Your Thoughts on 3DMark threats to HardOCP.

[JinxterX]

Tero Sarkkinen is a tool.

That is all

You got to at least respect the fact that the guy made an apology (in public), some people never admit they're wrong, look at Bush/Blair, they've killed 10s of thousands of innocent people yet they refuse point blank to apologise for anything they've said or done, ok, might be an inappropriate comparison in some respect but I think it makes the point.

The older versions of 3DMark had their uses but the latest one won't even run on my pc and I'll be damned if I'm going to pay huge sums of money (we're not all rich on this planet) to some corporation (or one of it's subsiduaries) for the latest gfx card when my existing one - which cost a bomb originally and is now worth next to nothing - does the job I need it to do just fine.

If this guy wants to produce some software which spits out a number at the end of it's run cycle and makes people think their pc is not up to the job then fair enough, good luck to him and his company, if people are dumb enough to actually pay money for this software, then good luck to them too, they are free to do whatever they like.

My opinion is 3DMark should be Open Source, of course being a Linux nut I would say that

 

[rancor]

Well that is true, but then how come nVidia's DST is in 3DMark05, and further, why is it enabled by default?

I think DST is available on other cards too not sure though.

 

[FrgMstr]

Hey of course I agree with you Kyle. I guess I'm too much of a softie.

Heck, one time a girl wrote on public forum that "I sucked" and I sent back a much worse and hate-filled e-mail than this. Damn that hurt Wasn't much opportunity to explain the history of that to our collective friends either haha.

I suggest you sue her next time.

 

[Trip2way]

Very funny Kyle!

*Yo!...You suck!*

*What!?* *(Lawyer enters - drops lawsuit)*

*Suck on this!!*

Edited for bad taste..

 

[Mike90]

Yeah the dude apologized. Not hard to figure that one out. Someone higher up than him put some big time heat down on his ass.

 

[yevaud]

Well, Tero was a man about it....

Makes me wonder though… says he has been asking Kyle for input for a long time. Now, if you ask for input over and over and all you get back is "your product sucks" then seems to me that's cause to get angry. Only difference is Tero works for a real company where people are accountable for professionalism, whereas {H} does not have that constraint... sorry, but people who run businesses don't/can't use terminology like "your product sucks".

Regardless, I wonder if Kyle can step up and make 3DMark a better product. If he chooses not to, then we all lose, and I'll really have a hard time listening the next time he tells me he cares about the hardware community. It’s easy to be a critic, it takes guts and ability to make something.

Am I the only person who doesn't understand why Tero has somehow missed all the constructive criticism Kyle and others have posted all these years, but can pick out the word "sucks" and get all upset? I have read the apology, and the subsequent *justification* as to why he did it. I have also read his other post where he appears to be reading through looking for additional constructive criticism. I'm sure you'll find what you need without any trouble or difficulty at all.

As far as whether Kyle will "step up" I personally believe that HE WOULD COMPLETELY BUY INTO A FUTUREMARK PRODUCT IF THEY WOULD MAKE ONE THAT DID WHAT IT CLAIMS TO. He would post beaming reviews of such a product, I believe, even after this sorry episode. If toddw (or others who have posted similar sentiments) had observed what I have for the past several years, you would know this to be true.

 

[REGENERATION]

TeroS: heres a suggestion for you:
listen to the users (after all they suppose to purchase your product instead of flaming it)
design the product accordingly to their bad/good opinions and needs
for example:add OpenGL Game test,better CPU test

p.s.
you should hire reviewers like Kyle because they can help you with the product

 

[slavik]

CPU test is not needed in "3DMark"

I think, 3dmark should have a different scene to "tax" ONE general part of the video card ...

for example:
1 scene - fillrate
2 scene - memory bandwidth (very large textires, very small amount of polygons)
3 scene - max polygon count ..
etc. ...

basically have all non-game tests of 2001se (change/modify as needed) and then to have 2 "real world" game engines and do a simple render on them (which support ALL of the features of the video card under disection)

TeroS: heres a suggestion for you:
listen to the users (after all they suppose to purchase your product instead of flaming it)
design the product accordingly to their bad/good opinions and needs
for example:add OpenGL Game test,better CPU test

p.s.
you should hire reviewers like Kyle because they can help you with the product

 

[4keatimj]

OK I know I'm jumping on the bandwagon late, but here's my two cents (less than that if converted into American dollars )

From what I have seen, Kyle is entitled to an opinion. It's kind of like the Infinium case. But I think the company should take notice if all the members of his forum (thats all of us here) say the same or something simillar, then straight public opinion and weight should convince the company that it <B><I>isn't</I></B> as good as what they claim it is. Anyway, who says Kyle, or any of us for that matter, have to qualify their opinion automatically in order to satisfy the few that suddenly want it? I'm starting to get very sick of companys and executives that suddenly want to prosecute someone just because they said something negative about their product, even though it is their opinion.

Call that rambling, but thats my opinion. Don't sue me.

 

[Polarhound]

Well, Tero was a man about it....

Makes me wonder though… says he has been asking Kyle for input for a long time. Now, if you ask for input over and over and all you get back is "your product sucks" then seems to me that's cause to get angry. Only difference is Tero works for a real company where people are accountable for professionalism, whereas {H} does not have that constraint... sorry, but people who run businesses don't/can't use terminology like "your product sucks".

Regardless, I wonder if Kyle can step up and make 3DMark a better product. If he chooses not to, then we all lose, and I'll really have a hard time listening the next time he tells me he cares about the hardware community. It’s easy to be a critic, it takes guts and ability to make something.

I don't know that I can agree with the "real company" comment, especially since Kyle has been able to absorb 6 figure lawyer costs in the Phantom suits.... OCP seems like it is profitable enough and takes enough of his time to be a "real company."

Kyle should make a single editorial describing exactly what he thinks Futuremark should do to make their benchmarks "viable" and/or "valid" for current gamers/power users. To do should nip ANY speculation in the bud as to what he expects out of Futuremark.

 

[Polarhound]

I am reading carefully through the many good questions and constructive feedback that this very lengthy thread has. I'll try to comment on those that I can and also I will ask others from Futuremark to step in where necessary.

This is something we have considered continuously. Unfortunately, it is more difficult than it might appear at first sight. Sure, it would be possible to license currently available engines, but then again, by definition, those are already out there and many games using them have benchmarks. We probably could not add any real value if we used today's engine technology. And when you consider that we are trying to predict future technologies, then the engine licencing becomes a problem, because game developers are generally not willing to give out any new tech due to competitive or technical reasons, or the engine's features are likely to change substantially before the game ships.

Although there are many games that use current engines, they must balance engine features with acceptable system specifications. If Futuremark were to take EVERY feature to the extreme, to test the limits of the engine, I would be more likely to purchase 3DMark.

 

[Varsis]

Why desn't 3DMark correlate with Hardocp to make a professional, NO PANSIES bench that we can all agree with and count on. Instead of the usual fruity "crap"

 

[ittech]

I haven't posted much less read hard|forum for quite a long time... Since I got banned quite a while ago for something that was a bit dumb, but no hard feelings.


Anyways I suggest to Futuremark that to improve the "usefulness" of their benchmark, they need to diversify the 3dmark scores into a few different tests.

One 3dmark number just isn't going to do it.

I suggest that when you start up 3dmark you pick the tests you want to run, or run all of them, but at the end you get a few different 3dmark points.

Just off the top of my head:

Futuristic Points:
Current Points:
Old School Points:

Just divide up the tests so that Futuristic is your best guess at what tech games in the future will use and how well cards do at that. Current is taliored to features and tech current game engines are using, and Old School is for year- 2 year old engines.

Then we can all use "current" as the most important 3dmark, and note "futuristic" as important, but not as important as you can't actually buy a game that would relate to.

Thanks for the time.

 

[FrgMstr]

I don't know that I can agree with the "real company" comment, especially since Kyle has been able to absorb 6 figure lawyer costs in the Phantom suits.... OCP seems like it is profitable enough and takes enough of his time to be a "real company."

Kyle should make a single editorial describing exactly what he thinks Futuremark should do to make their benchmarks "viable" and/or "valid" for current gamers/power users. To do should nip ANY speculation in the bud as to what he expects out of Futuremark.

My Momma taught me to save up for a rainy day. And litigation was a sure bet sooner or later the way we share our opinion so freely. The Phantom thing it laughable though. Maybe if we are lucky, we will be able to establish some case law that will help protect all of us Netizens.

 

[DthInd]

I don't know that I can agree with the "real company" comment, especially since Kyle has been able to absorb 6 figure lawyer costs in the Phantom suits.... OCP seems like it is profitable enough and takes enough of his time to be a "real company."

Kyle should make a single editorial describing exactly what he thinks Futuremark should do to make their benchmarks "viable" and/or "valid" for current gamers/power users. To do should nip ANY speculation in the bud as to what he expects out of Futuremark.

In short, are you smoking rock?

What part of the world are you from that you are not attempting in some capacity to earn more income for yourself and your family. You have NO RIGHT to judge someone based on their ability to earn an income as a direct result of their hard work. With that in mind, I hope Kyle and the [H] make a seven figure income next year. Regardless of their personal assets, income, revenue stream or click through percentage, I will continue to come to this site, because I for one, strongly believe that the [H] is playing above board and telling it like they see it.

Move on, nothing to see here...

 

[9mmx19]

I think that editorial would be a great idea . I think its pretty expected that they are upset though - they bill their product as the "gamers benchmark" but apparently thats not really the case and youve stated that openly.

Personally I just installed it to see what it looked like - but now its gone.

 

[Fooshnik]

...it would be possible to license currently available engines, but then again, by definition, those are already out there and many games using them have benchmarks. We probably could not add any real value if we used today's engine technology. And when you consider that we are trying to predict future technologies, then the engine licencing becomes a problem, because game developers are generally not willing to give out any new tech due to competitive or technical reasons, or the engine's features are likely to change substantially before the game ships.

What we have done is to get as much data points from game developers and the graphics industry as possible to help us determine which features and workload levels are likely to be used in game appearing 1 to 2 years from today. Then, we have built an engine for that.

Tero,

I appreciate you posting your thoughts here, and... you can disregard that email I sent you.

But you have to understand that the people who read [H] and most any other hardware site are not especially interested in how their system will work two years from now. In two years they'll be swapping their parts out for something new. I want to know how Q3 will perform on my system now. If I'm languishing in suckiness for two years because Futuremark told me that's the card I should get, then I'm not happy. However, if I see on a video card box that brand Z has a Futuremark Q3 of 68.3 and brand X has 62.9, that means something to me, because I know that Q3 on a standardized system will run faster on Z than on X. Even though some games do have built-in benchmarks, probably the top 30 FPS games use various versions of the top 5 engines. No one has taken those engines, put them together running at a standard resolution with a standard script, and output a benchmark number. If you did that, that would most certainly add value to your product.

I do see your whole "Future" point though. Joe Blow who doesn't read up on products wants to know that his $300 he's spending on a video card is going to last him. So still call it Futuremark! Keep some demos of what you think future games will be in the product. But add something that is truly relevant now. I don't even see why you'd have to pay to license any engine except id's. I'd think everyone else would be eager to get more exposure for their product.

 

[SuX0rz]

Tero,

I too appreciate that you apologized and you can disreguard my email as well. If you can take some of the feed back you get here and merge that with your next product I suspect that it will be more excepted as a more reliable benchmark.

I do understand the element of predicting of how next-gen games will run is cool but I think that there is more relivence to put together a benchmark that has today's games. Not only would it make benchmark that much easier but it would also help to see how our systems will run games that we might not own.

Just my thoughts.

Nathan Dowd

 

[LyCoS]

Kyle should make a single editorial describing exactly what he thinks Futuremark should do to make their benchmarks "viable" and/or "valid" for current gamers/power users. To do should nip ANY speculation in the bud as to what he expects out of Futuremark.

i dont know for you, but i dont think thats HIS job.

i think 3D mark, instead of JUST "spitting out a score", should be a real benchmark, which tests the way the system really reacts at a lower level.. :
run in special windows conditions (only essential processes, minimum memory usage...) to actually test how the hardware reacts, not only fps/fps stability, but also monitor how the drivers react ( processor usage, memory usage, HDD usage, process monitoring... ), even registery monitoring, in order to verify if the optimisations used arent *benchmark* specific.

The fact of having shader optimisations or what not doesnt disturb me. They WOULD be used in games. but timedemo (like what nvidia used in 2003...) optimisations should be detectable... within the benchmark itself.

the result would be like:
*some irrelevant score to campare groce performance*
gametest1 : FPS *click here for stability graph* *click here for memory usage graph*......

and so on. I know the fps graph is available for the paying version, but it sould be monitored anyway...

 

[Bendill]

Well, I for one am glad this matter wasn't handed to the lawyers to duke it out. That wouldn't have helped either one... Unless the lawyer were in fact "Duking" it out, like punching each other, kicking in the shins, pulling hair, clawing and stuff, that would have been fun to see.. =D

 

[Blackdog]

My opinion of 3dmark has dropped in the past 2 years. I used to like it but now, I just view it as a novelty. The best way to benchmark your PC is test it with the games you want to play. 3dmark has moved more away from CPU and RAM and just hinges on the GPU, and not all games use solely the GPU, but use all elements of the PC.

So it's fun to see the neat demos in it, but I don't need 3dmark to determine if MY pc kicks butt.

 

[md262626]

Yeah the dude apologized. Not hard to figure that one out. Someone higher up than him put some big time heat down on his ass.

Or maybe he's a decent guy and just decided to do the right thing!

 

[johndoe]

I had started this thread elsewhere about 3D Mark 2005 the very next day after it was released

'nuff said

 

[ST|FFY]

My opinion of 3dmark has dropped in the past 2 years. I used to like it but now, I just view it as a novelty. The best way to benchmark your PC is test it with the games you want to play. 3dmark has moved more away from CPU and RAM and just hinges on the GPU, and not all games use solely the GPU, but use all elements of the PC.

So it's fun to see the neat demos in it, but I don't need 3dmark to determine if MY pc kicks butt.

this is so true, the only way to "benchmark" is to play the game urself

 

[electech98]

Kyle, to be honest, it's too bad they didn't sue you ...

the computer news field is rather "dull" at the moment ... I want some REAL news

Kyle, [H] - 1, plaintiffs - 0 (infinium)

was there anyone else who tried to sue you? (digging through years of your news ... would sidetrack me into reviews of old products )

and my "3rd" thought ... I think that Kyle should deserve the Pulitzer prize for great investigative (spellcheck ) reporting

my final thought (tired yet?), Kyle should cover the election ... too much corporations looking out for their own interest ... any chance on an article about the election related happenings in the near future?

Dude, I think your sig has WAY too many lines (10 max)!

 

[miazmaticdotcom]

I'd much rather spend my $20 on my girl instead of spending it on Bungholiomark2005 cause the points i score with her actually mean something haha.

You, sir, are quoted.

 

[Craz]

Kyle,

I believe that the CEO was only sorry that he could not move on with litigation. So afterwards he could brag and bolster about his product to make it more widely used & accepted. I believe there is something more to his withdrawal and apology then meets the eye. Him and team of his team of lawyers know that.

-Craz

 

[Ravenrex]

Kyle,

I believe that the CEO was only sorry that he could not move on with litigation. So afterwards he could brag and bolster about his product to make it more widely used & accepted. I believe there is something more to his withdrawal and apology then meets the eye. Him and team of his team of lawyers know that.

-Craz

Grow up. Contrary to what you seem to think some people can conduct themselves in a civil and mature manner, even after an emotional outburst.

 

[Evil Weazel]

I didn't read all of the posts here simply because there are too many. So don't flame me for possibly repeating something already said, or flame my spelling or grammar, keep it to topic related and "Cuz I said so" isn't a good enough reply.

For my part I think 3DMark is a valid tool for testing performance, my practice when building a system is to use 3DMark to get an overall indicator of performance then move on to some games and test that way. I think that far too many .com columnists try to use their influence and power to enforce their own opinions and over inflated egos. I can crush you simply because I don't like you, syndrome. No particular one person is intended, their are too many over inflated egos to mention, I have my opinions I am keeping names to myself.

Honestly has anyone here ever had a system that performed well in 3DMark and then sucked at gaming or vise versa a system that sucked at 3DMark and then rocked at gaming? I never have. That doesn't mean cause you got 30 fps average in 3DMark 05 your card sucks that might be a good score for most current technology. If card A gets 30 fps in 3DMark and card B gets 15 fps, card B is never going beat card A in real games. When a video card, CPU, RAM, etc. fail in 3DMark they are also poor performers in most CURRENT and FUTURE games as well. I stressed Current and Future because let's face it any video card available (current manufacture) today can get about a bazillion fps in Half Life on the other hand Doom 3, Far Cry, X2 Threat or any new game about to be released are another matter. But to sum up no card that bombs at an artificial bench will be truly stellar in any of these games. I think the real problem is when ATI or Nvidia or anyone else for that matter starts optimizing driver for benches only and forgets to optimize for games and compatibility.

These are my thoughts on the benchmark and some un named .com columnists, however the E-mail mentioned is probably not the best way to handle things. Coulda been done with more tact.

 

[[Ch]amsalot]

I think someone overclocking the card and showing the insane score shows DAMN WELL the capability of the card ...
I know your point ... but I think that as long as ATI says that a true hardcore enthusiast was able to do such and such and get this score, then it should be used for marketing to other enthusiasts (do u get my point, though?)

I get your point

However, true hardcore enthusiasts don't look to ATI's press releases to guage the potential of the card. They look to tech sites, and they'll go to Futuremark's database if they're inclined to see the top o/c'd scores.

Who actually goes to ATI's press release? The "masses" who don't know any better. They see 8000 bungholiomarks and think, "that's the card for me." The don't make the distinction between an overclocked card and stock, they just see the number. Then they wonder why the install it and only get a score of 4500.

Additionally, even for enthusiasts, as I mentioned earlier there's no way of judging stability for the overclocked cards. Sure it could run the benchmark and generate a result, but were their artifacts or other visual abnormalities? I'm not suggesting that macci's incredible 3DMark2005 benchmark run wasn't completely stable, for all I know it was a thing of beauty to behold. However, simply put, there's no way short of taking macci's word, that it was. Certainly, you and I can't tell, and clearly anyone reading ATI's press release can't tell. A 3DMark2005 score of 8000+ on a card who's core is overclocked some 300Mhz is NOT VALID, IMNSHO, if it did not run the benchmark cleanly, without any visual abnormalities.

On top of the above, the driver used was neither WHQL nor FM approved. To see why this is a key factor, look no further than here. ATI simply has no business publishing it in a press release to promote the prowess of the X800XT PE.

One final note. My commentary is limited to the manner in which official Futuremark Partners list scores. I'm certainly not suggesting that tech sites or magazines be limited in what they publish. But I find ATI's and NVIDIA's press releases misleading to the general public, unverifiable by most members of the tech community (something which is anathema if this were the scientific community), and a practice which should be stopped by Futuremark.

-[Ch]amsalot

 

[Trip2way]

.....
I also don't get this whole "you can't post your opinion the way your used to because you've become a popular site" thing. As if once you hit 10,000 viewers a day you have to become Tom Farking Brokaw and change the way you've been running things. If people want dry, boring, perspectiveless news and reviews then go read CNet.

Very nice perspective on the whole thing. Don't try to make sense out of the senseless.


ROCK ON ! ! ! [H]ardOcp ! ! !

 

[darktiger]

Screw futuremark.

 

[athlon750]

FM definitely seems to be on the decline. It's not just this senseless war with [H], either. There are rumbles of negative press and negative comments all across the netpress.

Sad, so sad, to see how the mighty have fallen.

 

[’m‚³‚ñ]

Maybe they'll come up with something similar to Aquamark3?

 

[Jon855]

So you got over an unfair banning? Tell me about it. Let's just say I lost some respect for Kyle now since I read that crap of people getting banned over something right. But of course, it's Kyle's website and I can STFU but not when this is going on. Very unfair. Kyle *should* respond to this question of why he banned people for being right. Maybe they insulted or degraded him afterwards but over something right? That's egoism explodism I'm seeing.

-J.

If I may give an input here.

1) Free Speech is a right (Not quoted, couple of pages ago) - you are right in this regard however posting in this forum is not a right, it's a privilege. Kyle runs this site and he may bans anybody as he sees fit, and this is still within the "Free Speech" or so as you have claimed which he has violated.

2) If you don't like the way Kyle is doing it, you are more than welcome to leave the forum or not post in here at all.

3) I should also note that I do at times see Kyle act a little like a little boy at times but I do understand that it's within his right to do so. He's providing us with a service, maybe you will disagree with me on this. Sometimes Kyle does need to grow up but this isn't the place to complain about it. Just so you know I've heard your voices, now hear mine.

As long we understand each other, all is good.

 

[MatDef]

If I may give an input here.

1) Free Speech is a right (Not quoted, couple of pages ago) - you are right in this regard however posting in this forum is not a right, it's a privilege. Kyle runs this site and he may bans anybody as he sees fit, and this is still within the "Free Speech" or so as you have claimed which he has violated.

2) If you don't like the way Kyle is doing it, you are more than welcome to leave the forum or not post in here at all.

3) I should also note that I do at times see Kyle act a little like a little boy at times but I do understand that it's within his right to do so. He's providing us with a service, maybe you will disagree with me on this. Sometimes Kyle does need to grow up but this isn't the place to complain about it. Just so you know I've heard your voices, now hear mine.

As long we understand each other, all is good.

Wow, thanks for bringing up a thread that had died almost 4 years ago.

 

[Jon855]

Wow, thanks for bringing up a thread that had died almost 4 years ago.

I didn't realize that

 

[MatDef]

I didn't realize that

Which is why I always check to see the post date before I respond, just in case.

 

[F.E.A.R.]

ROFLMAO

It was only on page 1309686870...just messing with ya...

 

[inotocracy]

I think the issue is this thread was linked to from the homepage. Oops. Still brings back memories though, I remember this thread when it happened

edit: lol, found my old post:

Futuremark is gonna get...