Cheating in benchmarks or games? oh noes!

[Mussels]

I keep seeing this kind of thing pop up all over the place, and people often taking it as fact.

The most common i see is "company/game Dev X took a bribe from Y to cripple their customers of product Z!"

The problem is, all this stuff about ATI/Nvidia/Creative/etc 'cheating' tends to be pure speculation, and everyone assumes its gospel. Its mostly not true.



I figure people could at least benefit from knowing that EVERYONE does it, so therefore, its not cheating if everyone plays by the same rules.

Large IT companies love making 'programs' (not the software kind) where they do the work for you, at the cost of some advertising/tweaking things their way.

A good example of this is batman Arkham asylum on PC, where the game is missing some visual effects that are visible on the console versions of the game unless Nvidias hardware physX is enabled. The devs got some free/cheap (we dont know for sure) code from nvidia to help them make the game better quality and able to be released quicker/on time, in exchange for letting nvidia do things their way - and in this case, resulted in a negative experience for non nvidia users. NORMALLY, it would only be a case of nvidia getting a few FPS higher, or having problem free drivers already out prior to the games release.

On to some other examples:

1. Nvidia has its "The Way its Meant to be Played" program. Generally this gives nvidia users a better experience, without negatively impacting on non nvidia users.

2. ATI and its 'Get in the Game' program. same deal as nvidias really, but less scandals pop up, overall.

3. Creative and its EAX monopoly. Ever wonder why EAX was needed to get 5.1 sound in games? because the game devs simply slapped in ready to go code that creative gave to them, instead of making their own engine that could do 5.1 audio for everyone.
(see all the whining gamers did when they upgraded to vista/7, and found out it broke hardware EAX, so no surround sound in all those games dominated by creative code)

4. A more neutral example, microsofts "games for windows live' program. These games get some help from microsoft to port their games from console to PC, and get some help programming them to work well on 360 controllers on PC. i'm sure they pay a price beyond some mere advertising of the GFWL logo, but overall it turns out well for consumers.


moral of the story? It aint cheating if everyone follows the same rules, stop beleiving drivel on the internet just because you want to.

 

[crazyeyesreaper]

to be honest this needs a better title i like most around here down surf the forums i just click links on what the newest posts are and all i see is.. (Insert company name here) fix it and this shall become gospel

 

[Batou1986]

I remember back in the day when you needed a creative sound card to use a cd rom drive.

Almost every company does this stuff if they don't get partnerships with devs/other company's
you wont see advancements.

Cant honestly expect to see awesome new features such as tessellation with out the hardware designer explaining to devs how to design there software to take advantage of the new hardware.

Its like saying Ati and M$ Direct X / whoever specs Pci-e standards are in cahoots to steam roll everyone because Ati had DX 11 and pci-e 2.0 before Nvidia, utterly ridiculous.

 

[Athlon2K15]

/ thread fail

 

[streetfighter 2]

Not cheating you say? I argue it can and will be cheating/illegal.

Intel sued by everyone
http://www.ftc.gov/opa/2010/08/intel.shtm
http://www.anandtech.com/show/3839/intel-settles-with-the-ftc

Intel suing Nvidia, Nvidia suing Intel
http://www.tomshardware.com/news/intel-atom-cpu-nvidia-ion,7043.html
http://www.tomshardware.com/news/Intel-Nvidia-Lawsuit-Licencing-Agreement,7398.html

(...and that's only in the last year or so)

These rumors get so much attention just because they are expected and some of them are true.

The chip manufacturers are constantly suing each other for cheating. It's the nature of the industry and us technophiles are therefore interested.

 

[Velvet Wafer]

IF everyone cheats, its still cheating.
just that there are not just a few assholes, all of them are.

 

[RejZoR]

I can't see how EAX fits into all this. EAX was essentially just an extension of DirectSound3D API.
With Vista and later, DS3D was thrashed and is software emulated. OpenAL is now a hardware accelerated API under which EAX 4.0 and later work as intended. To make things easier to understand, it's not only Creative that doesn't work in hardware mode now, all audio chip makers face the exactly same problem. That includes all C-Media and Realtek derivates.
It's just that with these generic chips you didn't really lose much since they didn't offer much either, but with EAX powered ones, you lost all the hardware 3D reverberation and spatialization effects.

I don't particulary understand the complaining since there is ALchemy that is free and just works (far better than any other attempts by other vendors).

I'm on second generation OS (Win7) that lacks HW DS3D and i'm still enjoying EAX in all my games. Either natively with EAX 4.0 through OpenAL or EAX 2.0 through ALchemy.

 

[Mussels]

I can't see how EAX fits into all this. EAX was essentially just an extension of DirectSound3D API.
With Vista and later, DS3D was thrashed and is software emulated. OpenAL is now a hardware accelerated API under which EAX 4.0 and later work as intended. To make things easier to understand, it's not only Creative that doesn't work in hardware mode now, all audio chip makers face the exactly same problem. That includes all C-Media and Realtek derivates.
It's just that with these generic chips you didn't really lose much since they didn't offer much either, but with EAX powered ones, you lost all the hardware 3D reverberation and spatialization effects.

I don't particulary understand the complaining since there is ALchemy that is free and just works (far better than any other attempts by other vendors).

I'm on second generation OS (Win7) that lacks HW DS3D and i'm still enjoying EAX in all my games. Either natively with EAX 4.0 through OpenAL or EAX 2.0 through ALchemy.

EAX fits in because creative passed on the EAX code to game developers, which in effect locked those games to their own hardware.

 

[LAN_deRf_HA]

Complaints about ati and nvidia driver "cheating" are necessary, as most of these issues effect image quality and hurt the consumer. Complaints get them fixed, at least part of the time.

 

[HXL492]

i like the new name of this thread

I've noticed that some games are either more optimized for AMD or Nvidia cards
However, in most cases the difference is just a few extra frame rates

 

[Mussels]

complaints are given whether theres a problem or not.


i just want people to realise that just becase one company (ATI, nvidia, whatever) is 'cheating' at any given time, doesnt mean the others arent doing it at the same time, in the past, or will do so in the future.


I'm getting sick of fanboys saying things like "ATI are cheating with lower quality, buy nvidia!" only to see another thread with the same bloody thing said the other way around!

i like the new name of this thread

I've noticed that some games are either more optimized for AMD or Nvidia cards
However, in most cases the difference is just a few extra frame rates

that is the 'good' cheating - giving nvidia extra frames at no cost to ATI users (and vice versa) isnt a problem, thats exactly what you expect from the sponsorship deals.

 

[claylomax]

/ thread fail

+1 It's pointless

 

[Mussels]

+1 It's pointless

oh it has a point. you just may not have seen the utterly ridiculous comments some people have been making in the fanboi wars. its all common sense, but some seem to lack it.

 

[entropy13]

GFWL is a good thing indeed though, somewhat alleviates the pains of having ports by trying to improve upon them and minimizing the negative effects of obsolete hardware of consoles.

 

[Mussels]

GFWL is a good thing indeed though, somewhat alleviates the pains of having ports by trying to improve upon them and minimizing the negative effects of obsolete hardware of consoles.

yes.

thats the goal of nvidia and ATI's marketing things as well. Its not MEANT to 'cheat', but rather to give some people (all that use their products at least) a better gameplay experience.


people should only kick up a fuss when it negatively impacts others experience (EG, no AA for ATI in batman AA) but instead seem to want to argue if anything isnt completely neutral... despite the fact the games industry has beenbiased towards certain hardware combinations for decades (hence the EAX example, showing its not even restricted to video cards, and GFWL showing it doesnt even have to be hardware)

 

[entropy13]

yes.

thats the goal of nvidia and ATI's marketing things as well. Its not MEANT to 'cheat', but rather to give some people (all that use their products at least) a better gameplay experience.


people should only kick up a fuss when it negatively impacts others experience (EG, no AA for ATI in batman AA) but instead seem to want to argue if anything isnt completely neutral... despite the fact the games industry has beenbiased towards certain hardware combinations for decades (hence the EAX example, showing its not even restricted to video cards, and GFWL showing it doesnt even have to be hardware)

One thing that's working in Microsoft's favor is that the platform itself (Windows) is constant for all ports regardless of system configuration, while AMD and Nvidia is hardware-dependent, hence that perception.

 

[ShiBDiB]

+1 It's pointless

Im with him... Atleast word the title better as I still dont see how this is cheating in bench's and games.. More like a mods rant about companys slapping their logo on games

 

[sneekypeet]

So this thread isn't really about the companies cheating, but rather your distaste for noobie comments?

 

[Mussels]

well i couldnt come up with a good title, and people told me to change it so i did.

suggest a new title ^^



the INTENT was to point out that fanboyism in a negative way about 'cheating' and 'optimisations' its utterly pointless. all the big companies do it, and its always been that way and always will.

 

[sneekypeet]

I just find this funny, I brought this all up in the lounge and got laughed at, as I was taking it too serious. After a break from all the drama llamas, I find that I really don't care anymore. N00bs will be n00bs, this is the interwebz remember

Maybe a title that would identify the issue of fanboyism over cheating?

 

[RejZoR]

EAX fits in because creative passed on the EAX code to game developers, which in effect locked those games to their own hardware.

Sorry, but you don't really know what you're saying. They locked what? They haven't locked anything. You could still hear sound on other soundcards, it just wasn't so detailed as far as environments are involved. Simple example is NFS3 or NFS4. They both had EAX or plain Stereo. But when you were driving through tunnel, you got same effects on both, it's just that EAX version was more realistic and intense.

EAX is not a replacement, it's an extension to the existing sound features. It always was and always will be. It's not being used as much since CPU's have evolved so much and since anything above EAX 2.0 is essentially locked to Creative soundcards and they don't seem to be as aggressive about it as in the past. But i can also safely say that 128 sounds on CPU are much more sluggish than 128 sounds on X-Fi. Even on Core i7 920 CPU. If there will ever be a 256 or even 512 sounds version, the difference will be even bigger. Either way, more and more developers use software 3D and reverberation solutions. I'm not exactly the fan of them because they just sound poor compared to true EAX 4.0 or EAX 5.0.

 

[Mussels]

Sorry, but you don't really know what you're saying. They locked what? They haven't locked anything. You could still hear sound on other soundcards, it just wasn't so detailed as far as environments are involved. Simple example is NFS3 or NFS4. They both had EAX or plain Stereo. But when you were driving through tunnel, you got same effects on both, it's just that EAX version was more realistic and intense.

EAX is not a replacement, it's an extension to the existing sound features. It always was and always will be. It's not being used as much since CPU's have evolved so much and since anything above EAX 2.0 is essentially locked to Creative soundcards and they don't seem to be as aggressive about it as in the past. But i can also safely say that 128 sounds on CPU are much more sluggish than 128 sounds on X-Fi. Even on Core i7 920 CPU. If there will ever be a 256 or even 512 sounds version, the difference will be even bigger. Either way, more and more developers use software 3D and reverberation solutions. I'm not exactly the fan of them because they just sound poor compared to true EAX 4.0 or EAX 5.0.

i take it you werent around in that era, or you were on creative and never noticed.


In all those EAX titles from EAX 2.0 onwards, if you didnt have EAX you didnt have anything past 2.0 sound. thats how those games were. Since they got slapped with vista disabling hardware audio it changed and a few games DID come out with 5.1 sound even without EAX, but it doesnt change thats how it was with the earlier ones.

you've gone off into unrelated tangents - i never mentioned the added audio effects or 'better sound' or anything at all like that, i simply said that without EAX in certain games, features were disabled.

Batman AA: no AA for non nvidia users
EAX titles: crippled audio for non creative users. it wasnt just fancy effects like reverb or adding more channels, things that other audio engines did perfectly fine (like 5.1 audio) were simply disabled if you didnt have EAX (and thusly, creative). Again, this DID change eventually, iirc the battlefield games (2 and 2142) allowed 5.1 even without EAX

see the link?