Possibility that Nvidia intentionally held back performance.

[otispunkmeyer]

Originally posted by: ArchAngel777

Originally posted by: johnnqq
cars are electronically limited (they CAN be elminated) to 155 for SAFETY reasons...not that half the cars out there can even reach that.

i don't understand how everything turns into an arguement nowadays. eveyrbody has something up their ass.

LOL, nice try, but the cars are not limited for safety reasons in America. If that were the case, then no car would go above 75 MPH, which is the speed limit. The cars are limited by the MFG's plain and simple. If it was for safety reasons (going to give your logic a thought here) then why would the Z06 Corvette be allowed to hit 191+ Mph while the BMW M3 is limited at 155 Mph? We all know the BMW M5 can easily pass the 155 Mph mark, so it must be limited by the MFG.

the 155mph limit is something all the german manufacturers agreed to do. their cars can do much faster. (hi end anyway) i cant remember why they did it (think it was to curve the speeds on Autobahns)

from wiki "Many car manufacturers (including Mercedes, BMW and Audi) limit the speed of their cars electronically to 250 km/h (155 mph); this is only a gentlemen's agreement, not a legal requirement."

"It started out years ago as a ?gentlemen?s agreement?. Now, the 155-mph speed limit found on Audi, BMW, Lexus, and Mercedes cars may be lifted after years of being a fact of life. Started as a means to prevent government regulation, this self-regulation is not followed by all manufacturers out side of these four. With more and more manufacturers producing cars that are significantly faster, these four are talking about lifting the limit on their regular production vehicles. The limit removal is being looked into by Audi, BMW, and Lexus. Lexus was not one of the original manufacturers when the limits first were imposed". here

M3 cant do much beyond 160 anyway so the limit doesnt have a huge effect.

 

[Drayvn]

It seems these drivers enable you to use dual cores better....

 

[otispunkmeyer]

Originally posted by: Drayvn
Ok if you read the benchies for Doom 3 for High Quality settings.

That is just BS. an average of 75FPS from all the other drivers except for one. and it then suddenly gets a 40FPS increase....

Hmm. Intentionally held back....

thats because of the dual core i think. the rel 80.xx drivers are optimized to give a good boost on dual core systems, and i think in doom3 the cpu matters becuase the engines limited to 60fps maybe? or that the drivers use the cpu for the shader look up tables i dont know

 

[Drayvn]

yea just saw the extra benchies from other ppl. I took my frustration off the post....

 

[ArchAngel777]

Originally posted by: otispunkmeyer

Originally posted by: Drayvn
Ok if you read the benchies for Doom 3 for High Quality settings.

That is just BS. an average of 75FPS from all the other drivers except for one. and it then suddenly gets a 40FPS increase....

Hmm. Intentionally held back....

thats because of the dual core i think. the rel 80.xx drivers are optimized to give a good boost on dual core systems, and i think in doom3 the cpu matters becuase the engines limited to 60fps maybe? or that the drivers use the cpu for the shader look up tables i dont know

Correct, Anand had mentioned in a review not to long ago that Doom3 was CPU limited, big time. Since these new drives now use Dual Core, well, I think it speaks for itself. Doom3 shows some awesome performance that we can expect from that Engine, at least .

 

[otispunkmeyer]

Originally posted by: Drayvn
yea just saw the extra benchies from other ppl. I took my frustration off the post....

lol no worries.

good to see dual core getting into gaming in some way

 

[Keysplayr]

I think I'm going to give this a try.

My system:

P4 3.0E @stock
Albatron/Intel PX915P4C mobo
1GB Geil DDR500 Dual Channel
eVGA 7800GTX 450/1200 stock -w- 78.01's
Windows XP SP1

These are the most recent games I have to work with:

Doom3
HL2
FarCry
CoD
CoD United Offensive
Vampire the Masquerade Bloodlines (Source Engine game)
Counter Strike Source
Painkiller
FEAR Demo (why not?)

Then I can do 3dmark03/05
I can see if I can get Aquamark

Now I need a way to benchmark all of these. I know how to bench Doom3. But all the others I need help with.
Anyone who is into helping out with how to bench each one, feel free.

 

[nRollo]

Originally posted by: Killrose
Did'nt nVidia "release" a driver set to hardware reveiw sites only when ATi released the 8500 or 9700? I remember something like this awhile back. They were Beta drivers only given to reveiw sites to use against the latest ATi release and did'nt make it to WHQL because they sucked at anything but a benchmark apps.

I hope this is'nt the same sort of stunt. And I hope they benefit 6800U users like myself.

It was with the GF3 and the 8500. And the drivers did make WHQL IIRC, nVidia just came up with better device drivers.

It happens. It took them a few months to fix the AF on the FX series as well, and when they did, it was faster and better IQ.

I don't know about them "holding back" any performance this time, but I can't see how getting it now can be a negative if IQ is comparable or better. It stands to reason the drivers will get better, the card has only been out three months.

 

[nRollo]

Originally posted by: ArchAngel777

Originally posted by: jasonja
It's interesting how much High Quality in 3DMark05 lost with this driver... fixing the shimmering costly?

Well, I am not sure if you are attempted to start a war or something. But Rollo made a post on the forums where he tested the 78.01 (or .03) drivers. According to him, placing things on HQ did fix the shimmering for the most part with an extremely minor performance hit. Almost not worth noting, because they are well within the error tolerance of a test.

The performance hit for the shimmer fix (some games) and reduction (on other games) didn't incur any more of a performance hit than disabling optomizations did before. The amount of performance loss varies by game.

For reasons unknown, some seem to think having optomizations or not should offer exactly the same IQ and framerates.

 

[Topweasel]

Originally posted by: johnnqq
cars are electronically limited (they CAN be elminated) to 155 for SAFETY reasons...not that half the cars out there can even reach that.

i don't understand how everything turns into an arguement nowadays. eveyrbody has something up their ass.

Why is Mine (Stratus) Topped out at 110 why was my Achive capped at (115). The Answer is in the tyres the purchase tyres that are rated at a lower speed and set them their. The only company I know of that sets theirs to 155 is Benz.

But back on topic, whether or not they were sandbaging (which I doubt), I bought a card with a certain speed and viewed their average performance. I was very pleased with its accomplishments and bought it. If Nvidia came by and unlocked another 10-15 FPS I would be sweet thanks I really needed that. Nvidia never said that the GTX people where going to get every speed increase as they came, they never promised an extra FPS per month, I don't care how much you spent on a card it never entitles you to more then you purchased.

 

[Keysplayr]

Depends on the car and what is was designed for. My Chevy Camaro Z-28 has Z-rated tires. Z in the size signifies a maximum speed capability in excess of 149 mph, 240 km/h ... My car, according to GM, does not have a limiter on it. I have reached 160mph
so far and it felt like it could've gone a little more. So, no 155 limiter on mine.

Ok, I love cars and all, but enough

 

[ArchAngel777]

Originally posted by: otispunkmeyer

Originally posted by: ArchAngel777

Originally posted by: johnnqq
cars are electronically limited (they CAN be elminated) to 155 for SAFETY reasons...not that half the cars out there can even reach that.

i don't understand how everything turns into an arguement nowadays. eveyrbody has something up their ass.

LOL, nice try, but the cars are not limited for safety reasons in America. If that were the case, then no car would go above 75 MPH, which is the speed limit. The cars are limited by the MFG's plain and simple. If it was for safety reasons (going to give your logic a thought here) then why would the Z06 Corvette be allowed to hit 191+ Mph while the BMW M3 is limited at 155 Mph? We all know the BMW M5 can easily pass the 155 Mph mark, so it must be limited by the MFG.

the 155mph limit is something all the german manufacturers agreed to do. their cars can do much faster. (hi end anyway) i cant remember why they did it (think it was to curve the speeds on Autobahns)

from wiki "Many car manufacturers (including Mercedes, BMW and Audi) limit the speed of their cars electronically to 250 km/h (155 mph); this is only a gentlemen's agreement, not a legal requirement."

"It started out years ago as a ?gentlemen?s agreement?. Now, the 155-mph speed limit found on Audi, BMW, Lexus, and Mercedes cars may be lifted after years of being a fact of life. Started as a means to prevent government regulation, this self-regulation is not followed by all manufacturers out side of these four. With more and more manufacturers producing cars that are significantly faster, these four are talking about lifting the limit on their regular production vehicles. The limit removal is being looked into by Audi, BMW, and Lexus. Lexus was not one of the original manufacturers when the limits first were imposed". here

M3 cant do much beyond 160 anyway so the limit doesnt have a huge effect.

The M3 can hit about 167 uncapped. If you noticed, I also mentioned the M5, and the M5 is one monster of a car which can easily hit 190+. Anyway not sure on what the point of your post was. If it was trying to counter my point, it did nothing of the sort. Again, the speed limiter isn't for safety, which is what I was argueing against. The fact that all german car makers agreed to a 155 MPH cap, still shows it was a decision on the car maker themselves, not some government cap.

I subscribe to Car & Driver, Road and Track, MotorTrend etc... So I have also been exposed to the information you presented.

Ok, I am done with the car tangent.

Edit ** Sorry, I just reread your post, it seems you were just being supplimentary! :thumbsup:

 

[Munky]

OK, back on topic. Suggesting that Nv intentionally held back performance is just rubbish. They might not have put as much effort into speed and optimizations as they are now (to better compete with the x1800) but why would the company decide to limit their own high end products? The x850 was no slouch in modern games, and if i were Nv I'd want to get as high gain over the x850 as possible to sway people to buy the new product. IMO, the only reason we're seeing all these driver tweaks, and SLi tweaks (working w/o a bridge, combining cards from different vendors) is to compete with the x1800 and the upcoming crossfire.

 

[nitromullet]

I've been thinking about this, and I really don't think NV held back performance. If you check out guru3d's driver section, you will see that they had the 80.40's available on June 30, with files dated June 13. Given the fact that people have even mentioned that the latest leaked betas still have a few issues (I haven't seen any), I would imagine that the 80.40 were simply not ready for for release yet. Personally, I wouldn't consider not releasing a driver because of stability issues as NV withholding higher performance drivers so they could release them at a more strategic time.

I think the faster they could make the 7800GTX, the more they could push ATI to ramp up the clockspeeds on the X1800XT, which appears to be what is keeping ATI from launching. The longer NV has the 7800GTX in the market without any competition, the longer they have to work on their next gen. Meanwhile, it puts more and more pressure on ATI, gives them a shorter product cycle, and less time to work on their next generation if they want to stay competative.

The whole withholding the driver theory doesn't make sense, and just sounds like sensationalism by the Inq. I like how they link to another one of their purely speculative pieces of journalism from years ago as proof that this happens all the time. All that means to me is that the Inq has had the exact same unfounded accusations against NV more than once.

 

[imported_dwalton]

Mad? Upset? I am lost. I don?t understand why anyone would be mad at nvidia for providing additional performance to a card for free especially when it comes to the 7800GTX.

Lets put it in a different perspective.

You go to Walton?s Burger, because their SupaDupa Burger is the tastiest burger declared by the burger review sites on the net. You buy one and sit down. You take one bite and can?t believe how wonderfully juicy and tasty this burger is to you. Just as you are about to take a second bite, a Walton?s Burger waiter taps you on your shoulder and says, ?We just released this special secret sauce that we will put on all our burger to improve their tastiness. While we knew a burger could taste like this, but we held back to combat anything our competitor would put out. Here try it?. You put the special secret ?A81.26? sauce on your burger and take a bite. POW?BAM?BOOM, The taste is even better. This burger with this special sauce is the most ?wonderfulest?, ?tastehumongous? and ?crack on a bun? burger you ever ate. You stand up, look the waiter in the eye and then totally slapped the living s&^* out of him. You scream, ?You should have put this on the ?SupaDupa? burger from the start. It should have never been released to the general consumers with out this special sauce. I am going to AnandBurger?s forums and let everyone know my distaste over your actions?. You slowly walking away licking your fingers and saying to yourself, "OMG, I can't believe I went through all those "SupaDupa" burger sessions without this secret sauce".


I?m just joking. Even though I can?t understand you grievance to this possible ?restriction? by Nvidia, I think people have the right to feel anyway they want about any possible issue they have with Nvidia or any other company.

 

[Duvie]

Originally posted by: dwalton
Mad? Upset? I am lost. I don?t understand why anyone would be mad at nvidia for providing additional performance to a card for free especially when it comes to the 7800GTX.

Lets put it in a different perspective.

You go to Walton?s Burger, because their SupaDupa Burger is the tastiest burger declared by the burger review sites on the net. You buy one and sit down. You take one bite and can?t believe how wonderfully juicy and tasty this burger is to you. Just as you are about to take a second bite, a Walton?s Burger waiter taps you on your shoulder and says, ?We just released this special secret sauce that we will put on all our burger to improve their tastiness. While we knew a burger could taste like this, but we held back to combat anything our competitor would put out. Here try it?. You put the special secret ?A81.26? sauce on your burger and take a bite. POW?BAM?BOOM, The taste is even better. This burger with this special sauce is the most ?wonderfulest?, ?tastehumongous? and ?crack on a bun? burger you ever ate. You stand up, look the waiter in the eye and then totally slapped the living s&^* out of him. You scream, ?You should have put this on the ?SupaDupa? burger from the start. It should have never been released to the general consumers with out this special sauce. I am going to AnandBurger?s forums and let everyone know my distaste over your actions?. You slowly walking away licking your fingers and saying to yourself, "OMG, I can't believe I went through all those "SupaDupa" burger sessions without this secret sauce".


I?m just joking. Even though I can?t understand you grievance to this possible ?restriction? by Nvidia, I think people have the right to feel anyway they want about any possible issue they have with Nvidia or any other company.

Exatcly since you likely bought the crad based on numbers you got in revews then...you based it on how it beat cards then...this is the bonus that most Nvidia owners have long enjoyed wiith forceware drivers...

I for one with my NU cannot seem to get it to run more then 50% on my dual core in 3 games I have tested t 1600x1200, max settings, max AA...eventhough it seemes a bit laggy which should suggest gpu limitations.....

 

[reever]

Originally posted by: ArchAngel777

Originally posted by: otispunkmeyer

Originally posted by: Drayvn
Ok if you read the benchies for Doom 3 for High Quality settings.

That is just BS. an average of 75FPS from all the other drivers except for one. and it then suddenly gets a 40FPS increase....

Hmm. Intentionally held back....

thats because of the dual core i think. the rel 80.xx drivers are optimized to give a good boost on dual core systems, and i think in doom3 the cpu matters becuase the engines limited to 60fps maybe? or that the drivers use the cpu for the shader look up tables i dont know

Correct, Anand had mentioned in a review not to long ago that Doom3 was CPU limited, big time. Since these new drives now use Dual Core, well, I think it speaks for itself. Doom3 shows some awesome performance that we can expect from that Engine, at least .

OpenGL already has native multi-core support

 

[Wreckage]

NVIDIA traditionally offers performance boosts with its new drivers. This has been going on for years.

Nothing more to see here, move on.

Now a 512MB 7800ultra would be a smack in ATI's face.

 

[Gstanfor]

Would I be upset about not already having the performance increase these drivers provide (and in my experience, they do provide a performance increase in games)? No, of course not. You naturally expect performance to increase as drivers evolve.

On IQ, with these drivers it is absolutely top notch, clearly better than the 77.xx series drivers (with the exception of 3DMark05).

On performance, these drivers are clearly faster than previous drivers in games, not just benchmarks demos (in some demos/benches they can actually be slightly slower in my experience).

To address Archangels low res only performance crap, I'm a big fan of nVidia's unofficial 16x AA mode (enable it with nHancer) and I do most of my gaming @ 1600x1200 or 1920x1440. The 16x AA at these resolutions clearly performs better than in previous drivers, in my experience.

 

[Ackmed]

Originally posted by: dwalton
Mad? Upset? I am lost. I don?t understand why anyone would be mad at nvidia for providing additional performance to a card for free especially when it comes to the 7800GTX.

Lets put it in a different perspective.

I didnt read anything past this, as you must not have read the whole thread. Its not a question of if "nvidia providing additional performance". Nobody who had the card would be mad if they just some how happened to squeeze more performance, as drivers matured.

Its IF (and I stress if) NV held performance back on purpose. Yes it would make me mad, because I could have had the performance the last several months. How would getting it now, be better than having it the whole time? I just dont understand this logic.

But as Ive said, I dont think that they would do this, so Im not going to get worked up. I also dont think there is a 10fps gain across the board.

 

[Vernor]

Originally posted by: Ackmed
I dont think they would. I for one, as a consumer, would be mad.

If there were proof.

 

[biostud]

Hopefully the held back 200%

 

[Ackmed]

Originally posted by: Vernor

Originally posted by: Ackmed
I dont think they would. I for one, as a consumer, would be mad.

If there were proof.

Please read, before posting. Ive said several times that I dont think that they did. As I said in the same post, which you didnt include.

 

[Vernor]

Exactly.

They could easily do it, and most likely it would never get out.

 

[akugami]

If I was one of those who bought a 7800GTX early and found out it had been neutered just so they could claim increased performance when the X1800 came out, I'd be royally PO'ed. And don't use the car speed analogy for this one. If you want to use a car analogy. I'd say it'd be the same as buying car1 and getting a decent 35mpg. Then 6 months later you find out car1 is getting a onboard system change free at your local dealer that will boost your car fuel efficiency to 40mpg to compete with newly released car2.

I don't think nVidia held anything back. They could have gotten all the fence sitters if the 7800's could have been made to perform better. Most likely nVidia has performed some driver optimizations for the 7800's that increase performance in certain situations only and for the most part it will not increase performance by any major amount.