Dave Baumann of Beyond3D joins ATI

[Ackmed]

Originally posted by: redbox

Originally posted by: Gstanfor
I'm not exactly a fan of Martrox over at b3d, but I must say, i found his post below to be "interesting" too, especially in light of Geo's efforts here...

link

While Dave deservers our thanks and the best for his and his families future, I can't help but wonder where those members of B3d that lean to the green are......

Chalnoth?......Last Activity: 26-Jun-2006 06:31
Ailuros?.....Last Post:25-Jun-2006, 07:15
Uttar?.....Last Activity: 26-Jun-2006 08:12

Not trying single out anyone in particular. I just find it "interesting"!

I don't see anything 'interesting' in that link. Looks like they have all recently visited the forum ....soooo?

Hes trying to claim they are banned.

Originally posted by: keysplayr2003

My own advice eh? Ok. Let me advise myself to do some digging. What kind of digging? Oh, I don't know. Be back later.

Once again, you tell others to "back down", yet you cant take your own advice. Nice. Good to see you're consistantly hypocrtical.

 

[Nelsieus]

Originally posted by: TheSnowman
So who do you think was on my account last night typing out those paragraphs explaining the details of the issue at the request of Redbox?

Perhaps the fake Dave Baumann...

Originally posted by: DaveBaumann
Why, has a fake one joined?

:roll:

 

[Munky]

Originally posted by: Nelsieus

Originally posted by: BFG10K

Cheating is cheating. The fact that you feel compelled to defend one "cheater" over the other is disturbing, but expected from someone like you, nonetheless.

Nope, sorry, the two aren't even close. ATi had generic shader re-ordering but unfortunately they relied on application detection of 3DMark for them to work which is where the cheating came from. When called out they apologized and removed the detection in the next driver. As for Quack, that was a bug and when they fixed it performance and IQ went up.

When nVidia was caught out in 3DMark first they denied it, then they claimed it was a bug, then they claimed 3DMark was invalid, then they badgered FutrureMark to change their stance. In the end nVidia put out some ridiculous "optimization guidelines" which they violated even before the ink had dried.

Below is the FutureMark audit report from 3DMark that shows just how badly nVidia cheated, and this is to say nothing of the thousands of shaders nVidia subsituted in games.

Wat Are The Identified Cheats?
Futuremark?s audit revealed cheats in NVIDIA Detonator FX 44.03 and 43.51 WHQL drivers. Earlier GeForceFX drivers include only some of the cheats listed below.

1. The loading screen of the 3DMark03 test is detected by the driver. This is used by the driver to disregard the back buffer clear command that 3DMark03 gives. This incorrectly reduces the workload. However, if the loading screen is rendered in a different manner, the driver seems to fail to detect 3DMark03, and performs the back buffer clear command as instructed.

2. A vertex shader used in game test 2 (P_Pointsprite.vsh) is detected by the driver. In this case the driver uses instructions contained in the driver to determine when to obey the back buffer clear command and when not to. If the back buffer would not be cleared at all in game test 2, the stars in the view of outer space in some cameras would appear smeared as have been reported in the articles mentioned earlier. Back buffer clearing is turned off and on again so that the back buffer is cleared only when the default benchmark cameras show outer space. In free camera mode one can keep the camera outside the spaceship through the entire test, and see how the sky smearing is turned on and off.

3. A vertex shader used in game test 4 (M_HDRsky.vsh) is detected. In this case the driver adds two static clipping planes to reduce the workload. The clipping planes are placed so that the sky is cut out just beyond what is visible in the default camera angles. Again, using the free camera one can look at the sky to see it abruptly cut off. Screenshot of this view was also reported in the ExtremeTech and Beyond3D articles. This cheat was introduced in the 43.51 drivers as far as we know.

4. In game test 4, the water pixel shader (M_Water.psh) is detected. The driver uses this detection to artificially achieve a large performance boost - more than doubling the early frame rate on some systems. In our inspection we noticed a difference in the rendering when compared either to the DirectX reference rasterizer or to those of other hardware. It appears the water shader is being totally discarded and replaced with an alternative more efficient shader implemented in the drivers themselves. The drivers produce a similar looking rendering, but not an identical one.

5. In game test 4 there is detection of a pixel shader (m_HDRSky.psh). Again it appears the shader is being totally discarded and replaced with an alternative more efficient shader in a similar fashion to the water pixel shader above. The rendering looks similar, but it is not identical.

6. A vertex shader (G_MetalCubeLit.vsh) is detected in game test 1. Preventing this detection proved to reduce the frame rate with these drivers, but we have not yet determined the cause. Page 4 of 7

7. A vertex shader in game test 3 (G_PaintBaked.vsh) is detected, and preventing this detection drops the scores with these drivers. This cheat causes the back buffer clearing to be disregarded; we are not yet aware of any other cheats.

8. The vertex and pixel shaders used in the 3DMark03 feature tests are also detected by the driver. When we prevented this detection, the performance dropped by more than a factor of two in the 2.0 pixel shader test.

It's very telling how you, Munky, and Snowman rush in to defend ATI when all I stated was how "both nVidia and ATI had their own driver cheats." (which I cited by 4 sources, including references from FutureMark, themself).

Kind of like when a principal calls in a student who immediatly screams "I didn't do it!" before the principal even says anything... :roll:

(Awaits Josh to bawl "But BFG has a Geforce card! Ha! You can't reprehend him!")

Your attempt to downplay the extent to which Nv cheated and the way they responded to the accusations only shows your own bias.

 

[F1shF4t]

Originally posted by: munky

Originally posted by: Nelsieus

Originally posted by: BFG10K

Cheating is cheating. The fact that you feel compelled to defend one "cheater" over the other is disturbing, but expected from someone like you, nonetheless.

Nope, sorry, the two aren't even close. ATi had generic shader re-ordering but unfortunately they relied on application detection of 3DMark for them to work which is where the cheating came from. When called out they apologized and removed the detection in the next driver. As for Quack, that was a bug and when they fixed it performance and IQ went up.

When nVidia was caught out in 3DMark first they denied it, then they claimed it was a bug, then they claimed 3DMark was invalid, then they badgered FutrureMark to change their stance. In the end nVidia put out some ridiculous "optimization guidelines" which they violated even before the ink had dried.

Below is the FutureMark audit report from 3DMark that shows just how badly nVidia cheated, and this is to say nothing of the thousands of shaders nVidia subsituted in games.

Wat Are The Identified Cheats?
Futuremark?s audit revealed cheats in NVIDIA Detonator FX 44.03 and 43.51 WHQL drivers. Earlier GeForceFX drivers include only some of the cheats listed below.

1. The loading screen of the 3DMark03 test is detected by the driver. This is used by the driver to disregard the back buffer clear command that 3DMark03 gives. This incorrectly reduces the workload. However, if the loading screen is rendered in a different manner, the driver seems to fail to detect 3DMark03, and performs the back buffer clear command as instructed.

2. A vertex shader used in game test 2 (P_Pointsprite.vsh) is detected by the driver. In this case the driver uses instructions contained in the driver to determine when to obey the back buffer clear command and when not to. If the back buffer would not be cleared at all in game test 2, the stars in the view of outer space in some cameras would appear smeared as have been reported in the articles mentioned earlier. Back buffer clearing is turned off and on again so that the back buffer is cleared only when the default benchmark cameras show outer space. In free camera mode one can keep the camera outside the spaceship through the entire test, and see how the sky smearing is turned on and off.

3. A vertex shader used in game test 4 (M_HDRsky.vsh) is detected. In this case the driver adds two static clipping planes to reduce the workload. The clipping planes are placed so that the sky is cut out just beyond what is visible in the default camera angles. Again, using the free camera one can look at the sky to see it abruptly cut off. Screenshot of this view was also reported in the ExtremeTech and Beyond3D articles. This cheat was introduced in the 43.51 drivers as far as we know.

4. In game test 4, the water pixel shader (M_Water.psh) is detected. The driver uses this detection to artificially achieve a large performance boost - more than doubling the early frame rate on some systems. In our inspection we noticed a difference in the rendering when compared either to the DirectX reference rasterizer or to those of other hardware. It appears the water shader is being totally discarded and replaced with an alternative more efficient shader implemented in the drivers themselves. The drivers produce a similar looking rendering, but not an identical one.

5. In game test 4 there is detection of a pixel shader (m_HDRSky.psh). Again it appears the shader is being totally discarded and replaced with an alternative more efficient shader in a similar fashion to the water pixel shader above. The rendering looks similar, but it is not identical.

6. A vertex shader (G_MetalCubeLit.vsh) is detected in game test 1. Preventing this detection proved to reduce the frame rate with these drivers, but we have not yet determined the cause. Page 4 of 7

7. A vertex shader in game test 3 (G_PaintBaked.vsh) is detected, and preventing this detection drops the scores with these drivers. This cheat causes the back buffer clearing to be disregarded; we are not yet aware of any other cheats.

8. The vertex and pixel shaders used in the 3DMark03 feature tests are also detected by the driver. When we prevented this detection, the performance dropped by more than a factor of two in the 2.0 pixel shader test.

It's very telling how you, Munky, and Snowman rush in to defend ATI when all I stated was how "both nVidia and ATI had their own driver cheats." (which I cited by 4 sources, including references from FutureMark, themself).

Kind of like when a principal calls in a student who immediatly screams "I didn't do it!" before the principal even says anything... :roll:

(Awaits Josh to bawl "But BFG has a Geforce card! Ha! You can't reprehend him!")

Your attempt to downplay the extent to which Nv cheated and the way they responded to the accusations only shows your own bias.

Funny look at all the people who cry cheating. Both companies cheat, but the thing is the FX cards were a flop, and only if they had their code optimised they could reach the performance of the ATI counterparts. (yes i had an fx card in the day and was dissapointed eventially when it started to suck in games)

Now u can look at it in another way, cause i'm sure the extra performance at the loss of quality in some areas would have been a welcome to the people who bought those cards. I mean if i can play a game at 1024 * 768 with slight reduce in quality it will be still miles better than 800 * 600.

People here are beating a dead horse, do u expect a company to go and say we have a inferior product? Be that ati, nvidia, intel or amd etc, they are not gonna go and say (or admit) that their product sucks, cause that would be plain stupid.

I'm biased towards better performing cards, lol i could give a cr@p about the company that makes it. Although i did buy nvidia cards till now just to be able to chage em over in comps without reinstaling the drivers.

 

[Shadowmage]

It's true, but the customer should have a choice in the matter of performance over IQ.

 

[Munky]

Originally posted by: Dark Cupcake
Funny look at all the people who cry cheating. Both companies cheat, but the thing is the FX cards were a flop, and only if they had their code optimised they could reach the performance of the ATI counterparts. (yes i had an fx card in the day and was dissapointed eventially when it started to suck in games)

Now u can look at it in another way, cause i'm sure the extra performance at the loss of quality in some areas would have been a welcome to the people who bought those cards. I mean if i can play a game at 1024 * 768 with slight reduce in quality it will be still miles better than 800 * 600.

People here are beating a dead horse, do u expect a company to go and say we have a inferior product? Be that ati, nvidia, intel or amd etc, they are not gonna go and say (or admit) that their product sucks, cause that would be plain stupid.

I'm biased towards better performing cards, lol i could give a cr@p about the company that makes it. Although i did buy nvidia cards till now just to be able to chage em over in comps without reinstaling the drivers.

I don't feel like arguing too much over a 3 year old issue, but there's a fundamental difference between optimizing shader code for games and what Nv did in 3dmark. In an interactive game the camera doesnt follow a fixed path, and Nv would never introduce predefined clip planes in games no matter how much they wanted to. So such optimzations were mostly in place to artificially boost the benchmark score, even though an actual game would never use such optimizations.

 

[kylebisme]

And the industry is still hurt by that today as dvelopers have to take into account alll that hardware out there which people bought while misslead into thinking they were getting competive products.

 

[thilanliyan]

Originally posted by: Dark Cupcake
Both companies cheat, but the thing is the FX cards were a flop, and only if they had their code optimised they could reach the performance of the ATI counterparts. (yes i had an fx card in the day and was dissapointed eventially when it started to suck in games)

So because the FX cards were a flop it's good enough reason for them to cheat?? So any company lagging in performance should cheat so their products look better? At the very least NVidia did a great job with the Geforce 6/7 series after the FX (which they probably had to do since the FX sucked) but don't try to justify the cheating. Just to clarify I'm using NVidia as an example (since it was brought up) but I'm sure ATI have done some "optimizations" also for certain games/benchmarks that shouldn't be allowed.

Originally posted by: Dark Cupcake
People here are beating a dead horse, do u expect a company to go and say we have a inferior product? Be that ati, nvidia, intel or amd etc, they are not gonna go and say (or admit) that their product sucks, cause that would be plain stupid.

No of course a company wouldn't say "our products suck" but there's a difference between 1)not saying anything and NOT cheating and 2)not saying anything and CHEATING. A company can keep quiet about their products and not cheat and that's a much better option than cheating because if they get caught they'll take a lot of flak (ie. in the public's eyes their products suck AND they are cheating).

 

[Gstanfor]

LOL! How do some of you manage to be so thick?

If you had bothered to follow the link I provided on top of the quote, you might find that the quote came from Baumann's "everything must change" thread, where people are farewelling Baumann from B3D and congratulating him on joining ATi.

Martrox was pointing out, as was I, that Uttar, Chalnoth and Ailuros are absent from the thread (chrisray, democoder and most of the other "pro-greens" too, I believe).

Originally posted by: Ackmed

Originally posted by: redbox

Originally posted by: Gstanfor
I'm not exactly a fan of Martrox over at b3d, but I must say, i found his post below to be "interesting" too, especially in light of Geo's efforts here...

link

While Dave deservers our thanks and the best for his and his families future, I can't help but wonder where those members of B3d that lean to the green are......

Chalnoth?......Last Activity: 26-Jun-2006 06:31
Ailuros?.....Last Post:25-Jun-2006, 07:15
Uttar?.....Last Activity: 26-Jun-2006 08:12

Not trying single out anyone in particular. I just find it "interesting"!

I don't see anything 'interesting' in that link. Looks like they have all recently visited the forum ....soooo?

Hes trying to claim they are banned.

Originally posted by: keysplayr2003

My own advice eh? Ok. Let me advise myself to do some digging. What kind of digging? Oh, I don't know. Be back later.

Once again, you tell others to "back down", yet you cant take your own advice. Nice. Good to see you're consistantly hypocrtical.

 

[sandorski]

Don't know who this guy(Dave Bauman) is, but congrats.

PS: If you were to send a 1900XTX my way I'd gladly use it!

 

[redbox]

I followed your link and found them to be absent yes but they have been on the site recently. To me all this says is they didn't want to comment in that thread, but I guess you and your logic see a behind the scene snuff job. Why else would you find it interesting? What motive would Dave have for banning them now? Just so that they don't crap in his farewell thread? That doesn't seam to likely.

 

[Gstanfor]

Lets just say I consider it a token of the B3D "pro-green"''s "respect" *cough* *choke* for Baumann...

 

[akugami]

I tell you, it's gotta be a conspiracy that the pro-nVidia folks are not saying goodbye to Dave Baumann. I tell you it's some evil attempt by ATI to shut nVidia folks up. Next thing you know, ATI will have viral campaigners in every thread talking about Dave Baumann and his move to ATI. It is my belief that this will create a massive void that sucks in ATI fanboys but somehow repells nVidia fanboys. Thus the only voices heard will be those of ATI. Pure genius I tell you.

 

[Nelsieus]

Originally posted by: akugami
I tell you, it's gotta be a conspiracy that the pro-nVidia folks are not saying goodbye to Dave Baumann. I tell you it's some evil attempt by ATI to shut nVidia folks up. Next thing you know, ATI will have viral campaigners in every thread talking about Dave Baumann and his move to ATI. It is my belief that this will create a massive void that sucks in ATI fanboys but somehow repells nVidia fanboys. Thus the only voices heard will be those of ATI. Pure genius I tell you.

Heh, and it's already begun (atleast on B3D):

Originally posted by: JDWoods[TeamATi]
Yes, our giveaways come from ATi and their partners.


[TeamATi] is a group of friends that have been gaming, attending and hosting LAN parties and generally goofing off for several years. Our ages range from young to old. We play FPS, RTS and console games for the most part but are not beyond an old-fashioned game of Axis and Allies. We have been officially sponsored for about a year and we currently have 40 members. This originated because we attended a LAN party (TXGF) that ATi also attended. We (my team) helped give away most of the prizes at the LAN. ATi was impressed with our ability to appeal to the gamers and our A-typical way of dealing with a crowd. Our mission statement reads as follows:

[TeamATi]'s goal is to build on the already strong bridges that link ATi and its Manufacturing Partners to the general public, gaming and business communities by supporting existing marketing styles and strategies as well as developing and implementing new ones.

[TeamATi] strives to educate the community through reccurring personal interaction both in-person and on the Internet.

[TeamATi] uses these links to develop and reinforce an understanding of the history and evolution of ATi and its Manufacturer Partner's products and marketing activities.

http://www.beyond3d.com/forum/showthread.php?t=26617&page=2

Atleast he's being transparent...:roll:

 

[redbox]

Originally posted by: Gstanfor
Lets just say I consider it a token of the B3D "pro-green"''s "respect" *cough* *choke* for Baumann...

So are you saying that out of all the 125 posts congratulating Dave that they are all made by "pro-reds" , and that all of the "pro-greens" are thumbing their nose in his face? Why do you have such disdain for this person Mr. Sour Grapes?

 

[5150Joker]

Originally posted by: redbox

Originally posted by: Gstanfor
Lets just say I consider it a token of the B3D "pro-green"''s "respect" *cough* *choke* for Baumann...

So are you saying that out of all the 125 posts congratulating Dave that they are all made by "pro-reds" , and that all of the "pro-greens" are thumbing their nose in his face? Why do you have such disdain for this person Mr. Sour Grapes?

Because he was banned from B3D's forums for being the troll he is.

 

[SolMiester]

STFU Joker, your the F_ _ _king troll here if anyone is. I dont think I have seen 1 post from YOU that follows gstanfor, where you dont flame him. Jesus, talk about glass houses..LOL

 

[Nelsieus]

Originally posted by: 5150Joker

Originally posted by: redbox

Originally posted by: Gstanfor
Lets just say I consider it a token of the B3D "pro-green"''s "respect" *cough* *choke* for Baumann...

So are you saying that out of all the 125 posts congratulating Dave that they are all made by "pro-reds" , and that all of the "pro-greens" are thumbing their nose in his face? Why do you have such disdain for this person Mr. Sour Grapes?

Because he was banned from B3D's forums for being the troll he is.

You're lucky the moderation here at Anandtech isn't as strict or else you'd be gone in an instant, as well.

 

[F1shF4t]

Originally posted by: thilan29

Originally posted by: Dark Cupcake
Both companies cheat, but the thing is the FX cards were a flop, and only if they had their code optimised they could reach the performance of the ATI counterparts. (yes i had an fx card in the day and was dissapointed eventially when it started to suck in games)

So because the FX cards were a flop it's good enough reason for them to cheat?? So any company lagging in performance should cheat so their products look better? At the very least NVidia did a great job with the Geforce 6/7 series after the FX (which they probably had to do since the FX sucked) but don't try to justify the cheating. Just to clarify I'm using NVidia as an example (since it was brought up) but I'm sure ATI have done some "optimizations" also for certain games/benchmarks that shouldn't be allowed.

Originally posted by: Dark Cupcake
People here are beating a dead horse, do u expect a company to go and say we have a inferior product? Be that ati, nvidia, intel or amd etc, they are not gonna go and say (or admit) that their product sucks, cause that would be plain stupid.

No of course a company wouldn't say "our products suck" but there's a difference between 1)not saying anything and NOT cheating and 2)not saying anything and CHEATING. A company can keep quiet about their products and not cheat and that's a much better option than cheating because if they get caught they'll take a lot of flak (ie. in the public's eyes their products suck AND they are cheating).

Firstly my view on optimisations is if it does not reduce quality its good, so if they can optimise and it wont effect IQ good on them. Dont get me wrong i complitely dissapointed in what they did with the FX cards, but then again i was a noob at hardware back then and a pretty box and 256mg memory was enough to sway my choice lol.

With ur second point, yes that is true, but gone are the days when u can have an inferior product and still be fine. See if they cheat the avarge consumer has no idea, cause majority dont read forums or reviews. ALL they see is a box with pretty pictures (well not always, have u see the sapphire boxes lol) and some stupid sales person saying it gets this much in 3dmark so it must be good. Then again, looking at how many people still buy fx5200s its no supprise.

Then again i think this topic has been talked about to death already.

 

[thilanliyan]

Originally posted by: Dark Cupcake
With ur second point, yes that is true, but gone are the days when u can have an inferior product and still be fine. See if they cheat the avarge consumer has no idea, cause majority dont read forums or reviews. ALL they see is a box with pretty pictures (well not always, have u see the sapphire boxes lol) and some stupid sales person saying it gets this much in 3dmark so it must be good. Then again, looking at how many people still buy fx5200s its no supprise.

Then again i think this topic has been talked about to death already.

I agree with you that an average consumer wouldn't know the difference. I just wish it wasn't that way so that companies wouldn't rely on cheating as a "performance booster".

 

[RobertR1]

Originally posted by: DaveBaumann

Originally posted by: RobertR1
haha yeah! i was the about to start a new thread: "The REAL Dave Baumann joins Ati thread."

Why, has a fake one joined?

Hi Dave.
Looks like you broke 3 hearts and now they're really gonna miss you, especially that ole Gregy. Look how he's already boiling over like a lil tea pot at the thought of having to find someone else to be obsessed over

 

[geo1]

Originally posted by: RobertR1

Originally posted by: DaveBaumann

Originally posted by: RobertR1
haha yeah! i was the about to start a new thread: "The REAL Dave Baumann joins Ati thread."

Why, has a fake one joined?

Hi Dave.
Looks like you broke 3 hearts and now they're really gonna miss you, especially that ole Gregy. Look how he's already boiling over like a lil tea pot at the thought of having to find someone else to be obsessed over

What, are you kidding?

Mr. Wizard gave me this one:

Originally posted by: gstanfor re "ATI 3DM09 scandal"

It was Baumann, I tell you! IT WAS BAUMANN!!!! I used an editor on the executable and found W in position 16, a in 2004, v in 14551, e in 14552 (sequential, even!) and y in 32113. COINCIDENCE? I THINK NOT!

It's been fun guys --I'm going home. Ta ta.

 

[Gstanfor]

Originally posted by: geo1

Originally posted by: RobertR1

Originally posted by: DaveBaumann

Originally posted by: RobertR1
haha yeah! i was the about to start a new thread: "The REAL Dave Baumann joins Ati thread."

Why, has a fake one joined?

Hi Dave.
Looks like you broke 3 hearts and now they're really gonna miss you, especially that ole Gregy. Look how he's already boiling over like a lil tea pot at the thought of having to find someone else to be obsessed over

What, are you kidding?

Mr. Wizard gave me this one:

Originally posted by: gstanfor re "ATI 3DM09 scandal"

It was Baumann, I tell you! IT WAS BAUMANN!!!! I used an editor on the executable and found W in position 16, a in 2004, v in 14551, e in 14552 (sequential, even!) and y in 32113. COINCIDENCE? I THINK NOT!

It's been fun guys --I'm going home. Ta ta.

:disgust:

Just you wait until we get another 3dmurk type leaked reviewers guide (the one that reccomended turning nvidia's optimizations of while using settings that left ATi's on", then we'll have some fun, you can be sure of that...

 

[RobertR1]

Originally posted by: geo1

Originally posted by: RobertR1

Originally posted by: DaveBaumann

Originally posted by: RobertR1
haha yeah! i was the about to start a new thread: "The REAL Dave Baumann joins Ati thread."

Why, has a fake one joined?

Hi Dave.
Looks like you broke 3 hearts and now they're really gonna miss you, especially that ole Gregy. Look how he's already boiling over like a lil tea pot at the thought of having to find someone else to be obsessed over

What, are you kidding?

Mr. Wizard gave me this one:

Originally posted by: gstanfor re "ATI 3DM09 scandal"

It was Baumann, I tell you! IT WAS BAUMANN!!!! I used an editor on the executable and found W in position 16, a in 2004, v in 14551, e in 14552 (sequential, even!) and y in 32113. COINCIDENCE? I THINK NOT!

It's been fun guys --I'm going home. Ta ta.

Wow! it's like a High School chick who just got dumped and is out for revenge.
See ya back there.

 

[josh6079]

(Gstandfor's last post): I'll get you my pretty!!! And your little.....optimizations...too!!!