Future Mark sets the rules ? You guys catch this?

The article on Future Mark at:

http://www.extremetech.com/article2/...1299014,00.asp

JAD wrote:
The article on Future Mark at:

http://www.extremetech.com/article2/...1299014,00.asp

Point 4 is presumably, the one nVidia is displeased about:
"Generic optimizations that do not violate the above rules and benefit
applications in general are acceptable only if the rendering is
mathematically consistent with that of Microsoft DirectX reference
rasterizer"

It seems that nVidia are altering the rendering process to be inconsistent
with Microsofts' reference rasteriser, how else can you explain differences
in images? It is exactly these types of optimisations that I would consider
cheating, be it a benchmark or a game.

If I write a shader and I want it to look one way, I wouldn't expect nVidia
or anybody else to change that in order for their hardware to render it in
less time.

So although this rule seems to make it inconsistent with what is happening
in games, I think that images should NOT be altered from how they are
intended to look.

If AMD or Intel did the equivelent, 3+4 could equal 6 - somehow I don't
think consumers would put up with that and I don't think we should put up
with it from nVidia or anybody else.

Ben
--
I'm not just a number. To many, I'm known as a String...

FutureMark set the rules for 3DMark; that's all. It's their benchmark.

TMC


"JAD" wrote in message
ink.net...
The article on Future Mark at:

http://www.extremetech.com/article2/...1299014,00.asp