Quote Originally Posted by trinibwoy View Post
Prediction

AMD faster -> they rock!
nVidia faster -> cheats! scandal! payoffs!

Seriously though, it's obvious that both nVidia and AMD have a keen interest in not being shafted by Futuremark given how popular their benchmarks are. What causes suspicion is that these are all backroom dealings so we don't know what's being "fixed" and who is complaining about what. Granted it's not our right to know since the thing isn't even released yet but it would be nice to understand what's going on even from a purely technical standpoint. I've always wondered how Futuremark decides a given algorithm is fair given the differences in architecture and the different optimizations that may favor one IHV over another.
do you remember how well the 4800s did vs upper 200s. a 260 was able to keep up with all of ati's offerings.

but then we jump a year forward to 5800s vs 480/470s
vantage didnt change at all. and the efficiency of the 4800s was practically just doubled in 5800s. which is why the difference between old and new was also basically just doubled. so i would say that nvidia simply messed up in building a gpu which was not friendly with vantage style graphics. or i would say that games did not push shaders nearly as well as they could have and ati cards have technically been handicapped for a few years on alot of titles. (no vantage is not a game, but does have an engine which seems to push atis 5D well, so why has no other game?)

with vantage being out before fermi, theres really nothing futuremark did wrong, which is why ive just been quite disappointed in nvidia for this architecture, since what they had before was great for gaming, while their new stuff is just great for cuda.