would probably go back to them.
One other point though, how the hell are you supposed to optimize drivers? The HW is the limitation for the most part. After that it comes down to streamlining your rendered data to make up for limitations of the HW. If they only do it for the benchmarks, then that is bad, but if it is for all 3D apps, then it is a true optimization, as you are getting higher performance from the card in real life usage across the board. I don't see anything wrong with that at all.
I'm a little surprised at the indifference here, but I guess its a little like politics: People are so used to politicians lying to them that they don't care anymore.
I do care.
Because I think most of the folks who DO care or WOULD care see it for what it is now. Especially since BOTH companies are doing it. I think its come to the point where the informed folks...(those who come to these type of forums) are going to get what they want regardless of what happens on 3dmark2k3. Thats the way it should be anyway. Ive said for a while now that its a BS benchmark. And now ATI and NVIDIA have made it all but useless IMO. I think all the pointless flaming from a few weeks ago has made everyone say who cares...because they get their cards for GAMING...NOT 3dmarkQuote:
Originally posted by russ_watters
I'm a little surprised at the indifference here, but I guess its a little like politics: People are so used to politicians lying to them that they don't care anymore.
I do care.
I think the mods should just make a Sticky that says "Nvidia and ATI both cheat, get over it."
^----LoL! I totally agree. And why is the fx5900u faster in Quake 3? Because nvidia has better opengl performance, not because of cheating. Now the 8500 cheat for q3a, now that, was a cheat. But do i really care right now? NO! I'll just buy whichever card i feel like getting at the moment.
I'm sorta leaning towards -who gives a ____? Use your imagination
It was a cheat that was removed immediately but the performance gain was still there.Quote:
Originally posted by Psycho Evangelion
^----LoL! I totally agree. And why is the fx5900u faster in Quake 3? Because nvidia has better opengl performance, not because of cheating. Now the 8500 cheat for q3a, now that, was a cheat. But do i really care right now? NO! I'll just buy whichever card i feel like getting at the moment.
EDIT: nVidia is doing the exact same thing ATI did two years ago in Unreal Tournament 2003 with AF!
Are you even aware of what we're talking about?Quote:
Originally posted by AMD_Man
It was a cheat that was removed immediately but the performance gain was still there.
EDIT: nVidia is doing the exact same thing ATI did two years ago in Unreal Tournament 2003 with AF!
To not care is to live in ignorance... sorry, but it is the truth. I would want to know if ATI or nVidia is cheating... EVERY TIME they do it. This is important information and for those of us whom are intelligently speaking of a certain gfx card, we need to know what each company is up to to make/give a truly informed decision/recommendation.
I agree that we should care, and voice our disapproval of their practice, even though our voices may be drowned out by those who say they don't. If nVidia cheats, I wanna know.:mad: If ATI cheats, I wanna know too:mad: . That way, if we decide to buy a card from either company, we would, at the very least, make an informed decision. ;) Even then, I grow tired of all this flaming whenever a thread like is posted.:( I like ATI but if they cheat I'd wanna know 'bout it, that way if I choose to go with ATI or nVidia, then, I've made a informed choice based on personal preferences. After all these flamewars, people can get jaded and become cynical 'bout these vid card companies (Honestly, who can blame them?) Please no flaming, OK? :) Just airing my $0.02 worth.;):)Quote:
To not care is to live in ignorance... sorry, but it is the truth. I would want to know if ATI or nVidia is cheating... EVERY TIME they do it. This is important information and for those of us whom are intelligently speaking of a certain gfx card, we need to know what each company is up to to make/give a truly informed decision/recommendation.
Yea, I am, I just worded it awkwardly. I meant to say nVidia is doing the exact same thing in Unreal Tournament 2003 with AF that ATI did two years ago in Quake III. They're lowering IQ without the user's consent.Quote:
Originally posted by Ashpool
Are you even aware of what we're talking about?
You pay for a Porsche 911 Turbo and you get a normal 911 with a CD who play the turbo sound , the strategy is not bad :).
The bottom line is that they pulled out 2 generations videocards to compete with the 9700/9800 series and when they see the final disappointing result they desperately cheat , cut quality , overclock , cut FSAA , and etc only to barely be the winner .
They sould concentrate in good hardware like they did before and not in cheats and stuff like this , they never need cheats to make the GF2 , GF3 or GF4 a stellar videocard , cards had raw power in that time and the king was undisputed , now they are pathetic.
What's our "standard" for AF quality? There is none, so it is hardly a cheat. If you want high image quality buy ATI, want the fastest FPS possible, buy Nvidia.Compared to the last generation of cards, the image quality is still better than it's been. Sort of like arguing about how fast your toaster, makes toast. You don't like it? Buy a different one.Quote:
Originally posted by AMD_Man
Yea, I am, I just worded it awkwardly. I meant to say nVidia is doing the exact same thing in Unreal Tournament 2003 with AF that ATI did two years ago in Quake III. They're lowering IQ without the user's consent.
Using the "AntiDetect" script, it was proven that the nVidia hardware is capable of better image quality, but they're compromising image quality for speed even though they don't make it explicitly clear in their driver settings. If you're going to consider the whole Quack issue a cheat, then nVidia is definitely also cheating in UT2003.Quote:
Originally posted by rhettro
What's our "standard" for AF quality? There is none, so it is hardly a cheat. If you want high image quality buy ATI, want the fastest FPS possible, buy Nvidia.Compared to the last generation of cards, the image quality is still better than it's been. Sort of like arguing about how fast your toaster, makes toast. You don't like it? Buy a different one.