[H] slams nVidia, Kyle fed up

[nRollo]

He's mad

He has a point. It would be interesting to see where the FX products stand w/o the "optimizaations".
I think the hardware is potent enough it that it doesn't really matter if it loses to the 9800s in some benchmarks. If you're at 100fps average, to me it doesn't really matter if you could be at 110.
nVidia's handling of the driver issues, and the 5800 issue, has left a bad taste in my mouth.

 

[Regs]

Even though I think futuremark is a joke anyway, I also think nVidia is acting like a bunch of slime balls about the situation. They have powerful graphic cards yet they rather stick it up your as's* then in your AGP slot.

 

[merlocka]

Kyle should be mad. nVidia has left him out to dry. I personally think many of the issues surrounding the latest nVidia "scandals" are blown *way* out of proportion but Kyle has associated himself very closely with nVidia under the guise of "they really listen". nVidia doesn't listen to Kyle. They listen to Dell, HP, etc...

Kyle dug his own hole on this, now it seems he feels betrayed by nVidia because he now knows the truth... he is just a media outlet for nVidia PR.

 

[epicstruggle]

I am really puzzled by all the slamming of futuremark. The amount of hate they get, you would think they were like M$, some big heartless corporation that has a monopoly on its industry. All far from the truth. They are an extremely small company. If i remember correctly they have less than30 employees. Alll they try to do is judge how your computer would do against a synthetic benchmark. They are not out to ruin NV, or create a monopoly on synthetic benchmarks for graphics cards :roll:.

ill write more later, need to go sleep.

later,
epic

 

[Tab]

Originally posted by: epicstruggle
, or create a monopoly on synthetic benchmarks for graphics cards
epic

Yea, right. They are trying to tell use futurecrap is better than benchmarking using real games and giving the noobies the wrong edge. Regaurdless Kyle did a nice little writeup.

 

[MDE]

Originally posted by: epicstruggle
I am really puzzled by all the slamming of futuremark. The amount of hate they get, you would think they were like M$, some big heartless corporation that has a monopoly on its industry. All far from the truth. They are an extremely small company. If i remember correctly they have less than30 employees. Alll they try to do is judge how your computer would do against a synthetic benchmark. They are not out to ruin NV, or create a monopoly on synthetic benchmarks for graphics cards :roll:.

ill write more later, need to go sleep.

later,
epic

They just want Nvidia and everyone else's beta program money.

 

[Mem]

I too think 3Dmark scores are waste of time,Nvidia need to sort out their customer service ,being honest in all aspects and listening to their customers would be a good place to start.

 

[Rogodin2]

It's what I've been saying all along-I wouldn't sell robusta to my customers that excect gourmet coffee (by roasting a ratio of robusta to arabica)-and that is what nvidia has been doing all along-misrepresenting their scores across all forms of information (periodicals, internet, trade journals, you name it) they want their poorly performing cards to score well in the published benchmarks-thereby FLEECING US.

it's a bad way to do a buisness and I'm amazed that Kyle had the balls to finally say something.

rogo

 

[Regs]

Now we need Anand to say something. *Pushs the mic over to him.

 

[spam]

I would really like all the review sites to call a cheat a cheat. It seems to me the only way to communicate effectively sometimes with big business is to effect their bottom line. Bravo, HardOCP I hope others are willing to follow your leadership.

 

[Genx87]

God people are still stuck on this same old subject?
Hey did anybody see the benchmarks at aces hardware? Futuremarks 3dmark is about as valuable for showing your computers potential game performance as my grandmother being a meteorologist.

And Kyle good old Kyle. His adolescent mentality gets the best of him everytime. He swings on issues worse than Al Snore.
One day he cries about Nvidia, the next he cries for them.

 

[niggles]

I say hail Kyle, good for him for speaking out. There's no such thing as a Ralph Nader of the PC world, I nominate Kyle.

 

[DaveSimmons]

God people are still stuck on this same old subject?

Yes, because:
(a) we keep finding out about new nVidia cheats besides 3DMark, in real games like UT2K3 and Elite Force II
(b) nvidia has now refused to fix trilinear filtering and give users the image quality they're paying $500 to get.

I've been buying nvidia cards since the TNT days and am using one now, but my next card will probably be an ATI since then I can play games with the full image quality that the designers want me to see, not the degraded image quality that nvidia spews out to score better in benchmarks.

 

[spam]

Originally posted by: Genx87
God people are still stuck on this same old subject?
Hey did anybody see the benchmarks at aces hardware? Futuremarks 3dmark is about as valuable for showing your computers potential game performance as my grandmother being a meteorologist.

And Kyle good old Kyle. His adolescent mentality gets the best of him everytime. He swings on issues worse than Al Snore.
One day he cries about Nvidia, the next he cries for them.

Doesn't honesty matter to you? Don't you mind being cheated? If you catch someone cheating wouldn't you expect them to confess and admit it? What you say about Kyle is the worst of nonsense. You do not address the message he's sending, you just shoot the messenger. That is a cheap shot.

 

[grabadude]

Originally posted by: Rollo
He's mad

He has a point. It would be interesting to see where the FX products stand w/o the "optimizaations".
I think the hardware is potent enough it that it doesn't really matter if it loses to the 9800s in some benchmarks. If you're at 100fps average, to me it doesn't really matter if you could be at 110.
nVidia's handling of the driver issues, and the 5800 issue, has left a bad taste in my mouth.

What's up with the sudden change of opinion, you always defended FX 5800 before. What driver issues are you talking about?

 

[niggles]

Originally posted by: grabadude


What driver issues are you talking about?

Did you read the article?

 

[grabadude]

Originally posted by: niggles

Originally posted by: grabadude


What driver issues are you talking about?

Did you read the article?

Did you read my post?

 

[Ronin]

And yet no one remembers ATi and Quake3, or that ATi had optimizations in their drivers for games. Is there a problem with a manufacturer putting in optimizations for specific games? If it runs better, who the hell cares?

Seems to me we've got a lot of people who care more about less performance than a debate about a company who had enough foresite to take the most popular games and optimize drivers for them (which, if you read ATi's driver releases, they do ALL the time).

This is a dead horse without a carcass anymore. It's a subject that needs to be dropped and people need to move on.

In regards to Kyle, he's bipolar, and you can see it time and again. The guy needs to take some medicine.

 

[nRollo]

What's up with the sudden change of opinion, you always defended FX 5800 before. What driver issues are you talking about?

I've had no change of opinion, I still think the FX5800 is an EXCELLENT video card.
I am annoyed with nVidia for it's handling of the FX5800 though. They removed the 5800s from their product list on their website, as if trying to make people forget they ever made them. This lowered the resale value for all of us who had them, for NO GOOD REASON. 5800 are approx equal to 9700NPs, 5800Us are approx. equal 9700Ps, which is about as good as it gets, and nVidia acts like they put out the Parhelia.
Then their CEO tells the press they've "learned from their mistakes with the 5800" and their PR people do the same to reviewers, again lowering resale value of a product a lot of us paid good money for. Why? Because they didn't totally beat ATI? Or because 5900s are better?

As far as the driver cheats goes, I believe I saw the review at Digit Life where they compare the cheat/no cheat scores, and an explanation of how the cheat drivers lower the quality of the AF.

Beyond that, I sent emails to Brian Burke, Carrie Cowan, and Derek Perez about the 5800. Polite emails asking them for the reasoning behind their "let's make sure the name 5800 is never spoken again" policies. No response. Apparently, as a 5800 owner, I warranted no response even though I said in my email I had also purchased the TNT, TNT2, GF1, 2 GF2s, GF3, GF4, and had been a long time supporter on the bbs.

So I did what I could:
I sold the FX5800, put a 9800Pro in my box, and have told the story of nVidia customer support many times. I'll buy nVidia again, but not if ATI has a comparable part for comparable money.


Rogo: You know I get lost when you talk that coffee smack.

 

[DaveSimmons]

Originally posted by: RoninCS
And yet no one remembers ATi and Quake3, or that ATi had optimizations in their drivers for games. Is there a problem with a manufacturer putting in optimizations for specific games? If it runs better, who the hell cares?

Seems to me we've got a lot of people who care more about less performance than a debate about a company who had enough foresite to take the most popular games and optimize drivers for them (which, if you read ATi's driver releases, they do ALL the time).

This is a dead horse without a carcass anymore. It's a subject that needs to be dropped and people need to move on.

nvidia isn't doing valid optimizations, which would offer the same image quality at a higher speed -- they are doing what ATI first did with quake3 (and were justly criticized for) which is to degrade image qulaity and not give users the option to see the full image quality.

It's not a dead horse as long as nvidia keeps denying users the choice of whether to trade image quality for speed.

 

[nRollo]

Seems to me we've got a lot of people who care more about less performance than a debate about a company who had enough foresite to take the most popular games

The problem with "quack" and the nVidia cheats is they remove your option to run the games at higher image quality. If they're going to do crap like this it should be a switchable option, not just coded to make your picture look worse so it can win a benchmark.
I'm capable of altering my settings to increase framerate, nVidia's drivers don't give me the option.
That's not doing me a favor.

 

[chsh1ca]

So what? Why does anyone care if Kyle is upset or not? He's not alone, that's for sure, but really, people who aren't in Rollo's position and haven't actually paid money for the card in question don't really have much business being upset over this. So a big corporation in the computer industry is lying. News flash people, it's been going on for years upon years upon years. Apple's done it, Intel's done it, Microsoft's done it, ATI's done it, the list goes on. Why are people still surprised and/or upset at this? Nobody stopped buying technology because the companies involved weren't honest. That never seems to have bothered people before, I don't get why it bothers them now.

So nVidia is lying to people, getting upset about it doesn't help. Spreading the word about it won't either, because people have to want to listen to hear your message, and a large number of computer owners just buy machines somewhere like Dell, IBM, HP, etc.. I can guarantee you that this whole FX5800 fiasco crap will have about $10000 worth of impact on the bottom line, and that was how much it took their lawyer to call and have a 10 minute conversation with futuremark.

Just my $0.02 (wanted or not).

PS: Since I know that you guys will leap on the "provide examples" for each of my companies listed above, I'll save you and I the trouble of a second post:
Apple fudged benchmark numbers to make the G5 look much faster than it really is.
Intel and their marketing BS and benchmark fudging.
ATI and their Quake 3 benchmark inflation.
I don't think I need to link anyone to any article about microsoft...

 

[Regs]

So nVidia is lying to people, getting upset about it doesn't help

Then explain why I bought a ATI product and not a Nvidia product. Tell me why Dell sells its power computers with advertised 9800 pros with the 5900 ultra? Wouldn't that make you want to think at least what Item to select during a 2-3 thousand dollar purchase?

I'm part of a growing populous in this nation that actually researches a product before he buys it.

The fact still stands that the FX series failed from the get go. Ever since they have been trying to make up for the bombed cards that they passed. And now they try to sell it to us by pushing false 3dmark scores like we wouldn't know other wise. Don't get me wrong the new revisions of the card are excellent, but too little to late and they know that. Thats why they came up with this flim flam.

You want to buy nVidia products and let them treat you like a dumb monkey be my guest.

 

[Corporate Thug]

Originally posted by: chsh1ca
So what? Why does anyone care if Kyle is upset or not? He's not alone, that's for sure, but really, people who aren't in Rollo's position and haven't actually paid money for the card in question don't really have much business being upset over this. So a big corporation in the computer industry is lying. News flash people, it's been going on for years upon years upon years. Apple's done it, Intel's done it, Microsoft's done it, ATI's done it, the list goes on. Why are people still surprised and/or upset at this? Nobody stopped buying technology because the companies involved weren't honest. That never seems to have bothered people before, I don't get why it bothers them now.

So nVidia is lying to people, getting upset about it doesn't help. Spreading the word about it won't either, because people have to want to listen to hear your message, and a large number of computer owners just buy machines somewhere like Dell, IBM, HP, etc.. I can guarantee you that this whole FX5800 fiasco crap will have about $10000 worth of impact on the bottom line, and that was how much it took their lawyer to call and have a 10 minute conversation with futuremark.

Just my $0.02 (wanted or not).

PS: Since I know that you guys will leap on the "provide examples" for each of my companies listed above, I'll save you and I the trouble of a second post:
Apple fudged benchmark numbers to make the G5 look much faster than it really is.
Intel and their marketing BS and benchmark fudging.
ATI and their Quake 3 benchmark inflation.
I don't think I need to link anyone to any article about microsoft...

c'mon now. you're saying that as long as you havent paid for the card it is ok? people use benchmarks as a way of comparing two products and deciding which is better. the bottom line is that fudging benchmarks is essentially lying to the consumer. and if a company is lying to the consumer, they are showing absoluetly no respect for them. did other companies do it? yes. does that make it ok for nvidia to do it? absolutely not. damn, Ati learned their lesson after optimizinf for quake III but how many times is it gonna take for nvidia to learn?

 

[jiffylube1024]

Originally posted by: Rollo
I've had no change of opinion, I still think the FX5800 is an EXCELLENT video card.
I am annoyed with nVidia for it's handling of the FX5800 though. They removed the 5800s from their product list on their website, as if trying to make people forget they ever made them. This lowered the resale value for all of us who had them, for NO GOOD REASON. 5800 are approx equal to 9700NPs, 5800Us are approx. equal 9700Ps, which is about as good as it gets, and nVidia acts like they put out the Parhelia.
Then their CEO tells the press they've "learned from their mistakes with the 5800" and their PR people do the same to reviewers, again lowering resale value of a product a lot of us paid good money for. Why? Because they didn't totally beat ATI? Or because 5900s are better?

Rogo: You know I get lost when you talk that coffee smack.

The 5800 was a good card (performance wise) but the launch was done very sloppily. Despite the fact that it was over half a year late, it still came off as a knee-jerk reaction to the 9700 Pro. There were major driver flaws after launch, something they haven't really done before, and especially after a 6+ month delay. The 5800 Ultra's exorbitant cooling system was too loud, bulky and cumbersome for most users. Compared to the small, tight 9700 cards, nVidia needed to make a brute of a card to match the performance.

Silly little things like dropping the speed to 300/(dont even remember what the memory dropped to) in Windows so you can actually hear yourself think while the card runs made it a splotch nVidia's perfect track record.

They wanted us to "think different" about the 5800, and realized that we wouldn't stand for it. That's why I think they want to sweep the 5800 under the carpet.