Ubisoft - paid in full by Nvidia?

[T2k]

This is from [H]: http://www.hardocp.com/news/2010/10/20/benchmark_wars

I fully agree with Kyle, this is downright disgusting from Ubisoft (Again! Assassin's Creed etc NV-supported-patented-prohibited parts rings a bell?) - AMD says

AMD has demonstrated to Ubisoft tessellation performance improvements that benefit all GPUs, but the developer has chosen not to implement them in the preview benchmark. For that reason, we are working on a driver-based solution in time for the final release of the game that improves performance without sacrificing image quality. In the meantime we recommend you hold off using the benchmark as it will not provide a useful measure of performance relative to other DirectX® 11 games using tessellation.

Scandal after scandal after scandal at Ubisoft, always something that gives NV some huge advantage...

...or the utterly retarded and completely broken always-on Internet-based DRM in Ubisoft games which failed so spectacularly in every single game they enabled in...

...Ubisoft is the absolut lowlife of the industry, period.



This thread has burned up from all the flaming, and cannot be resurrected.

Super Moderation BFG10K.

 

[MentalIlness]

...Ubisoft is the absolut lowlife of the industry, period.

At least they are in good company with NV.

 

[SlowSpyder]

So the benchmark is incomplete, it doesn't use AMD's improvements is what I am reading? Nvidia likes the benchmark because it shows them in a better light?

 

[Grooveriding]

No surprise, NV was using Hawx 2 to showcase some stuff at their GTC recently.

Expect to see pcper, tech report, benchmarkreviews and guru3d all using this benchmark ():thumbsdown:

 

[nemesismk2]

It makes perfect sense for Nvidia to gain any advantage they can.

If you don't like what Ubisoft have done then don't buy their games and in the future they will think twice.

 

[railven]

It makes perfect sense for Nvidia to gain any advantage they can.

If you don't like what Ubisoft have done then don't buy their games and in the future they will think twice.

In this case we (PC Gamers) don't really matter to be frank. The last DRM fiasco gave them a nice black eye in the PC world but when console versions of the same game sold in the millions - why should they care?

I'm surprised they're still releasing PC games to be honest haha.

 

[notty22]

AMD is getting touchy over tesselation.
Huddy mentioned it in that article.
But he also mentioned most games were being developed on AMD dx11 hardware . So what exactly is the problem ?
Nvidia is stronger in hardware tesselation still.
AMD does not want anyone to use Lost Planet 2 ?
Maybe they will make a review guide next ? lol

 

[nemesismk2]

AMD is getting touchy over tesselation.
Huddy mentioned it in that article.
But he also mentioned most games were being developed on AMD dx11 hardware . So what exactly is the problem ?
Nvidia is stronger in hardware tesselation still.
AMD does not want anyone to use Lost Planet 2 ?
Maybe they will make a review guide next ? lol

Lost Planet 2 runs great on AMD hardware. I can use max settings with my previous video card which was a Powercolor Radeon 4770.

 

[MentalIlness]

I'd just say let NV have Ubisoft. Maybe they would think twice if AMD abandoned them. And to be honest, what was the last actual good game from Ubi anyway ? And from upcoming releases, I see absolutely nothing I am interested in.

Hell, let them go console only. They cannot make a game run worse on the Xbox than they can the PS3 anyway.

Maybe this is confirmation that AMD has a huge increase in Tessellation and NV knows it but can do nothing about it. Grasp at straws much NV ?

 

[MentalIlness]

It makes perfect sense for Nvidia to gain any advantage they can.

If you don't like what Ubisoft have done then don't buy their games and in the future they will think twice.

The only games Ubisoft has ever released that I liked alot were Far Cry and Far Cry 2. Everything else just blows. Except maybe for the Myst Series.

But anyway, One person does "not" make a difference what so ever, but I will not be buying any more NV hardware either. Reason is, I have been away from AMD for far too long.

AMD....will be sending you about "11" C-notes in the coming weeks.

 

[railven]

So from the reading I take it AMD tried to get Ubisoft to implement code that would improve tessellation on both sets of DX11 hardware.

I take it the current tessellation implementation was coded by nVidia and designed to use some kind of heavy (unnecessary?) tessellation?

Anyone catch the part at the end of the article where they say nVidia hardware still has better tessellation than "AMD's latest."

Does that mean the 6k series?

 

[Idontcare]

AMD is getting touchy over tesselation.

I remember when the Unigine heaven benchmark was THE tessellation bench preferred by AMD...until fermi was released.

It seems AMD can't seem to find enough bad things to say about tessellation these days. What was once their pride and joy has now become the pariah child of the DX11 feature-set.

I don't do anything that uses tessellation so my opinions are really formed by these marketing wars, but it has definitely left me with the impression that AMD thought tessellation was in the bag for them up until fermi was released and now they are still licking their wounds.

If this perception is wrong or in err then I suppose that is just further proof of marketing fail.

 

[dguy6789]

They're just companies after all. They'll do whatever they can to make themselves look good. AMD obviously wouldn't want reviewers to use a game that makes them look worse. It's no different from Nvidia telling every big reviewer to change AMD driver settings to slow the AMD card down. A good journalist would ignore such requests from either company.

 

[notty22]

For people that skip around and read all the tech sites for new news, blog postings, representative comments ect. its obvious to me, they are making a preemptive information impression about their tessellation performance, increases in their new cards, and what we the gamers really need.
Didn't Nvidia do that when they said lower level hardware didn't need dx11, when they didn't have any dx11 cards ?
How was that received

 

[darckhart]

afaic, all review sites can use whatever games they want as "benchmarks." certainly some become de facto like crysis, but what's one drop in the vast plethora of games? certainly my decision to purchase whichever card is not dependent on the performance of a single game (unless that's the one i really cared about playing). so it performs worse in that one title? who cares? (besides, i haven't seen any games use tesselation in a way that i've cared about anyway. and yea, i hate ubisoft anyway. i'm surprised anyone still buys their pc ports.)

 

[bryanW1995]

I remember when the Unigine heaven benchmark was THE tessellation bench preferred by AMD...until fermi was released.

It seems AMD can't seem to find enough bad things to say about tessellation these days. What was once their pride and joy has now become the pariah child of the DX11 feature-set.

I don't do anything that uses tessellation so my opinions are really formed by these marketing wars, but it has definitely left me with the impression that AMD thought tessellation was in the bag for them up until fermi was released and now they are still licking their wounds.

If this perception is wrong or in err then I suppose that is just further proof of marketing fail.

+1 for brute force approach. I love my gtx 460 in civ 5. hopefully 6 series will improve tess significantly, though from their recent statements I wonder if it will be any better than fermi.

 

[Scali]

What is AMD trying to say, really?
That the level of tessellation used is too high for the 6000-series to handle, and that they have proposed a watered-down version to Ubisoft?
Ofcourse more tessellation than what AMD can handle "will not provide a useful measure of performance relative to other DirectX® 11 games using tessellation" by default, according to AMD.

 

[Genx87]

What is AMD trying to say, really?
That the level of tessellation used is too high for the 6000-series to handle, and that they have proposed a watered-down version to Ubisoft?
Ofcourse more tessellation than what AMD can handle "will not provide a useful measure of performance relative to other DirectX® 11 games using tessellation" by default, according to AMD.

I mean really, is this AMD trying to poison the water because the 6000 series still blows with regards to Tesselation? I guess we will find out soon enough. Just hope to god review sites dont bow to AMDs whining and let us know how the 6000 series really performs in this metric. Whether they beat Fermi or not.

 

[blastingcap]

This is from [H]: http://www.hardocp.com/news/2010/10/20/benchmark_wars

I fully agree with Kyle, this is downright disgusting from Ubisoft (Again! Assassin's Creed etc NV-supported-patented-prohibited parts rings a bell?) - AMD says

AMD has demonstrated to Ubisoft tessellation performance improvements that benefit all GPUs, but the developer has chosen not to implement them in the preview benchmark. For that reason, we are working on a driver-based solution in time for the final release of the game that improves performance without sacrificing image quality. In the meantime we recommend you hold off using the benchmark as it will not provide a useful measure of performance relative to other DirectX® 11 games using tessellation.

Scandal after scandal after scandal at Ubisoft, always something that gives NV some huge advantage...

...or the utterly retarded and completely broken always-on Internet-based DRM in Ubisoft games which failed so spectacularly in every single game they enabled in...

...Ubisoft is the absolut lowlife of the industry, period.

My respect for Kyle keeps rising. It can't be fun to have to take on both AMD and NV (pointing out CF is broken, highlighting NV's benchmark shenanigans, etc.). He hasn't taken the easy way out and submitted to reviewer guide requests like so many other review sites have done. We're already down to just a handful of truly independent and competent review sites.

 

[Creig]

I mean really, is this AMD trying to poison the water because the 6000 series still blows with regards to Tesselation? I guess we will find out soon enough. Just hope to god review sites dont bow to AMDs whining and let us know how the 6000 series really performs in this metric. Whether they beat Fermi or not.

Really? Since when has AMD dictated review terms? I thought Nvidia was the one telling reviewers what benchmarks they can and can't run.

 

[Genx87]

Really? Since when has AMD dictated review terms? I thought Nvidia was the one telling reviewers what benchmarks they can and can't run.

Did you not read the link? They sent out an email asking they dont use the benchmark until they figure it out.

 

[MentalIlness]

Really? Since when has AMD dictated review terms? I thought Nvidia was the one telling reviewers what benchmarks they can and can't run.

There is plenty of proof that NV does this. I have read articles myself in the last several years. But I cannot recall an article where AMD has.

:thumbsup:

 

[Lonyo]

Using an early build benchmark in a review is stupid anyway.
The fact that Ubisoft/NV are trying to encourage reviewers to use it is the issue, not the implementation of tessellation.

The "problem" with the tessellation will only occur if they do stick with their current method rather than choosing to put in something which is faster for everyone as claimed by AMD.

Sending an early build benchmark which is 1) A canned benchmark and 2) Might not represent final performance and then encouraging its use is what is problematic.

As the article says, they don't like canned benchmarks, and typically they are poor estimators of real performance. Encouraging use of something which may not have any real bearing on actual performance is what I take issue with. For all we know NV want a benchmark out there that shows them in a good light, and Ubisoft haven't had a chance to improve their tessellation.

 

[Creig]

Did you not read the link? They sent out an email asking they dont use the benchmark until they figure it out.

I read the link. In it, they requested that reviewers hold off publishing H.A.W.X. 2 tessellation figures until their driver level fix is available. Otherwise, initial reviews will show lower H.A.W.X. 2 tessellation figures than the hardware is truly capable of.

I fail to see what's so wrong with that. Or did I leave something out?

 

[Schadenfroh]

...Ubisoft is the absolut lowlife of the industry, period.

No doubt, were they not one of the publishers that tried to shove StarForce down everyone's throats?