[Rav]

Saw this pointed out at www.hothardware.com All I can say is

NVIDIA:
"3DMark03 combines custom artwork with a custom rendering engine that creates a set of demo scenes that, while pretty, have very little to do with actual games. It is much better termed a demo than a benchmark. The examples included in this report illustrate that 3DMark03 does not represent games, can never be used as a stand-in for games, and should not be used as a gamers’ benchmark."

NVIDIA:
"Unfortunately, Futuremark chose a flight simulation scene for this test (game 1). This genre of games is not only a small fraction of the game market (approximately 1%), but utilizes a simplistic rendering style common to this genre. Further, the specific scene chosen is a high altitude flight simulation, which is indicative of only a small fraction of that 1%."

"For all intents and purposes game tests 2 and 3 are the same test. They use the same rendering paths and the same feature set. The sole difference in these tests appears to be the artwork. This fact alone raises some questions about breadth of game genres addressed by 3DMark03. --- These two tests attempt to duplicate the “Z-first” rendering style used in the upcoming first-person shooter game, “Doom 3”. They have a “Doom-like” look, but use a bizarre rendering method that is far from Doom 3 or any other known game application."

"Finally, the choice of pixel shaders in game tests 2 and 3 is also odd. These tests use ps1.4 for all the pixel shaders in the scenes. Fallback versions of the pixel shaders are provided in ps1.1 for hardware that doesn’t support ps1.4. Conspicuously absent from these scenes, however, is any ps1.3 pixel shaders. Current DirectX 8.0 (DX8) games, such as Tiger Woods and Unreal Tournament 2003, all use ps1.1 and ps1.3 pixel shaders. Few, if any, are using ps1.4."

"This year’s 3DMark has a new nature scene (game 4). It is intended to represent the new DirectX 9.0 (DX9) applications targeted for release this year. The key issue with this game scene is that it is barely DX9."

NVIDIA:
"So, where do you find a true gamers’ benchmark? How about running actual games? Most popular games include a benchmark mode for just this purpose. Doom3, Unreal Tournament 2003, and Serious Sam Second Encounter are all far better indicators of current and upcoming game performance."

[funnyperson1]

i agree with them, but somehow i feel they will change their tune once GeforceFX (5800 non ultra) comes out, and once NV35 comes out and after they optimized for it they will talk about its great signigicance in representing the performance of our DX9 cards......thats the way business works.....

[PreservedSwine]

The interest in the recent 3DMark03 release has been phenomenal. We see the active discussion being a testimony to the importance of having neutral performance assessment tools available to independent media and consumers. In light of the interest, we feel that it is important to re-iterate the design process of 3DMark03 and other our products.
Our role as a benchmark developer is based on the fact that the computer industry and consumers need independent and neutral performance metrics. These tools should become publicly available as soon as new technologies arrive, in order to enable true apples-to-apples comparisons. They also should be easy to use that consumers themselves can run them to verify the results.

All Futuremark benchmark products are built in co-operation with our Beta Program partners, which consist of the major technology manufacturers (detailed information of the Beta Program is available from http://www.futuremark.com/betaprogram/). In order to make sure that all new technologies are measured in a correct and impartial manner, we work with all beta members who have equal access and opportunity for participating in the benchmark development.

A white paper is available that describes 3DMark03 in technical detail. It describes what is being measured, how it is measured and why. 3DMark03 is an accurate tool for analyzing the performance of current generation 3D accelerators. The white paper is publicly available for download from: http://www.futuremark.com/companyinf...hitepaper.pdf. We will continue to support the previous product, 3DMark2001, as a solid measurement tool for benchmarking the previous generations of 3D accelerators.

3DMark03, as well as all other Futuremark benchmarks, are developed with uncompromising integrity and do not favor or discredit any particular manufacturer. We will gather all comments, concerns from all of our constituents worldwide. We will address all issues and/or concerns in the weeks and months ahead.

Tero Sarkkinen
Executive Vice President of Sales and Marketing

There you have it...fair or unfair, it treats all GPU's the same.

It is pretty interesting to see that the people more likely to get their panties in a twist happen to own Nvidia products.

Frankly, I'm wondering just what took people so long to see that 3D mark isn't the main indicatore of a cards performance. It never was. That's what games are for people, nothings changed.........3d-mark is as accurate today as it was 1 year ago, and I find Nvidia's comments increasingly unprofessional. Do you see any other graphics card company blasting it? My goodness, the Parhelia doesn't even score over 900!!

I'm telling you, these guys (Nvidia) are paranoid, lashing out at any and everything they sense as a threat. Their PR dept. is out of control. They need step up to the plate and take responsibility, and stop blaming every other company on the planet for their failures.

[Evnas]

Originally posted by PreservedSwine


There you have it...fair or unfair, it treats all GPU's the same.

Sorta...there still driver optimizations for it. ATi had a prerelease copy of it from Futuremark and was able to optimize for it before it was released...nVidia's idea of "optimizing"...killing image quality once again

[dropadrop]

Nvidea has been on the beta testing team, and knew what to expect. Still it seems that they are only making noise now... In a while people will use it just as they have used the previous ones. The nvidia cards that are doing badly, are based on old technology, and while it's ok to argue that modern games don't use that technology, future ones will. The thing I'm more supprised about, is that cpu speed still affects the results so little. Maby the cards are still just cpu limited or something.

[Maxvla]

Originally posted by PreservedSwine
I'm telling you, these guys (Nvidia) are paranoid, lashing out at any and everything they sense as a threat. Their PR dept. is out of control. They need step up to the plate and take responsibility, and stop blaming every other company on the planet for their failures.

put yourself in their shoes.

try completely re-doing your entire chip fab and still be expected to be the best card on the block with your first try. once ati goes at .13 micron they will have the same problems nvidia is having and the roles will reverse once again.

i give major kudos to nvidia for going .13 first. this gives them an immense lead that noone seems to understand right now... but soon will.

[Evnas]

Originally posted by dropadrop
Nvidea has been on the beta testing team, and knew what to expect.

According to HardOCP, and some other sites, nVidia had no part in the development of 3DMark2k3, and didnt even have a pre-release copy of it, only ATi.

[Bouklah23]

Nvidia:
Further, the specific scene chosen is a high altitude flight simulation, which is indicative of only a small fraction of that 1%."

Do we all fly our airplanes at 10 feet off the ground in heavy commercial/residential areas? LOL

Futuremarks probably got a reason why they did that, specifically on rendering modes AA, AF .. etc.

NVIDIA:
"So, where do you find a true gamers’ benchmark? How about running actual games? Most popular games include a benchmark mode for just this purpose. Doom3, Unreal Tournament 2003, and Serious Sam Second Encounter are all far better indicators of current and upcoming game performance."

SERIOUS SAM SECOND ENCOUNTER!!!! wow.. I can run that game on a mx440 1600x1200 32b and get like 300fps.. They should have worried about NEW games like the ones in their release .. Futuremark also has to look into the future and put things out that may scorch cards that are out now but in the long run newer chipsets looking forward to like a Geforce 6 or 7 and a R11000 .. those will be the cards that can push numbers like ti4600s/r9700's can do now on 3dmark2001.. I dont flame nvidia in general but I still think there are a few stale peas in every pod.

[Evnas]

Originally posted by Maxvla

put yourself in their shoes.

try completely re-doing your entire chip fab and still be expected to be the best card on the block with your first try. once ati goes at .13 micron they will have the same problems nvidia is having and the roles will reverse once again.

i give major kudos to nvidia for going .13 first. this gives them an immense lead that noone seems to understand right now... but soon will.

Not quite. Both nVidia and ATi dont producae their own chips. Infact, the ONLY companies that do are Intel and AMD. nVidia and ATi both use TSMC to produce their chips. TSMC hadent completed the .13 micron process when nVidia wanted to do the switch, and so nVidia had to wait for them to finish. Now that TSMC has "perfected" the .13 micron process, ATi only has to develop a compatable design (which has been done obviously since the RV350 tapped out a long time ago). ATi will have none of the problems nVidia did with the move to the new process...the only problems they would have would be design/yeild problems

[skid]

SERIOUS SAM SECOND ENCOUNTER

Yeah, that's probably becuase Serious Sam Second Encounter is usually ran in Open GL and Nvidia has very good optimizations fo ranything Open GL Based, of course they want you to bench the games that they have heavy optimizations for.

I agree with PreservedSwine....nVidia is paranoid, heads are gonna roll at nVidia HQ.

[PhobMX]

Originally posted by Bouklah23
SAM SECOND ENCOUNTER!!!! wow.. I can run that game on a mx440 1600x1200 32b and get like 300fps..

post some screenies or quit your bs, not even my dead gf3 could run 1024x784 at 100Hz

[Illah]

Man, you guys are always talking the worst about companies. It's either black or white, no grey. Fact is, the whole world is in the grey, there is never black or white.

I don't think this is some paranoid PR move or some way to 'save face'. I completely agree, and not because I like nVidia or not, but because it's what I feel about 3DMark. This new one is pure hype.

The countdown, the mass download hysteria, the previews, teasers, etc... They released this thing the same way you're seeing the new Matrix movie being released. "The commercial debuts during _____ show! Watch and you'll see 30 seconds of quick cuts!" and people flock like sheep.

3DMark is riding a wave of hype and those who score well defend it while those who score poorly hate it, and some just look at it as the next step. I don't know, I think futuremark is gonna see the real reaction to this crap after the hype dies down a few weeks from now. Nobody is gonna buy this thing, even less will run it. It's the Winamp3 of benchmarks, lot's of extra fancy crap nobody wants.

--Illah

[Kunaak]

I don't care who, sayid waht, NVidia or future mark or anyone else.

for me, the benchmark it's self is just junk, it's ugly as hell, and has pre-playstation era graphics, and looks like a art project from a first year IT student in graphics designs.
it's soo bad its almost funny to watch...
then you watch it, and the rest of the tests either repeat themselves or have the same basic idea.

when I saw the ATI car demo for DX9 and the other demos, I thought DX9 was gonna be smoothest thing around, then I saw 3dmark 2003 and it felt like a joke.
laughable graphics, repeating tests, random scoring, now a major player in the graphics industry is calling it a joke.

all I know is, a 3dmark 2003 score is nothing to be interested in or care about any more.
so I simply stopped using it.
I have plenty of games to do tests with.

the little things ruind it for me too.

1. the free version takes all sense of "community" away from the whole thing, cause now you have to buy Everything, not one thing is free, other then a basic test.

2. can't change settings, like 800x600 at 16 bit color.

3. can't keep more then 5 scores in your profile.

4. no ones gonna pay 40-50 dollars for this, so now theres no real sense of competition to it, no real fun, other just getting the highest number you can. cause face it, no ones gonna be on the 1600x1200 benchmarks, or 640x480 benchmarks... cause no one wants to pay that kinda money for such a ugly test.

5. the ability to cheat is still there, as soon as Oppainter got top with AMD, there was a celeron 2 ghz on top with a 8500 LE, no overclock, at 8500. why bother if they don't even monitor for fakes? go to the PCmark2002, on top theres a score with a P4 at 5.55 ghz, with a 400 FSB, no overclock.... anyone see where the numbers are wrong there?
if it's that easy to cheat, and so obviously, and still have the scores there a month later, why bother...

6. the scoring system is really horrible.
would it really have been so horrible to keep the old scoring system so this benchmark didn't make people feel like thier computer was crap just cause thier 2 ghz and ti 4600 only score 1600 points, when they use to get 12,000...
why not juust keep it the same, and let the numbers get higher, so you can get 30 thousand with high overclock and such eventually... and people could still have a decent score that didn't feel like something that just made them feel thier computer was some how inferior cause a generic benchmark based on no game in existance told them so.

7. basically, just the loss of "community" is what killed this for me.
it was fun, cause it was free, we could all compete on the same scales, and how ever we wanted.
now, you wanna play, you pay...
you get nothing, but you still pay....
to me, this is the equivilant of expecting people to pay for email, like the USPS tried to pass in congress a few years ago, with 104.
(they wanted a nickel for every email you sent)

[Rav]

Originally posted by Kunaak
when I saw the ATI car demo for DX9 and the other demos, I thought DX9 was gonna be smoothest thing around, then I saw 3dmark 2003 and it felt like a joke.

I know EXACTLY how that feels. The DX9 demos from ATI are INCREDIBLE. They run smooth at high res and even with AA (some demos turn it on by default!). I expected a lot more from 3D2K3. Anyone whos seen the ATI waterfall demo can agree that it looks better than the new Nature bench.

Oh well time will tell.

-Rav

[Ugmore Baggage]

Whatever happened to "Don't shoot the messenger"?

Poor nVidia can't win races so they don't like races anymore. No big surprise, but don't shoot the messenger.

[RangerJoe]

Originally posted by Evnas


According to HardOCP, and some other sites, nVidia had no part in the development of 3DMark2k3, and didnt even have a pre-release copy of it, only ATi.

HOLY CRAP, Evnas is defending nVidia....the world is coming to and end...oh man..lol..anyway

i agree with nvidia, 3dmark 2001 did about the same thing, excluding test 1 and test 3. ive never seen a game which entails walking through a field with flowers and trees..that is actually the part you play..not the cutscenes...game 3 is still pretty cutscene like, but more of a part of todays games. ive never seen a game where you fly around on a dragon either...but you get my point.

uhh..sooo...ya, i lost my train of though

[Jawsome]

Screw 3dmark

[Jawsome]

Originally posted by Ugmore Baggage
Whatever happened to "Don't shoot the messenger"?

Poor nVidia can't win races so they don't like races anymore. No big surprise, but don't shoot the messenger.

There are no messengers in races, wtf are you talking about?

[Evnas]

Originally posted by RangerJoe


HOLY CRAP, Evnas is defending nVidia....the world is coming to and end...oh man..lol..anyway

I was just stating the facts, not really defending either side

[Genocide]

While I agree with what Nvidia is saying, about how the new 3Dmark is totally unrealistic, I know they are only looking out for their interests, if all the GeForces scored really high on 3dMark03, they would be praising it and saying how great of a benchmark it is. The program favors ATI slightly, and really screws the geforces over with the way it handles Pixle Shaders 1.1 and 1.4 and how you get major points deducted for not being able to run the 4th test, even though it BARELY contains DX9 code. The entire thing is super hyped and quite frankly, I ran the program once and dont plan to again, its just a few minutes of pretty graphics, not a real benchmark at all.

Also I dont think its possible for a gf4mx to get over 10fps in SeriousSam:SE at 1600x1200 at the highest graphical settings, my GF2 GTS was choking at 25fps on highest settings and 1024x768, that game pushes a lot of polys but looks awesome. infact ima go play it a bit =D