Nvidia cheats on 3DMark with 177.39 drivers

[vaperstylz]

Read the stupid article people!!! According to FutureMark's rules this is cheating, there is no discussion - and that wont change unless nVidia buy FutureMark...

some light reading for your amusement: http://www.hothardware.com/News/NVIDIA_Responds_To_GPU_PhysX_Cheating_Allegation/ Please note the comments by all parties concerned. I really think that its time to move on.:shadedshu

 

[vaperstylz]

Read the stupid article people!!! According to FutureMark's rules this is cheating, there is no discussion - and that wont change unless nVidia buy FutureMark...

some light reading for your amusement: http://www.hothardware.com/News/NVIDIA_Responds_To_GPU_PhysX_Cheating_Allegation/ Please note the comments by all parties concerned. I really think that its time to move on.:shadedshu

A word from Futuremark: And what does Futuremark have to say about this? Oliver Baltuch of Futuremark had this to offer with respect to NVIDIA's new technology, 3DMark Vantage and the industry as a whole:
"The driver in question has not been submitted for authorization and is for demo purposes only. NVIDIA has followed the correct rules for driver authorization and the BDP by sending us the 177.35 driver (the same as AMD has sent us the 8.6 driver), both of which are currently undergoing the authorization process in our Quality Assurance area at this moment. Only drivers that have passed WHQL and our driver authorization process have comparable results that will be allowed for use in our ORB database and hall of fame.

Other drivers which have not been submitted will not be commented on. Otherwise, we would have to inspect every Beta and press driver that is released. Outside of this matter, we have been introduced to this technology from NVIDIA and it is truly innovative for future games and game development. As you know, we have an actual game coming as well and it could also make use of PhysX on the GPU.”

FM's "rules" and position on this matter. " we have been introduced to this technology from NVIDIA and it is truly innovative for future games and game development."

Funny right?

 

[Dark_Webster]

I don't take this a cheating way but...

If the CPU Test was supposed to be handled by the CPU, it should be handled by the CPU, not for the GPU or the PPU.
And, of course they can implement as they wish Ageia's technology.

Remember, 3DMark Vantage is an e-penis benchmark, so of course somebody is now or will be pissed about this.

ATI's cards may have DX10.1, but this doesn't give them advantage on the CPU test.

 

[OEGUSAndy]

http://ps3files.net/theme/2371 : SEE It! My first PS3 theme, lol!

red?

 

[tkpenalty]

Is having better hardware cheating now?

So that means, I'm cheated upgrading from a 9550 to a X1950PRO, and I cheated even more by installing a new CPU, Motherboard, RAM???





Serious comment: Inquirer honestly needs a reality check. 3D Mark Vantage is about performance, what I cannot understand is why the inquirer calls physics through GPU for the physics test cheating. And in what sense is 3d Mark explicitly a competition? It doesnt pay dividends except the e-penis for its users! My comment above highlights what the inquirer classifies as cheating; upgrading. That guy needs to get his fanboy vibes beaten out of him

 

[Dark_Webster]

This isn't about better hardware...it about CPU tests being run on a GPU.

If that's the problem, Futuremark should create a patch do lock the CPU test only for the CPU.

And, for me, the only thing that matters is the best price/performance ratio I can get and if I can play proper in real-time situations, like games. Not some synthetic benchmarks that increase e-penis.

 

[tkpenalty]

I love how this guy makes such a big fuss out of such small things.

 

[vaperstylz]

Man just relax and enjoy the fruits, life is good. Sometimes you just can't give away a good thing.

 

[OEGUSAndy]

Man just relax and enjoy the fruits, life is good. Sometimes you just can't give away a good thing.

 

[adrianx]

so... I read more...

first

what the PPU /physics is? same software calculation to obtain same visual effects like: deformation, explosions, impact and ~ all the real world law of physics. (that can be used in a game/simulation)

2) in one normal system this software calculation are the CPU job, because there are not actually have a specific hardware device. So in this case the need is to have a specific hardware device that can handle this kind of calculation. So from that the people from ageia, make the PPU.
So far all are ok, but .... not all the game/application use same software to have physics in game/application. that because, there are many software/game developers. the developers can use different physics engine, like havok, ageia, or any from the open source. Also the this physics engine can work a hardware device or with out a hardware device, in that case the CPU take the job.

ok, so the new driver from nvidia come and take the job from the CPU(in normal pc) or PPU (in the pc with ageia card) and execute the job in the GPU. And with this driver we have a new working concept.

3) the vantaje have test for CPU, GPU and physics. the "problem" is that the physic was designed to be run in CPU with or without PPU(ageia card). but this test is actually done it by GPU. The result is a logical (I think is logical) optimization for the all system (the pc). But the test are totally NOT REAL, is simple don't test the physics capability of the CPU (with/without PPU), It test the physics capability of the GPU. All the test results are not comparable, it's like you compare an apple with an chicken egg.

And an idea, because the actual GPU (ati and nvidia) are very solid, I believe that the ageia engine (like the havok engine) can be run even in a non nvidia card , but I know is not opensource

 

[DarkMatter]

link from OEGUSAndy

Oh dear. Bad example. Hit a ship broadside and you get a hole. The ship sinks. The ship doesnt EXPLODE INTO A THOUSAND PIECES.


Unphysics enchancement, the way its meant to be played, nVidia, (un)Physx department

That's what usually happens. i.e. In the attack to Pearl Harbor, that was the case with Nevada, Tenesse, Oklahoma, West Virginia, California and Utah battleships. But sometimes under some situations (the ones you would want to see in a game or a film) the ship DOES EXPLODE into a hellfire of flying debris, as was the case of Arizona battleship.
Don't know you but I definately want that one in my games. I'm all for realism except on those kind of things. We could make grenades real and boring too BTW and make cars not explode, and talking about films we could do a remake of Rocky films and kill the boxers in the first punch as that would be REAL. Nah, let's not do it.

 

[yogurt_21]

I fail to see any cheating here, as an nvidia card processing phyx in game would have the same advantage, which would tend to make it a performance reality. not cheating.

cheating is my r600 which can bust out the 3dmarks but cringes at dx10. lol but in the end all they cheated was me, not nvidia.

and besides it's a cpu test, whotf cares if an nvidia card is boosting an amd or intel's cpu scores? I rarely if ever look at the final score and judge performance, because a gtx280 will have a much higher overall score on an overclocked quad core yorkfield than an athlon 64 x2. I look at the graphics scores to compare graphics cards, and cpu scores to compare cpu's everyone else should do the same.

 

[JRMBelgium]

I fail to see any cheating here, as an nvidia card processing phyx in game would have the same advantage, which would tend to make it a performance reality. not cheating.

cheating is my r600 which can bust out the 3dmarks but cringes at dx10. lol but in the end all they cheated was me, not nvidia.

and besides it's a cpu test, whotf cares if an nvidia card is boosting an amd or intel's cpu scores? I rarely if ever look at the final score and judge performance, because a gtx280 will have a much higher overall score on an overclocked quad core yorkfield than an athlon 64 x2. I look at the graphics scores to compare graphics cards, and cpu scores to compare cpu's everyone else should do the same.

 

[OEGUSAndy]

no more cheating i assume

EDIT: I´m asking, why nvidia would gave up such an advantage...

 

[yogurt_21]

http://forums.techpowerup.com/showthread.php?t=64042

lmao now ati is "cheating" lol

 

[KainXS]

I wish I knew this method in high school

 

[Kursah]

In reality what is called cheating on either side for whatever card by whatever manufacturer, it's added benefits that the consumer pays for...if it's there, it better work, be used and be beneficial imo. Any whining or sniping at the 3Dmarks is worthless for many, sure there are many that live for the benchmarks...I hope you enjoy the 3DMarks as much as I game...a 3DMark won't change my outlook on getting the next game I want to play or cranking up my current favorite and enjoying smooth frames, in reality DOES IT REALLY MATTER? If it does...that means it's time to go outside imo, FM made a name for benchmarks for those that love to show off their e-peens, which is fine..if that's what one decides to live for, then dammit go for it! But I see so much more to REALITY that some company's touted benchmarks and a bunch of nay-sayer's stated "cheating" is a joke in my eyes, if it's supported and there, even if not official, oh well...just recently shown was the other side was VERY capable of kicking ass in the same situation...who cares let's just utilize what is provided and enoy it!

At least that's my personal view...I apologize to those may disagree or are offended, but there are definately more important things out there than getting mad becuase NV is able to get higher scores in the CPU end because FM couldn't block a GPU from doing PhysX, and then ATI cards were shown to kick just as much ass if not better in the same arena, with even more hacked setups than what the NV side had...really come on already...who really needs to care? Those who compete and maybe get some sort of earnings/living out of it imo.

I just hope both sides stay competetive in prices, performance and value, that's what I look for in replacement hardware, and I really hope the consumer doesn't end up losing because a 3DMark score was more important than the ACTUAL gaming experience.

 

[Bytor]

With all this said and Nvidia having the PhysX edge. If they bought out Ageia and that is now supported by them why wouldn't a Ageia card work in a ATI GPU setup? The drivers for that PhysX card would still be Nvidia and I think should render PhysX no matter what GPU you are using. I know these cards only have 128 DDR3 memory and are not as powerful as a high end GPU.
I have a Asus P1 PhysX card and the new drivers for it are Nvidia.

So let my 3 3870's render the graphics and the PhysX card do its thing side by side.

 

[adrianx]

after that.... I can say the vantage is a joke it simple don't reflect the real performance anymore, only display same numeric data

 

[Hayder_Master]

now i check too many sites and tests so it seems that realy nvidia cheats on 3DMark with 177.39 drivers, it is make a deal with future mark by using agia to give a high score, i think nvidia do this cuz it out of contesting with ati, ati go far with new 4xxx card's , nvidia must shame when using cheating tools

 

[imperialreign]

now i check too many sites and tests so it seems that realy nvidia cheats on 3DMark with 177.39 drivers, it is make a deal with future mark by using agia to give a high score, i think nvidia do this cuz it out of contesting with ati, ati go far with new 4xxx card's , nvidia must shame when using cheating tools

well - the thing against nVidia being that they have been guilty of optimizing drivers in the past to boost their performance in 3m06. They've been caught in the act a couple other times since, and typically, they change their drivers and release a "new" beta shortly after being caught (anyone remember the rendering issues in Crysis?).

As to this issue, though, I can't really call it cheating on nVidia's part, as the benchmark wasn't really desinged around having a seperate physics processing score - which, is what it really needs to balance this issue out. A PPU individual score could entail waht a CPU, GPU or dedicated PPU is capable of, instead of having to wrap physics processing results into either the CPU final score, or GPU final score.

TBH, I think we might end up seeing a revision patch for Vantage sometime in the near future - thanks to the physics enabling with nVidia's drivers.

 

[Wile E]

well - the thing against nVidia being that they have been guilty of optimizing drivers in the past to boost their performance in 3m06. They've been caught in the act a couple other times since, and typically, they change their drivers and release a "new" beta shortly after being caught (anyone remember the rendering issues in Crysis?).

As to this issue, though, I can't really call it cheating on nVidia's part, as the benchmark wasn't really desinged around having a seperate physics processing score - which, is what it really needs to balance this issue out. A PPU individual score could entail waht a CPU, GPU or dedicated PPU is capable of, instead of having to wrap physics processing results into either the CPU final score, or GPU final score.

TBH, I think we might end up seeing a revision patch for Vantage sometime in the near future - thanks to the physics enabling with nVidia's drivers.

Vantage has always taken advantage of PPU's. Nobody saw fit to complain when people were using Physx cards in the bench. This is no different.

Let's step back for a moment, and look at 06. A killer cpu can add thousands of points to your score. So is it cheating when somebody upgrades their cpu to something faster to get a higher 06 score? The extra speed generally doesn't actually help in games (except in rare or extreme cases), yet nobody complains that QX's are an unfair advantage.

And ATI has been caught cheating in 3DMark (and other benches/games for that matter) as well. They both do it, so it's not really a valid point to bring up in either case.

 

[imperialreign]

Vantage has always taken advantage of PPU's. Nobody saw fit to complain when people were using Physx cards in the bench. This is no different.

I had meant that there should've been a seperate score entirelly for PP, not wrapping it into either the GPU or CPU score.

Vantage was supposed to be the "next-gen" benchmark, just as 3m06 was the "next-gen" when released. They accounted for the ability to process physics with Vantage - but why not have it's own seperate score?

Let's step back for a moment, and look at 06. A killer cpu can add thousands of points to your score. So is it cheating when somebody upgrades their cpu to something faster to get a higher 06 score? The extra speed generally doesn't actually help in games (except in rare or extreme cases), yet nobody complains that QX's are an unfair advantage.

agreed - but, we only really see that extra "boost" to 3m06 score in the final CPU score, and even then it's just an extra, what,? 1000 points tacked on? As much as a quad extreme gives unfair leverage with the benches, it doesn't seem to really effect GPU scores that much (a little bit, but not a whole lot).

And ATI has been caught cheating in 3DMark (and other benches/games for that matter) as well. They both do it, so it's not really a valid point to bring up in either case.

I'm unaware of any instance involving ATI caught in the act Can you cite me at least one example? Not trying to be a dick or nuffin, I'm just curious about this now . . .

 

[WarEagleAU]

Originally I was gonna do a diatribe on Jelle Mees flaming the fire, but Ive changed my position.

When I buy me an MSI K9N Platinum 4x 16x PCIe boar,d Im gonna run 2 or 3 radeon cards and get an nvidia card for physics. Thank you btarunr and everyone else for showing me that it can be done.

 

[Hayder_Master]

Originally I was gonna do a diatribe on Jelle Mees flaming the fire, but Ive changed my position.

When I buy me an MSI K9N Platinum 4x 16x PCIe boar,d Im gonna run 2 or 3 radeon cards and get an nvidia card for physics. Thank you btarunr and everyone else for showing me that it can be done.

am not sure for use nvidia physics card with ati maybe not work perfect , but am sure there is other powerful physics card's , try this asus one it is very good
http://ae.asus.com/products.aspx?l1=19&l2=102