Nvidia accusses ATI/AMD of cheating - Benchmarks

[Scali]

While this makes sense, you have to consider the recent history as well. The way I remember it( I could be wrong), Nvidia was preparing the GTX 3xx line-up against the 5XXX series, however, when the number started showing on sites they freaked out, canceling their plan altogether and jumping to 4xx series instead.

Seems to me they went to a marathon just to be able to dump the GF100 asap and finally have an answer. They want the crown and the 3xx series wasn't cutting to it. If you look at the 460 now, it's probably what the gf100 should have been in terms of performance/power/heat.

I don't think it went that way at all.
3xx is just a name, like 4xx.
I don't think it has any relation to what the underlying hardware is.
Also, as been discussed many times before, chip design is a process of years, and you can't 'respond' to what a competitor does, and suddenly come out with a new architecture in a few months time. It doesn't work that way. You don't even want to TRY and respond. You get into issues like the mythical man-month, and all that.
GF100 is probably what was originally rumoured as the 3xx series (which was a reasonable assumption, given that they named their current products the 2xx series... but nVidia decided otherwise... then again, they also renamed the 8800GT/GTS G92-based products to 9800 series... and we all know how different those chips were... A marketing name doesn't mean anything).

 

[Keysplayr]

If you are in the market for the best of the best and need the best of the best at all times, buying a card that is 6 months late while knowing the next gen from the other company is 6 months away means you only get to be on top for 6 months then have to sell and start over.

Then why do people still buy 5870's today? Or have all 5870 purchases ceased?

 

[railven]

Then why do people still buy 5870's today? Or have all 5870 purchases ceased?

Well, they aren't in the market for the best of the best, now are they?

 

[Flipped Gazelle]

Then why do people still buy 5870's today? Or have all 5870 purchases ceased?

To Xfire with all the 5870's that were purchased last year?

 

[railven]

To Xfire with all the 5870's that were purchased last year?

Hell yeah. I'm stuck with my 5870 for two years. I'm hoping once the HD 6K comes out I can score a used one for under $200 sometime next year.

 

[Keysplayr]

Well, they aren't in the market for the best of the best, now are they?

Point is, they are not exactly cheap, and a launch is right around the corner. They're still buying them. I think you guys know what I was hinting at.

 

[railven]

Point is, they are not exactly cheap, and a launch is right around the corner. They're still buying them. I think you guys know what I was hinting at.

Actually, I wouldn't know. You only focused on one small part of his overall post. The rest of his post covered your question - why the 5870's are still selling.

Someone in the market for the best of the best isn't a normal consumer and most often won't have buyers remorse when it comes to pony up for the upgrade. This same person isn't the one buying a 5870 over a GTX 480.

 

[Keysplayr]

Actually, I wouldn't know. You only focused on one small part of his overall post. The rest of his post covered your question - why the 5870's are still selling.

Someone in the market for the best of the best isn't a normal consumer and most often won't have buyers remorse when it comes to pony up for the upgrade. This same person isn't the one buying a 5870 over a GTX 480.

Well, there is a difference. The waiting time a user is willing to go before an upgrade. Does he/she buy the best available now, or wait and see? Can go either way. But getting back to the original concept here, GF100 was late to the party, but that does not make it an inferior product especially when prices are lowering on a regular basis. You will assume this lowering of prices is because the product is inferior of course. But the prices are currently very competitive between companies. Late or not, Fermi is superior to the competition IMHO. In many ways. DX12 is a while off yet so that would extend the "rig life" of current offerings anyway.

 

[railven]

Well, there is a difference. The waiting time a user is willing to go before an upgrade. Does he/she buy the best available now, or wait and see? Can go either way. But getting back to the original concept here, GF100 was late to the party, but that does not make it an inferior product especially when prices are lowering on a regular basis. You will assume this lowering of prices is because the product is inferior of course. But the prices are currently very competitive between companies. Late or not, Fermi is superior to the competition IMHO. In many ways. DX12 is a while off yet so that would extend the "rig life" of current offerings anyway.

You pretty much contradict yourself in your own post. One is a "factual" occurence in human behavior. The other is your opinion on how that "factual" human behavior characteristic should work.

GF100/Fermi could rightly so be inferior to Evergreen because it is late. A person in the market to buy January 2010 looks, doesn't see Fermi, and buys Evergreen. When Fermi launches, their mindset is "Fermis is inferior because it is so late" is justifiable because it is true, Fermi was late. Now try to convience them that they are wrong and they will most likely fight you tooth and nail because they want their purchase to be the "right choice."

So, buy in Jan 2010 Evergreen or wait for Fermi? Fermi launched, buy Fermi or wait for Northern Island? First to market might get deemed the "superior" product because it was ready to go when someone was ready to buy.

Just perception by people. Arguing is going to give you a headache just becase you want to be right same way they want to be right haha. But that's what is awesome about opinions - we can somehow all be right

 

[Keysplayr]

You pretty much contradict yourself in your own post. One is a "factual" occurence in human behavior. The other is your opinion on how that "factual" human behavior characteristic should work.

GF100/Fermi could rightly so be inferior to Evergreen because it is late. A person in the market to buy January 2010 looks, doesn't see Fermi, and buys Evergreen. When Fermi launches, their mindset is "Fermis is inferior because it is so late" is justifiable because it is true, Fermi was late. Now try to convience them that they are wrong and they will most likely fight you tooth and nail because they want their purchase to be the "right choice."

So, buy in Jan 2010 Evergreen or wait for Fermi? Fermi launched, buy Fermi or wait for Northern Island? First to market might get deemed the "superior" product because it was ready to go when someone was ready to buy.

Just perception by people. Arguing is going to give you a headache just becase you want to be right same way they want to be right haha. But that's what is awesome about opinions - we can somehow all be right

Whatever dude. ::shrugs::

 

[railven]

Whatever dude. ::shrugs::

I should have said two posts ago when you kept moving the goal posts.

Right back at ya.

 

[Kenmitch]

In the video card industry competition is good for everbody. Staggered generation releases kinda add fuel to the fanboy fire!

The biggest problem with staggered generations is ones need to justify his/her purchase by posting threads that in theory are designed to take away the limelight/downplay the other teams impending launch! Don't think I need to link to any threads to clarify the point

Nvidia is just doing what they are suppost to do....Cast doubt on the other guys performance in turn keeping their team happy! Hell I'm looking forward to the announcement of the announcement of the paper launch of Fermi II around the same time that AMD releases the 6xxx series of cards.

But on the other hand it's kinda fun to read/watch the fanboy responses. The hardest part is keeping up with the threads as some of them move pretty quickly and get rather long at that. Feel sorry for those whom get some interest in the thread when it's 100's of posts long.

Whatever dude. ::shrugs::

In the end this is one of the best responses one can have in this situation. Doesn't add any fuel to the burning fire.

 

[Keysplayr]

In the end this is one of the best responses one can have in this situation. Doesn't add any fuel to the burning fire.

Pretty much agree. Knowing when to say when is priceless. And railven, there can't be any goalposts to move when one isn't trying to make a touchdown.
:thumbsup;

 

[Madcatatlas]

Pretty much agree. Knowing when to say when is priceless. And railven, there can't be any goalposts to move when one isn't trying to make a touchdown.
:thumbsup;

I think you mean to say "when one cant make a touchdown".

 

[railven]

Pretty much agree. Knowing when to say when is priceless. And railven, there can't be any goalposts to move when one isn't trying to make a touchdown.
:thumbsup;

Oh, so you weren't trying to drive a point in? I wouldn't have guessed that from your wording.

I was just injecting my alternative opinion.

 

[HurleyBird]

In the video card industry competition is good for everbody. Staggered generation releases kinda add fuel to the fanboy fire!

The biggest problem with staggered generations is ones need to justify his/her purchase by posting threads that in theory are designed to take away the limelight/downplay the other teams impending launch! Don't think I need to link to any threads to clarify the point

Seems like less of a "staggered launch" situation (where each company leapfrogs the other every six months or so... which would be awesome), and more like one company being >=six months behind (not so awesome, leads to price gouging by whomever is ahead.)

 

[Keysplayr]

Oh, so you weren't trying to drive a point in? I wouldn't have guessed that from your wording.

I was just injecting my alternative opinion.

No, not really. You are totally victorious. :thumbsup;

 

[Keysplayr]

I think you mean to say "when one cant make a touchdown".

Undoubtedly you'd like to perpetuate the drama. Why?

 

[railven]

No, not really. You are totally victorious. :thumbsup;

So sharing a none agreeing opinion is now worthy of sarcasm and fanfare? Wow.

Yeah, thanks...I guess. Should have just left it at "Whatever dude."

 

[extra]

This thread can probably be locked, it's strayed completely outside the original topic.

 

[Tempered81]

GF100 might be hot, loud, power hungry, and late; however it's faster than Cypress (GTX480 that is) and it comes with user-friendly polished drivers, TWIMTBP game support, cuda, physx, blah blah blah, etc.

5970>GTX480 and uses less power. NVCP > CCC.

IMO, Nvidia has always been using hacks here and there and mostly in between when it comes to games. When PCGH did a crysis image quality comparison you could see a big difference between nvidia and ati shots on VERY HIGH. Then Trubritar did a comparison side-by-side of GTX480 VS. 5870 in Crysis benchmark (both gpus running ~35 FPS) and the Nvidia video showed the distant mountains blur out a lot sooner than the ATi video.

 

[Madcatatlas]

Undoubtedly you'd like to perpetuate the drama. Why?

I certainly am allowed to express my take on it and it was not in anyway ment as "drama". If you want to play the victim, go ahead, just dont incriminate me while doing so.



With all the effects ingame these days. Ill admit to being hardpressed to see noticable image quality between the major card makers. Hell if you trew a fast enough intel graphics in there, i might have problems seeing image quality difference there aswell.

Ill take notice of what people are saying though, and looking at the number of times a cardmaker has done something behind the scenes, it seems Nvidia is leading alot to not so many. Again, sleazy is the synonym for Nvidia and this reviewers guide crap seems like just another part of that.

Its also sad to see oneliners from Keys derailing the topic like this and making it personal.

 

[Skurge]

While I think it's fine for a company to instruct a reviewer on how to get the best performance from their product, I have a problem with a company telling a reviewer what settings to use in their competitor's products. I think both company's recommendations should be followed for their own products. They should have no say though in the way the competitor's products are handled.

I agree with this. They should be minding their own business.

 

[notty22]

So ATI is cheating(accused,web article), and enthusiasts who use these video cards are calling Nvidia sleazy, lol

 

[Lonyo]

So ATI is cheating, and enthusiasts who use these video cards are calling Nvidia sleazy, lol

ATI has an OPTIONAL FEATURE which is in the drivers which enables "optimisations" which attempt to increase performance without decreasing image quality.
These optimisations are OPEN and KNOWN ABOUT. They can be DISABLED by ANYONE.

It is not cheating, it is providing an option to users to "cheat", one which is not compulsory and one which is openly admitted to.
As NV say in their whole thing about it, and as I have already quoted before in this thread, more than once:

AMD has admitted that performance optimizations in their driver alters image quality in the above applications.

On the other side:
NV hasn't accused ATI of cheating. They have put in their reviewers guide information that ATI has such optimisations, and that in some instances they perform a specific operation.
They have suggested that such optimisations be disabled because they can impact image quality.


At the end of the day, it is up to websites which review the cards whether they want to:
a) care about such guidelines and
b) benchmark ATI catds with Catalyst AI set to on or off


ATI isn't "cheating", they are offering the option to "cheat" if people want to, and most websites seem to leave the "cheats" on, even though they have a choice to turn them off.

NV hasn't accused ATI of cheating, they have specified what one of these optimisations is, and suggested that it be disabled because it may negatively impact image quality (which ATI has admitted to anyway).


End of. ATI isn't in the wrong, and NV has a valid point.
This is also in the NV reviewer guide, which is a guide for reviewers. Most reviewers should be aware of Catalyst AI and what it does, and all the NV guide does is draw attention to something which is already public knowledge (that Catalyst AI does optimisations) and highlight a possible issue with this with respect to image quality.