Tom's strange...

leeho730 · Oct 25, 2003

I have an impression that Tom's not fair anymore. Why does he stalk ATi, especially in the last two previous graphic card reviews? He's supposed to be a critic, not a PR guy for nVidia. nVidia being honest? oh, please....

Tom, no matter what you say, HL2 is a BIG thing and ATi is going to win this time. You could say that it's only a game, but remember the good old days when wing commander II (literally) forced people to buy 386DX with HD?

Note: don't get me wrong. I use nVidia cards (I have been using them for 5 years), but I am gonna buy 9800P for HL2. Benchmarks mean nothing when it's obvious ATi cards are way better for HL2.

Nicjac · Oct 25, 2003

Why shouldnt he mention ATI cheating ? It's ok to say nVidia cheats but not ATI ? It's the point of such reviews, nVidia did great efforts to deliver acceptable performances and IQ, it's true and he's right to say it.

And yes, HL2 will probably be better on ATI cards, but who cares at the moment as no one had a real version to test ?

flamethrower205 · Oct 25, 2003

Congrats, ur still gonna have trouble running it at top quality

HL2 is meant for the next gen- R400 and NV40 vid cards man.

The one and only "Monstrous BULLgarian!"

CaRnaGe · Oct 25, 2003

So, your trying to say I won't be able to run HL2 at top graphics with my Radeon 9800xt.....?

eden · Oct 25, 2003

Yes you will be able to.

--
<A HREF="http://www.lochel.com/THGC/album.html" target="_new">This just in, over 56 no-lifers have their pics up on THGC's Photo Album! </A> :lol:

uber_m0j0 · Oct 25, 2003

Then it may be wishful thinking on my part, but I plan on running HL2 at 1024x768 2x AA full graphics on my 9700np pretty well...

~m0j0

reever2 · Oct 25, 2003

The thing is, it took him 6 months for him to report on ANY nvidia cheats, even when it wasn't confirmed to be a cheat yet. But it took him only 6 hours to report on uncomfirmed Ati cheats without any explanation

Michaelius · Oct 25, 2003

When you read posts on the other forums Tom's is belived to be writing revievs in favour of nvidia

Oh and i got enough of all this cheating issues I'm going to buy this new XGI dual processor card (if the prices are similar to that of ati/nvidia similar models)

eden · Oct 25, 2003

And you suppose XGI will turn out completely cheat free?

Remember SiS' wall cheats?

--
<A HREF="http://www.lochel.com/THGC/album.html" target="_new">This just in, over 56 no-lifers have their pics up on THGC's Photo Album! </A> :lol:

eden · Oct 25, 2003

I think this is due to the fact only a few days before the article, there was a convention with credible people from the development company of the games, that reported potential cheats. Compared to reports on the web, it's not always easy.

As for the cheating after six months, which one are you talking about?

--
<A HREF="http://www.lochel.com/THGC/album.html" target="_new">This just in, over 56 no-lifers have their pics up on THGC's Photo Album! </A> :lol:

Crashman · Oct 26, 2003

And when they criticize nVidia they're accused of bias toward ATI. You guys are a bunch of idiots, Tom's doesn't change sides every 2 weeks, they simply report facts.

Only a place as big as the internet could be home to a hero as big as Crashman!
Only a place as big as the internet could be home to an ego as large as Crashman's!

Crashman · Oct 26, 2003

And when they criticize nVidia they're accused of bias toward ATI. You guys are a bunch of idiots, Tom's doesn't change sides every 2 weeks, they simply report facts.

Only a place as big as the internet could be home to a hero as big as Crashman!
Only a place as big as the internet could be home to an ego as large as Crashman's!

eden · Oct 26, 2003

LOL, way to double post, Crash!

And yeah, reporting facts can easily be seen differently. I'm still waiting to see that 6 months claim explanation.

--
<A HREF="http://www.lochel.com/THGC/album.html" target="_new">This just in, over 56 no-lifers have their pics up on THGC's Photo Album! </A> :lol:

Crashman · Oct 26, 2003

Sometimes when you want to reach two people you have to post twice, and the easiest way to do that is copy and paste!

Only a place as big as the internet could be home to a hero as big as Crashman!
Only a place as big as the internet could be home to an ego as large as Crashman's!

eden · Oct 26, 2003

Funny, I now get what Svol was getting, my light grey body post area has a pixel or two on the border exceeding to the left side. Notice under Resident how it is pushed to the left a bit?

Heheh.
I think I've been here way too long...

--
<A HREF="http://www.lochel.com/THGC/album.html" target="_new">This just in, over 56 no-lifers have their pics up on THGC's Photo Album! </A> :lol: Edited by Eden on 10/26/03 01:39 AM.

TheGreatGrapeApe · Oct 26, 2003

It's ok to say nVidia cheats but not ATI ?

Well not if ATI reacts better than nV to it. There is no indication that it is a cheat. So far it only looks like a bug, and even some of the 'cheats' that Lars found have been debunked. So calling them cheats when they don't use application detection to increase performance or do things SOLELY for the sake of benchmarking is ignorant.

nVidia did great efforts to deliver acceptable performances and IQ, it's true and he's right to say it.

Actually nV's PR department made bigger efforts first, and they only changed their ways once the community reacted negatively to those actions.

The main problem is, as some people have pointed out, that these reviews were quick to point out issues that were PROVIDED by nV, yet it took them quite a time to write about issues found by many other independantly, and even the ones ATI was finally forced to comment on didn't get the coverage that these small aonomalies are getting. And to compare these to nV's actions in 3Dmark and UT2K3 is just stoopid.

I'll reserve judgement on these 'cheats' until ATI makes an official statement, or if they are shown to be something more than glitches. I'll wait for a Catalyst driver release that has had a chance to address this, and see if those issues are still there, I think it's too late for them to be in the 3.9 release so whatever's after that (4.0?) will be the litmus test for me. If it does come out that these are cheats then I will be pi$$ed and I'll even write to ATI about it. But until then I'll reserve my judgement.

And BTW, it's not just HL2 it's many new games, look at Max Payne2 as well. The thing is that nV needs to use on the fly recompiling of HLSL to a more nV friendly format to make these new games work well on nV hardware. The run-time compiler needs to be optimized for in the drivers, so until nV users get their next driver release they will get significantly poorer performance than the ATI card do running right out of the box. This may not be the case for 'the way it's meant to be played games' (<A HREF="http://www.nvidia.com/object/game_tombraider_aod.html" target="_new">although TombRaider had it's issues too and it's an 'nV' game</A>, which even the run-time compiler couldn't fix at first [ran best under CG path]), but for anything where nV wasn't involved in the development process expect a wait for full performance, at which time it will rock (and perhaps even better than the comparable ATI products).

The fact that these things aren't prominent in the reviews but the ATI anomalies are is disturbing. nV also STLL has their share of rendering issues, even with the new 52.16 drivers, but they didn't get that much play despite this being ostensibly an FX review. I think Digit-Life covered botht the nV issues (Halo one surprised me a bit, RtoCW is an ongoing one) and the ATI issues (the one that disturbed me the most was the rightmark issue).

I like Lars' new reviews, but I think you need to read more than one review to get good picture of any situation. Pick a review and you could've seen the FX5700 beat and R9700, or an FX5950 lose to the R9600XT.
The more you read the more you 'know' IMO. But then again as Mars university says, 'Knowledge brings Fear'.

- You need a licence to buy a gun, but they'll sell anyone a stamp (or internet account) ! <A HREF="http://www.redgreen.com" target="_new">RED GREEN</A> GA to SK :evil:

TheGreatGrapeApe · Oct 26, 2003

So, your trying to say I won't be able to run HL2 at top graphics with my Radeon 9800xt.....?

Well actually I think (can't tell) what flame is refering to is that you won't be able to max out the settings on HL2 with your R9800XT, the way you can for other titles, and that the R400 and NV40 will/may have the power to max everything out at high res.

That's my take on it. And if that's what he meant, then I agree.

You'll definitely be able to play it with pretty good res/features, but likely not max/max.

But that's just a guess for now.

- You need a licence to buy a gun, but they'll sell anyone a stamp (or internet account) ! <A HREF="http://www.redgreen.com" target="_new">RED GREEN</A> GA to SK :evil:

Unit01 · Oct 26, 2003

Don't expect to much FSAA or AF though is my guess

Wooba Wooba

dxl · Oct 26, 2003

Money MONEY mONey!!! the one with more money wil more likely get more support~ it's the law of this world! no one can brake it!

nothing more!
oh, and pressure from the sponsors!!

http://www.mp3.com/dxl ASUS A7N8X, xp3200+ (218x10.5), 2xKINGSTON HYPERX PC3500 512MB(218mhz, at 2 3 3 7) segate 120g 8mb ATA100 segate 80g 2mb ATA100, Creamware pulsar2, ATI9800pro 128mb

speeduk · Oct 26, 2003

HL2 is ment for ATI cards, hence why they come bundled with the game :tongue: . If it plays on a 9800pro at over 60fps then surely its not going to need a next generation card to run it. I've been playing halo at an average of 50fps and that is more than playable.

And onto the main subject, this is old news and its been put to rest. Its not a cheat, its a bug (or so it seems) but since everyone is looking for a new victim then go ahead make up all the cheat accusations without proof. Just 'coz a site shows pics that are different from each other doesn't mean one of them cheats! And yes I said WITHOUT PROOF. Futuremark provided proof of cheating before, and until either Futuremark comment on Aquamark or tom provides us with a picture of how its suppost to be instead of comparing images and saying one is wrong ,based on his view, then its all irrelevant.

Bottom line is, some sites say one thing, another site says another and most dont even know what the fuss is all about. So wait for official pics, videos and info from the guys in the know.....

My system spec: Fast PC<A HREF="http://service.futuremark.com/compare?2k1=7000747" target="_new"> 3D-2001 </A>
"It's not the spoon that bends, it's only yourself."

Borsti · Oct 26, 2003

Well, Refrast says the ATI image is too dark. The AM3 techdoc shows it in the way it´s on NV cards. Both, the massive overdraw test and the particles test work by blending alpha textures over each other. This is where the final brightness comes from. I did not finaly say that it is a cheat and that it´s possible that it´s a bug. But if it´s a bug, how can it be overseen by the driver devs?

Aside of many other "big sites" I´m talking about the 3DM issue and NVIDIA since a long time this year. I look very close on the NV drivers. But I also look very close to all others. ATI is very popular at the moment but does that mean that they´re untouchable. If Gabe talks about NV issues at an ATI event it´s OK to write about it. But if Mark Rein and Randy Pitchford speak about issues at ATI it´s not OK? And if I do then I´m biased? Did logic turn around into something new during the past months!?

I think we´ll know pretty soon what´s behind this thing in AM3. If it´s a bug then it will be fixed and in the end there´s something good coming out of it - like with the AM3 article showing NV driver issues (those lighting bugs were in the drivers from 44.03 to 51.75.... sometimes one has to write about to bring it to attention...)

Lars

speeduk · Oct 26, 2003

Heh. I didn't expect a reply from the big man himself! I guess I've let all the "improper" talk on other forums get to me and I wanted to make a point that its premature to label a company a cheat based on a few pic's. A thread I've been participating in has been closed due to bogus accusations and the like. And most of what I read in that went along the lines of "but toms said ati cheats" etc, it just gets me so mad to think that people won't actually have a proper look at the article and note that the design of that section of the review was to look at I.Q and bring to light a strange difference in the way the ATI driver "does things" in Aquamark.

Actually its good that sites like this one bring to our attention bugs or cheats or whatever. The more we know the more the company in question has to think before it acts.

I still like to read the reviews on here, and think you do a top job generally. But its a shame so many people jump to conclusions so easily and use the name of this website as a basis of those accusations. Instead of just saying "theres something wrong with ATI's drivers" people say "ATI are cheating look at these pictures". But no doubt the outcome will be beneficial to both customers and enthusiasts alike. If ATI are cheating, then they will (hopefully) remove them and move on. If they are not and its just a bug, then they will fix it and move on. Both scenarios produce a desirable outcome for all.

Now I'm not going to type again for a while 'coz my fingers are aching after typing all this!

My system spec: Fast PC<A HREF="http://service.futuremark.com/compare?2k1=7000747" target="_new"> 3D-2001 </A>
"It's not the spoon that bends, it's only yourself."

eden · Oct 27, 2003

These companies are realizing the tech community is becoming very apt at finding their little "play-arounds". It won't be long before they realize they cannot fool us anymore and that it'll be time to play right all the time, else we jump on them.

It's like hiding the egg in the house, and hiding it so well you know the lookers won't find it. But wow, they actually do, and it was hidden behind the attic's big stack of book boxes!

--
<A HREF="http://www.lochel.com/THGC/album.html" target="_new">This just in, over 56 no-lifers have their pics up on THGC's Photo Album! </A> :lol:

TheGreatGrapeApe · Oct 27, 2003

Lars, the question is whether they are purposeful optimizations (read cheats) or not. Issues and poor performance (which is what HL2 w/ FX was/is) are didfferent than the issues from this summer, when anyone but nV's lawyers knew that something smelt fishy. How can anyone show that these ATI issues are either genuine purposeful FLOPTIMIZATIONS, or just errors. With your opening sentence looking like the one I quote, you in effect equate the two as being equal cheats of equal magnitude:
Earlier this year, NVIDIA drew a lot of flak over a number of questionable optimizations in their drivers for 3DMark 2003 - optimizations which could definitely be called cheats.

Calling these cheats before getting ATI's reaction is still simply wrong. There are anomalies obviously, but that's not new for EITHER company. The questions was were they intentional in the same way that the nV ones are?

If they are cheats then we and many will crucify them like everyone before (not just nV but SIS too), but that leading senctence pretty much judges them before all the info is in.

Now if it's a limitations of the drivers, and it isn't fixed or addressed saying it can't be fixed, after a few releases, then it would be logical to say that ATI was 'up to something' or 'lacking in something'. If it's the way things look under 24vs32 precision (mainly for the overdraw I would think) then that would be another issue that isn't there as a cheat but a natural byproduct of design, as negative as it may be.

As for gamma, did anyone try adjusting it before making a big deal, or do only we gamers get to do that on a regular basis from game to game?

The thing that bothers me the most, is a level of difference between what is perceived as an ATI 'cheat' and an nVidia one.

The most glaring and STILL CURRENT example is nV turning off trilinear AF at ALL times. Now while UT2K3 does do a similar effect on the ATI's it can be initialized by the .ini file, however nothing will switch it on in the nV line, yet that isn't mentioned in the UT2K3 segment NOR in the segment about ATI's issues. WHY?

Can we expect equal time/space for ATI's response as <A HREF="http://www.tomshardware.com/graphic/20030912/half-life-01.html" target="_new">nV's response on HL2</A>?

MY issue isn't so much with your review I liked it and the issues made me go 'hmmm', however labelling them as being ANYWHERE near the same thing as the issues in A3 (why weren't the ATI issues found during that review?), or the Issue of this past summer isn't fair.

I also wonder what use it is to include Randy Pitchford's comments when he won't back them up? Proof would be nice. At least Gabe suplied us with that, and even let YOU do tests. The quality/veracity of these two are NOT equal.

It's also interesting that there were no issues in HALO, yet there are issues elsewhere.

Taken from <A HREF="http://www.digit-life.com/articles2/gffx/nv38-36.html/nv38-36.html" target="_new">THIS Digit-Life review of the FX5700/5950</A>, the FX's aren't rendering Lights in the ceilings and on the walls. Check these two Stills for comparison <A HREF="http://www.ixbt.com/video2/images/asus-ati/r9800-38-halo3.jpg" target="_new">ATI no AA/AF</A> and <A HREF="http://www.ixbt.com/video2/images/asus-ati/fx5900-5214-halo3.jpg" target="_new">nV no AA/AF</A>. It's small and easily missed I guess, but it is there none the less.

Now are the nV issues worse or better simply because no one pointed people in the right direction to notice them unlike the ATI 'issues'? Everyone got a nice subtle nudge from nV right before the release of their latest product. The issues that the FX line has with PS2.0 are still there, and are being glossed over by the nice 'new' run-time compiler that is needed to make standard HLSL run well on the FXs. And as evidenced by many recent reviews of MAX PAYNE, this means that nV's products will come out with performance behind ATI's until they can 'optimize' their drivers to re-compile on the fly for each game. Pretty big issue IMO, that wasn't given much mention; it's an even bigger issue in light of nV's statements about moving to fewer driver releases (wait almost a year for your card to perform properly?) that doesn't sound good at all.

I guess everyone is waiting with baited breath for ATI's statements in reply to all this, at which time we will have a better picture of what's happeneing (hopefully).

I'm also waiting for a revamped VGA buyer's guide to correct the glaring differences between THEN and NOW.
And could you PLEASE add a Parhelia to the tests, then we can see GOOD IQ to compare to! Even if it's framerates are comparable to the R9200/FX5200non-ultra.

Once again it's announce, hoopla, then wait.

Oh yes, and I almost forgot: The Catalyst 3.8 drivers are causing World Hunger!
More on this later, just take my word for it, for now. :evil:

- You need a licence to buy a gun, but they'll sell anyone a stamp (or internet account) ! <A HREF="http://www.redgreen.com" target="_new">RED GREEN</A> GA to SK :evil:

TheGreatGrapeApe · Oct 29, 2003

Thanks to info from GW, even if there won't be space given in THG's video card section for it, there appears to be an 'initial' response from Ati which was posted at Rage3D;

<A HREF="http://www.rage3d.com/#1067372704" target="_new">http://www.rage3d.com/#1067372704</A>

Seems to me someone could've just ASKED ATI for a response and gotten as much. But then that wouldn't be as sensational, nor would it garner so much attention.

Yes this is a bit of a rehash of another thread, but I felt this thread needed this in to add some sense of coming full circle.

I'd still like to see the reasons for the differences, as I have my own theories, but I guess we won't see those yet. Now I'd like to see how the HALO rendering issues were missed by so many. But I guess that wasn't cheating, just an honest error from someone with a history of honest errors. Right?

Seriously it's almost time to be reviewing reviews.

But I guess that's what this was in the first place.

- You need a licence to buy a gun, but they'll sell anyone a stamp (or internet account) ! <A HREF="http://www.redgreen.com" target="_new">RED GREEN</A> GA to SK :evil:

Tom's strange...

Distinguished

Distinguished

Illustrious

Distinguished

Champion

Distinguished

Distinguished

Distinguished

Champion

Champion

Polypheme

Polypheme

Champion

Polypheme

Champion

Champion

Champion

Distinguished

Distinguished

Distinguished

Distinguished

Distinguished

Champion

Champion

Champion

Share this page