Good Article on"Detonator FX Version 44.03: Feeling Cheated "

[Mem]

Link .

Let's go over the evidence presented by Extreme Tech first, since Extreme Tech is the party that brought this issue to light. They initially claim that the GeForce FX 5900 Ultra "was well ahead of ATI's Radeon 9800 Pro in Futuremark's 3DMark2003 benchmark, but the two boards were much more evenly matched in our GameGauge application benchmark suite." What the mean to say is that the 5900 Ultra performed evenly with the competition in normal game tests, but then gained an enormous lead when using 3DMark 2003. This would be a good sign of possible cheating if other reviews and previews showed the same results. The thing is, they don't.

I found it a good read.

 

[nemesismk2]

Originally posted by: Mem
Link .

Let's go over the evidence presented by Extreme Tech first, since Extreme Tech is the party that brought this issue to light. They initially claim that the GeForce FX 5900 Ultra "was well ahead of ATI's Radeon 9800 Pro in Futuremark's 3DMark2003 benchmark, but the two boards were much more evenly matched in our GameGauge application benchmark suite." What the mean to say is that the 5900 Ultra performed evenly with the competition in normal game tests, but then gained an enormous lead when using 3DMark 2003. This would be a good sign of possible cheating if other reviews and previews showed the same results. The thing is, they don't.

I found it a good read.

That article was very informative and didn't jump on the Nvidia must be cheating because it's Nvidia band wagon. I personally think ATI are behind the whole thing spreading disinformation about the FX5900 because it's a better video card than their R9800 Pro. It seems there's more stupid people around these days who will believe any crap whether or not there is any proof.

 

[ginfest]

That article was very informative and didn't jump on the Nvidia must be cheating because it's Nvidia band wagon. I personally think ATI are behind the whole thing spreading disinformation about the FX5900 because it's a better video card than their R9800 Pro. It seems there's more stupid people around these days who will believe any crap whether or not there is any proof

Not to mention the influx of ATI employess/Rage3D regulars who have signed up here and at other HW sites to spread thier version of gospel:disgust:


Mike G

 

[ZimZum]

Originally posted by: nemesismk2


That article was very informative and didn't jump on the Nvidia must be cheating because it's Nvidia band wagon. I personally think ATI are behind the whole thing spreading disinformation about the FX5900 because it's a better video card than their R9800 Pro. It seems there's more stupid people around these days who will believe any crap whether or not there is any proof

Do you see the irony in your last sentence?

 

[nemesismk2]

Originally posted by: ZimZum

Originally posted by: nemesismk2


That article was very informative and didn't jump on the Nvidia must be cheating because it's Nvidia band wagon. I personally think ATI are behind the whole thing spreading disinformation about the FX5900 because it's a better video card than their R9800 Pro. It seems there's more stupid people around these days who will believe any crap whether or not there is any proof

Do you see the irony in your last sentence?

hehe

 

[gururu]

ok, this is what is pissing me off. it is now, at least, considered a bug.
so why have not any sites RETRACTED their benchmark comparisons. obviously the FX cards have improperly attained results (3dmark at least). yet, no site has retracted all their "FX is the champion" statements. as far as I can tell, the jury is STILL out. at least until nvidia releases a new remedied driver version.
until then, it is less important for websites to take sides than to issue notices that their benches are invalid or untrustworthy.

 

[nemesismk2]

Originally posted by: gururu
ok, this is what is pissing me off. it is now, at least, considered a bug.
so why have not any sites RETRACTED their benchmark comparisons. obviously the FX cards have improperly attained results (3dmark at least). yet, no site has retracted all their "FX is the champion" statements. as far as I can tell, the jury is STILL out. at least until nvidia releases a new remedied driver version.
until then, it is less important for websites to take sides than to issue notices that their benches are invalid or untrustworthy.

There is no bug because 3dmark03 works perfectly with the 44.03 drivers. The 44.03 drivers might have a problem with the developer version of 3dmark03 but that's of no interest to us because we can't even get it.

When there was a problem with the v43.45 drivers Anandtech reported the problem right away. Anandtech hasn't posted any news saying the 44.03 drivers inflate 3dmark03 scores so IMO there is no problem with the 44.03 drivers.

IMO it's all just disinformation from ATI to spoil the launch of the FX5900 Ultra because they are once again running scared of Nvidia and their excellent Geforce FX range!

 

[Mem]

The 44.03 drivers might have a problem with the developer version of 3dmark03 but that's of no interest to us because we can't even get it.

Even Nvidia refuse to pay so they can have the developer version of 3Dmark03,I`m not surpised they might encounter a bug or two.

 

[Rand]

Originally posted by: nemesismk2

Originally posted by: gururu

There is no bug because 3dmark03 works perfectly with the 44.03 drivers. The 44.03 drivers might have a problem with the developer version of 3dmark03 but that's of no interest to us because we can't even get it.

It IS of interest because the 'cheat' still impacts the consumer version of 3DM03... it's merely only visible on the Developer version as they can control the camera perspective.
We cannot and hence are unaware of the cheat though it is still there and artificially inflating the benchmark scores.

Just because we cannot visibly see it does not mean it's not in operation precisely the same as it is in the Developer version.
Without the ability to alter the perspective we have no way of determining clipping planes were inserted between frames, only the Dev version offers that.

Personally I don't really care whether NV has cheated. 3DM means precious little to me as a determinators of real world gaming performance, though some of the synthetic tests hold some merit.

The evidence does seem to be against them however, and is probably more conclusive then the Quack/Q3A R8500 issue of so long ago.
Regardless, I've little doubt both nVidia and ATi cheat as frequently as their able to get away with.
The old 3DWinBench98 fiasco should be clear evidence that virtually all graphics card developers are more then willing to cheat if they feel they can get away with it.

 

[Rand]

Originally posted by: gururu
ok, this is what is pissing me off. it is now, at least, considered a bug.
so why have not any sites RETRACTED their benchmark comparisons. obviously the FX cards have improperly attained results (3dmark at least). yet, no site has retracted all their "FX is the champion" statements. as far as I can tell, the jury is STILL out. at least until nvidia releases a new remedied driver version.
until then, it is less important for websites to take sides than to issue notices that their benches are invalid or untrustworthy.

I see no reason to retract their statements unless their conclusion was based off of 3DMark results, the majority of sites have based their conclusion of other benchmarks and without evidence of improper usage in those benches there is no cause for retraction.