ati cheating in crysis benchmark?

[RaZz!]

saaya, i said it many times in the past and still think you jump to conclusions way too quickly. you could have atleast put a question mark at the end of the topic. otherwise it's just misleading. pcgh nowhere mentions they accuse ati of cheating. they just observed the deficit in AF and found it to be worth mentioning. nothing more.

i really think the days of driver optimization cheating are over tbh. there are way too many people checking such things today so that both companies, ati as well as nvidia, probably wouldn't risk to cheat anymore.

and i'm by no means an ati fanboy or smth...

[takamishanoku]

I totally agree that if this was nvidia there would be a totally different response. Not sure why to be honest. I couldn't care less about both companies; I just care about what's best performance for me. Xs in general really seems to love ATI, and I have no idea why. I guess partly it may be due to renaming which I understand, but if lowering quality for performance gains is true then shame on ATI.

[Iconyu]

that would explain why a 5870 beats a 480 in crysis...

Do you really think either nvidia or ati are stupid enough to do this for real when people pour over everything these days for signs of cheating? The reward:risk ratio just isn't there.

Alot of people jumped on the Dirt2 thing too on the leaked beanches for the 480, in my opinion there wasn't even a case to answer it was too obvious. The correct thing to do is point it out to the driver team and push them to fix it, not get the pitch forks out.

Honestly saaya, sometimes you're a drama queen, I often catch myself checking your avatar looking for a feather boa instead of a tie.

[h0bbes]

saaya, i said it many times in the past and still think you jump to conclusions way too quickly. you could have atleast put a question mark at the end of the topic. otherwise it's just misleading.

[gamervivek]

to all the people claiming you dont see it on the screenshots, use the mouseover script on pcgh... much better to compare it that way, and youll see how it goes from sharp to blurr and from aniso to bilinear

aniso to bilinear?
There has been a difference in the texture filtering methods of ati and nvidia for quite some time.What's the big deal now?

and this is a still... if you move the textures will flicker a lot...

and if crysis is no big deal and nobody plays it, then why did ati cheat and risk ruining their pr karma?

How much is lot? iirc ati had a lower texture LOD in crysis that gave sharper textures than nvidia but also with more flickering.
Their pr karma? wtf belated april fools'?

You seem to have periodical troubles with ati filtering, what gives?
http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/...d.php?t=235029

[rogueagent6]

Honestly saaya, sometimes you're a drama queen, I often catch myself checking your avatar looking for a feather boa instead of a tie.

Haha, that made me laugh!

[Chumbucket843]

Because the directed test checks for angle independence, not filtering quality. Everyone looks at that little circle test and thinks everything is honky dory.

this really bugs me. even anand fell for it and in their gtx480 article says that nvidia's AF is inferior while ATi is "perfect" which is technically impossible. most games i play arent narrow tunnels of mip levels so i will be fine with some angle dependence.

[saaya]

saaya, i said it many times in the past and still think you jump to conclusions way too quickly. you could have atleast put a question mark at the end of the topic. otherwise it's just misleading. pcgh nowhere mentions they accuse ati of cheating. they just observed the deficit in AF and found it to be worth mentioning. nothing more.

i really think the days of driver optimization cheating are over tbh. there are way too many people checking such things today so that both companies, ati as well as nvidia, probably wouldn't risk to cheat anymore.

and i'm by no means an ati fanboy or smth...

fair enough, i didnt mean that pcgh claims that, let me remove pcgh from the title and add a ?

and with the little time reviewers have to test the cards these days you really think they have enough time to hunt for optimizations and cheats in games and benchmarks? i doubt it... thats extremely time consuming... unless its something obvious, most optimizations/cheats dont get noticed...

Do you really think either nvidia or ati are stupid enough to do this for real when people pour over everything these days for signs of cheating? The reward:risk ratio just isn't there.

yes, and no the risk is only high if you make it too obvious, like in this case. then again, you might argue that a cheat that people dont notice isnt a cheat but an optimization as the image quality difference is obviously not noticeable to 99% of the users. i worked for amd when they merged with ati, and was told that there are a lot of "tweaks" that lower iq but youd never notice it unless you knew where to look... those same people told me if people dont notice it, but it gives them a more stable fps and better gameplay, hows that a bad thing? fair enough... but there was a huge debate about this a long time ago and thats when ati introduced catalyst AI, which supposedly disables all optimizations. that was a great move... unfortunately ati didnt stick to it...

Honestly saaya, sometimes you're a drama queen, I often catch myself checking your avatar looking for a feather boa instead of a tie.

its dozens of people like you in this thread turning it into drama... theres no drama in pcghs article and what exactly is the "drama" in my post?

There has been a difference in the texture filtering methods of ati and nvidia for quite some time.What's the big deal now?

ati notably reduced the filtering quality in crysis?
that alone is annoying, the fact that you cant change it back to normal and disable the optimizations is very lame and for the first time in a while im actually glad to be on an nvidia card opposed to feeling bad about it for indirectly supporting physix

You seem to have periodical troubles with ati filtering, what gives?
http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/...d.php?t=235029

lol, you got me, im paid nvidia pr staff

The sad part is, that is basically true.

nvidia cheating in drivers causes forum threads with dozens of complains and people making a big deal out of it, but ati cheating doesnt? then how come theres a 5 page thread here within 2 days with tons of people making a big deal out of it and making it a huge drama? dont you guys realize that both nvidia and ati are bending us over if we dont tell them off? instead everybody gets lost in a red vs green debate while both ati and nvidia continue lowering your image quality

this thread is giant fail imho nobody tested with other drivers to see if its really optimization or not

and what difference would that make? if a cheat or optimization that lowers iq, qhatever you want to call it, only exists in one driver then its fine? its a shame that third party driver kits have dissapeared, i loved the omega drivers on my ati cards, notably better image quality and they killed ccc and brought back the original driver panel. rip omega

[rogueagent6]

its dozens of people like you in this thread turning it into drama... theres no drama in pcghs article and what exactly is the "drama" in my post?

You have a tendency to over sensationalize your news posts. Also, as already pointed out in this thread, there was NO mention of cheating in the original article.

[crs]

I fully agree with Saaya, is a shame, it was purposeful, was to gain performance over quality,...
forgive me fanATIcs, but I only have one phrase to define this: Shame ATI / AMD!

hugs to everyone.

[saaya]

You have a tendency to over sensationalize your news posts. Also, as already pointed out in this thread, there was NO mention of cheating in the original article.

oh come on man, you dont really wanna tell me its a "bug" right?
how exactly do you "accidentally" disable anisotropic filtering and then not even default to trilinear but bilinear filtering?

it reduces image quality and boost performance... and thats supposed to be a bug? give me a break!

pcgh probably doesnt call it a cheat cause they dont want the drama some people in this thread make out of it.
and because they try to stay neutral and not pss on any mfcer cause they tend to reward press by removing them from reviewers lists and press events.

so im "sensationalizing" things because i call a cheat a cheat instead of a "bug" when it clearly is a cheat? :P

[Eastcoasthandle]

I fully agree with Saaya, is a shame, it was purposeful, was to gain performance over quality,...
forgive me fanATIcs, but I only have one phrase to define this: Shame ATI / AMD!

hugs to everyone.

Was that before or after he change the OP once he found out that the source didn't indicate any cheating?

[saaya]

Was that before or after he change the OP once he found out that the source didn't indicate any cheating?

you mean me changing the thread title?
i didnt "find out" that pcgh didnt indicate cheating, i knew it all along... imo they clearly hinted at ati cheating they just didnt say so to keep things calm and not step in the line of fire of ati and nvidia and their fans

i thought it was weird to discover such an obvious cheat and keeping quiet about it... cause then ati might think they can get away with it and 10.4 etc have the same "bug"... most people obviously arent aware about the "bug" thats why i started this thread.

[Eastcoasthandle]

you mean me changing the thread title?
i didnt "find out" that pcgh didnt indicate cheating, i knew it all along... imo they clearly hinted at ati cheating they just didnt say so to keep things calm and not step in the line of fire of ati and nvidia and their fans

i thought it was weird to discover such an obvious cheat and keeping quiet about it... cause then ati might think they can get away with it and 10.4 etc have the same "bug"... most people obviously arent aware about the "bug" thats why i started this thread.

But you did change it once you were made aware that the originator didn't imply or say such. Any way, that is an interesting assumptions there. I guess all us here don't agree with that interpretation. I didn't know that any potential bug found is now defined as a cheat during a review of competing products . If I tin foil that in I could see how that may be cheating.

[LesGrossman]

how exactly do you "accidentally" disable anisotropic filtering and then not even default to trilinear but bilinear filtering?

Are you sure? That screenshot is 90% identical between GTX480 and 5870.
And i just replayed crysis & warhead in a 40" tv and didn't notice any flickering.

How about more screenshots and comparisons?

[saaya]

But you did change it once you were made aware that the originator didn't imply or say such.

no, i knew it all along, i changed it cause razz suggested it, and i trust him and agree that it was easy to misunderstand.

I didn't know that any potential bug found is now defined as a cheat during a review of competing products . If I tin foil that in I could see how that may be cheating.

a bug that reduces image quality in favor of performance is nothing special at all for you? the last time i remember a "bug" improving performance it was nvidias geforce fx drivers removing the entire dragon from 3dmark 2001 and rendering a hot chic flying through the air with spread legs instead of riding a beast.

i cant believe how you and others dont seem to care that ati is toying with the iq of your card without telling you and without letting you disable this optimization... how can you claim that this is just a bug? and even if it IS, dont you think ati should have spotted this during their QA testing of the driver?

Are you sure? That screenshot is 90% identical between GTX480 and 5870.
And i just replayed crysis & warhead in a 40" tv and didn't notice any flickering.

How about more screenshots and comparisons?

im sure that its more than 90%, its still clearly visible...

and if you dont notice any flickering... good for you?
no idea if your screen being that big makes a difference... at what res and how many fps were you playing it at? at high fps and low res on a huge screen you probably notice it less?

[Eastcoasthandle]

no, i knew it all along, i changed it cause razz suggested it, and i trust him and agree that it was easy to misunderstand.

Again, once you were made aware that it wasn't in the original article.

a bug that reduces image quality in favor of performance is nothing special at all for you? the last time i remember a "bug" improving performance it was nvidias geforce fx drivers removing the entire dragon from 3dmark 2001 and rendering a hot chic flying through the air with spread legs instead of riding a beast.

i cant believe how you and others dont seem to care that ati is toying with the iq of your card without telling you and without letting you disable this optimization... how can you claim that this is just a bug? and even if it IS, dont you think ati should have spotted this during their QA testing of the driver?

Exactly, because if you enable AF and it doesn't work as it should it must be cheating. No other explanation can be seen or found. Even though the author never implied it . I mean there was no information regarding texture degradation or FOV tampering or anything like that. I mean those wouldn't be examples of cheating.

[FischOderAal]

and even if it IS, dont you think ati should have spotted this during their QA testing of the driver?

"Should" doesn't mean they did. Wherever people are involved there are problems that aren't noticed. Hell, NVIDIA released a driver with broken fan-control, don't you think this is even easier to notice? And iIrc NVIDIA isn't even on a fixed schedule on the driver releases.

Let's just pretend that it really is a bug. I don't think they look for such "minor" bugs. Remember the GSOD-issue? That is a nasty bug that should've never occurred. Or very obvious texture failures in certain games etc. I think it's those things they look for in their QA testing.

[saaya]

Again, once you were made aware that it wasn't in the original article.

maybe we are misunderstanding each other here...
made aware of implies i was unaware of it, which i wasnt...
why are you bringing this up again and again? you think i didnt know what an article i read and then linked to said?

Exactly, because if you enable AF and it doesn't work it must be cheating. No other explanation can be seen or found. Even though the author never implied it . I mean there was no information regarding texture degradation or FOV tampering or anything like that. I mean those wouldn't be examples of cheating.

so you think anisotropic filtering just happens to be "broken"... somehow... for one game only...
even if that would be the case, it first would point towards shoddy q and a at atis driver team and second wouldnt explain at all why its defaulting to bilinear texture filtering and not even trilinear texture filtering... or wait, is that coincidentally broken as well for some odd reason? :P
come on...

ill admit, it MIGHT not be a cheat but a bug... its very very very unlikely imo, but sure, sht happens, they somehow broke it, and then didnt even notice it was broken... and it just happens to give them a perf boost giving them a psychological win in a very demanding game benchmark many gamers use as a reference for their vgas performance, ie "can it play crysis"

i dont get why you and others dont seem to care about this at all, even if its a bug its lame that they broke it and didnt realize it.

[bill_d]

maybe we are misunderstanding each other here...
made aware of implies i was unaware of it, which i wasnt...
why are you bringing this up again and again? you think i didnt know what an article i read and then linked to said?

so you think anisotropic filtering just happens to be "broken"... somehow... for one game only...
even if that would be the case, it first would point towards shoddy q and a at atis driver team and second wouldnt explain at all why its defaulting to bilinear texture filtering and not even trilinear texture filtering... or wait, is that coincidentally broken as well for some odd reason? :P
come on...

ill admit, it MIGHT not be a cheat but a bug... its very very very unlikely imo, but sure, sht happens, they somehow broke it, and then didnt even notice it was broken... and it just happens to give them a perf boost giving them a psychological win in a very demanding game benchmark many gamers use as a reference for their vgas performance, ie "can it play crysis"

i dont get why you and others dont seem to care about this at all, even if its a bug its lame that they broke it and didnt realize it.

how much new crap have they pumped into the drivers last 3 sets Eyefinity, profiles elec. none of it working at 100%, but if they break af it cheating

i'm getting texture flashing in fallout 3 with 10.3 maybe it's cheating

[Eastcoasthandle]

maybe we are misunderstanding each other here...
made aware of implies i was unaware of it, which i wasnt...
why are you bringing this up again and again? you think i didnt know what an article i read and then linked to said?

so you think anisotropic filtering just happens to be "broken"... somehow... for one game only...
even if that would be the case, it first would point towards shoddy q and a at atis driver team and second wouldnt explain at all why its defaulting to bilinear texture filtering and not even trilinear texture filtering... or wait, is that coincidentally broken as well for some odd reason? :P
come on...

That is because you didn't change it until it was mentioned. It's not about what you say you knew but your actions after having been told. I'm not debating about you agreeing with it or not.

ill admit, it MIGHT not be a cheat but a bug... its very very very unlikely imo, but sure, sht happens, they somehow broke it, and then didnt even notice it was broken... and it just happens to give them a perf boost giving them a psychological win in a very demanding game benchmark many gamers use as a reference for their vgas performance, ie "can it play crysis"

i dont get why you and others dont seem to care about this at all, even if its a bug its lame that they broke it and didnt realize it.

So if a reviewer enables AF in that game and it doesn't work as it should then it must be either cheating or a bug?

[tajoh111]

I think if it alters benchmark results, it better to call this a cheat to get reviewers attention as well as AMDs(so they can fix it).

A cheat is something that alters performance and effect image quality. This obviously is both as it is super likely that by decrease the amount of work the videocard needs to do, the framerates will go up.

We might call this a bug, if it indeed didn't increase performance, but it doesn't. The complexity of the bug itself, the subtlety and the increase in performance make it look like a cheat more than a bug.

A bug is something that is pretty much immediately noticeable and possibly game altering. It alter the game enough that the bug is reported and the company has to fix it because it is too noticeable. A cheat has to be subtle otherwise they will get called out on it ASAP, this seems like one of those times where it subtle enough that only a reviewer with both cards, while playing back to back could notice it.

Intel has been caught cheating recently and they have a crazy lead. AMD competing with Intel and NV and I don't any company is immune to cheating.

[ElSel10]

nvidia cheating in drivers causes forum threads with dozens of complains and people making a big deal out of it, but ati cheating doesnt? then how come theres a 5 page thread here within 2 days with tons of people making a big deal out of it and making it a huge drama?

There isn't. There is a 5 page thread of people saying it isn't a big deal and is probably a bug. Some people are even saying that there isn't a difference between the two.

[Iconyu]

yes, and no the risk is only high if you make it too obvious, like in this case. then again, you might argue that a cheat that people dont notice isnt a cheat but an optimization as the image quality difference is obviously not noticeable to 99% of the users. i worked for amd when they merged with ati, and was told that there are a lot of "tweaks" that lower iq but youd never notice it unless you knew where to look... those same people told me if people dont notice it, but it gives them a more stable fps and better gameplay, hows that a bad thing? fair enough... but there was a huge debate about this a long time ago and thats when ati introduced catalyst AI, which supposedly disables all optimizations. that was a great move... unfortunately ati didnt stick to it...

Maybe so, but from 16x to bi/triliner mix is going a little far, it would be impossible to justify something like that. Also forced so you couldn't do anything about it would indicate that it wasn't that planned.

its dozens of people like you in this thread turning it into drama... theres no drama in pcghs article and what exactly is the "drama" in my post?

Let's get this straight, so there is zero confusion. Are you claiming that the 'dozens' of people saying that this isn't a big deal as it would be stupid for either company to be caught cheating are in fact the ones causing the 'drama' in this thread? Or just the 'dozens' of people that have hinted that you are a drama queen?

You do realise that just using the word 'dozens' is in fact a dramatization of the current situation, as you've deliberatly inflated the number of people who think you're a drama queen past '24' which would be the minimum number needed to to achieve 'dozens'.

I would imagine that '24' people being against you would be like the 'whole world' hating you. But don't worry, I'm pretty sure it's only about 3.

And yes, I'm being dramatic to prove a point, but this is the news forum. You can't just take info, dump it on us and make it all Fox News because you're a little excited about it. You need only look at the first five replies to the thread, and later on it's all 'If this were nvidia...' as if they didn't set the tone.

So while I agree that this isn't all your fault claiming you're innocent just won't wash.

[saaya]

That is because you didn't change it until it was mentioned.

and why does that matter to begin with? i dont see where you are going with this... i chose a misleading thread title, somebody dropped me a hint about it, i changed it... and?

So if a reviewer enables AF in that game and it doesn't work as it should then it must be either cheating or a bug?

what else would it be?
i doubt its a user error with pcgh... they double and tripple check before they claim something is broken... at least thats how it was when fr3ak was still there, dunno if him leaving made any difference