10 replies to this topic

[Bosco]

The article can be found here

[r_target]

I don't see what the big deal is about this.

[rein]

neither do i! Their optimizations seem legitamate. Its not like you can notice the difference in image quality if theyre not rendering the stuff you cant see!

[the11ama]

It is in the sense that Nvidia was given crap for the same thing (I know that technically it isn't, just like brown and black-and-white cows standing together.) In a sense it may not be cheating, but it is an attempt to raise scores by cutting quality, however small. Nvidia and ATI are now equal in the renderer's doghouse in my mind. Is it a big deal? No, it's just competition. But tell that to those who've raised hell about it.

[kurosen]

What it comes down to is business image... If later on down the line, ATI comes out with some super vidcard, people might speculate that said cards scores were attained through foul play like the case that is occuring now. Even though it doesn't affect the pretty pixels much (assuming they do "mess around with it"), it gives the buyer a sense of being "0\/\//\/3d"

I personally don't care so long as it can OC and push those frames at ludacris speed (a cookie for the first person to guess where that term came from )

Sorry to go offtrack for a minute but speaking of which, what is a STABLE clockrate for an All-In-Wonder 8500 128MB (Radeon 8500 clockrates will also be helpful)?

[the11ama]

Well hey! Can I have that cookie for saying "Spaceballs"?!
(at least I think that's what you're talking about, another cookie for the latin stuff)
But I agree with your sentiments, Kurosen, which is why they're even in my book now. But if it runs great, looks great, and at a great price, I would buy one even if it meant I was "owned" (j/k). I just want a card that doesn't have to cheat to have good performance. Oh well.

[kurosen]

Here's your cookie a rabbit, it was spaceballs

@

[r_target]

It is in the sense that Nvidia was given crap for the same thing (I know that technically it isn't, just like brown and black-and-white cows standing together.)  In a sense it may not be cheating, but it is an attempt to raise scores by cutting quality, however small.  Nvidia and ATI are now equal in the renderer's doghouse in my mind.  Is it a big deal?  No, it's just competition.  But tell that to those who've raised hell about it.

I don't really think it's the same thing at all though.What the ATI guy said made perfect sense to me.Why render something 16x when it can be done in 2x and look the same?It's only comparable to the NVidia SNAFU in the sense that it erodes consumer confidence.You're dead-on about that one.

[rein]

Im not sure if its true. but i read that nvidias optimizations were specifically for benchmarks. (ie 3dmark2003 and aquamark3) and not for games. I dont know if its true or not tho.

All i know is after seeing the shadermark comparisons between the two, i prefer ati. In farcry benchmarks the x800xt and 9800ultra are neck and neck. But when you compare lighting effects between the two manufacturers the nvidia card are very blocky. Ive seen this example in more than one review (plus theres many complaints about this and low framerates from nvidia owners on the farcry forums - its ironic because the came is a "The way its meant to be played" game) . So im wondering if nvidia cards were forced to run higher resolution shaders, what would their actual shader performance be?

shader quality comparisons

performance benchmarks