Your Thoughts on 3DMark threats to HardOCP.

[Terra]

Given that what is posted on the [H]ardOCP's main is a true representation of the truth I got this to say:

UP YOUR'S, Futuremark!
It's just my personal oppinion, now sue me...see if I care

Terra...

 

[BoogerBomb]

Im thinking this was meant to be private correspondence between companies that Kyle decided to throw out into the open to trash a company whose product he is known to not like. FM should have asked that the emails be treated as such and it is unfortunate that a disclaimer like that has to be made on every piece of email that a company sends out that is intended as such.

Coincidence that is it right before an editorial he had planned?

 

[FrgMstr]

So whats my point? Well, there is more to this story, and i dont think we will ever see it. Futuremark isnt going to come out of the blue and just start threatening to sue. I really think there is more correspondance that Kyle isnt letting out. It wouldnt make him look good (or right) in this case. Right now, all you see is the part that makes [H] look good. In reality, alot of chum has just been fed to hungry sharks here.

Actually no, you got the whole thread this morning. I was surprised to see him go off and wondered if there was more myself, and that is why I asked him that. As for what was NOT posted, here is my reply to his last email in full.

"My attorney is CCd on this as he was on the last email. I am sorry you cannot give specifics. You can use the above email address to contact him. Please never contact me directly again."

 

[RS]

Im thinking this was meant to be private correspondence between companies that Kyle decided to throw out into the open to trash a company whose product he is known to not like. FM should have asked that the emails be treated as such and it is unfortunate that a disclaimer like that has to be made on every piece of email that a company sends out that is intended as such.

Coincidence that is it right before an editorial he had planned?

And what corporate cubicle did you write this one out of, Mr. Corpo-drone-Dolt? These disclaimers are trash. If you don't want your email to be posted, don't send it. Once it is in someone else's mailbox, they can do whatever they want with it.

 

[nst6563]

this just solidifies the fact that I never had bought a futuremark product, and now never will. Hell, I originally was thinking about d/l the new one...but now I won't even do that.

They don't even deserve to be recognized as a "test application" in hardware reviews anymore IMO.

 

[Fooshnik]

Well my notes were a bit shorter than those written by some, but they pretty much cover how I feel:

"To: [email protected]
Sent: Wednesday, October 06, 2004 2:38 PM

Subject: Good work son

Amazing. You made it to Executive Vice President of Sales and Marketing without knowing the First Rule about sales or marketing: Don't Make Your Product Look Like Ass By Acting Like An Ass. You know what I mean.

Have a nice day, and hopefully you'll still have a job tomorrow.


RLB"


And as I favor to the company, which I care so little about, I also dropped a note to the CEO, who is apparently the only executive on the corporate ladder higher than this guy (amazing):

"To: [email protected]
Sent: Wednesday, October 06, 2004 2:47 PM

Subject: Time to promote someone...

To the position of Executive Vice President, Sales & Marketing, and please terminate the one you have before he does further damage to your company and it's reputation. One can often recognize the merits of a product by the character of those who represent it. I'll assume his appointment was not your doing or you Just Didn't Know.

re: HardOCP.com


Thank you,

Robert Beal"


I do have an evil streak, and I'm all for protecting the interests of the company that pays your salary, but you can't violate the First Rule. It's just bad business. Hopefully Tero Sarkkinen, if that is his real name, will be off running some other organization into the ground before Futuremark goes under. Not that I've used Futuremark since 2000, I'd just like for him to get what's coming to him.

And thank you Kyle for keeping your readers informed of the crap you have to deal with. I find it very interesting to learn about the characters behind the products I use and hear about. It also makes me glad I don't run a website.

 

[Tidy_Sammy]

I think all futuremark products are not all that and the 3dmark series of benchmarks are over-rated crap and I especially think that 3dmark05 is a flawed benchmark that runs terrible. I mean come on it doesnt run smooth on my machine. 3.4 northwood oc'd to 3.6 with a gig of geil pc3200 ultra platinum ddr and a BFGTech6800GTOC oc'd to 400/1100 stable.

Futuremark you can quote me. "You suck". Aquamark3 is a much prettier benchmark.

First of all it should run well on that rig, I have a inferior system Barton 2500+ (stock/X800 VIVO + 16 pipes@pro speeds/1024 mb's Twinmoss 3200 BH-5 (6-2-2-2)/Abit NF7-S and it runs very well, you either need to troubleshoot your system if it isn't performing up to scratch or withdraw your incorrect comments.

Also I shall suggest spectacles or some form of sight rendering helping tool since the technicalities of 05' far surpass Aquamark, thus you have nothing to merit that statement.

 

[AH786]

hardocp is totally right. theyre benchmarks are meaningless. doom3 maxed out on my pc looks AND plays better then the POS demos(3dm05) they have out. same with farcry.

 

[TeamMCS]

And what corporate cubicle did you write this one out of, Mr. Corpo-drone-Dolt? These disclaimers are trash. If you don't want your email to be posted, don't send it. Once it is in someone else's mailbox, they can do whatever they want with it.

I don't think thats necessarily true. If the correct copyrights are adhired to and depending on the contry of destination they cannot mearly "do what they want".

 

[FrgMstr]

Im thinking this was meant to be private correspondence between companies that Kyle decided to throw out into the open to trash a company whose product he is known to not like. FM should have asked that the emails be treated as such and it is unfortunate that a disclaimer like that has to be made on every piece of email that a company sends out that is intended as such.

Coincidence that is it right before an editorial he had planned?

We have used correspondence of Tero's in the past and being that I am a "reporter" he has no reason to think what he is saying is off the record or private in any way shape or form. He never asked for protection or that the email not be used publicly.

As for coincidence, I think you are totally correct. I think this was Tero's attempt to let us know that if we publish an editorial that he does not like, that he will in fact bring his legal team to our doorstep. Quite frankly, we write every review, article and editorial with that assumption...

 

[Tidy_Sammy]

hardocp is totally right. theyre benchmarks are meaningless. doom3 maxed out on my pc looks AND plays better then the POS demos(3dm05) they have out. same with farcry.

Once again more quotes from people who have no clue what they're speaking of, are you trying to tell me D3 or FC look better then 05'?, if so then whilst yes, to you (and some others) they may seem more appealing to the eye, the fact is that technically they're inferior in a magnitude of ways.

 

[forcefed]

Didnt Tero's mother ever teach him to think twice before he says something?
Its only a matter of time before he's fired and Kyle is given an apology by the FM head huncho.

 

[DiscardME]

Once again more quotes from people who have no clue what they're speaking of, are you trying to tell me D3 or FC look better then 05'?, if so then whilst yes, to you (and some others) they may seem more appealing to the eye, the fact is that technically they're inferior in a magnitude of ways.

Try not to turn this into a flamewar. He was only expressing his opinion. Opinions and reaction to said opinions are the subject of this thread.

Crap - just had a moderator moment. Sorry.

 

[PoW]

Muhahaha well done kyle, Futuremark will go the way of Infinium Labs with some luck

 

[Dataman]

It's a Worthless package. Numbers are worthless.

The software is not worth buying and the results are meanless except to brag I got XXXX number.

It's not on my computer and I tell people not worth having.

Dataman

 

[PRIME1]

I have refused to download 3dSkidmark since the whole worhtless 03 problems.

It's nothing more than eye candy. About as useful today as a screensaver.

I stand by my Constitutional right to call the software garbage and I support [H] in having that same right. This is why I donate to the EFF.

 

[HighwayAssassins]

yea fuck 3dmark...bunch of babies, instead of whining about people saying their product sucks, why dont tehy make a product that people like? too hard i guess

Lets make a "fuck futuremark" fund and everyone donates like $2 or something so if futuremark takes HardOCP to court, which would be soo stupid, HardOCP can jsut walk all over them.

 

[dropper]

Here is my problem: With 3dMark05, there are deliberate scenes in there that run in the "Frames-per-minute" arena, intentionally so. Many of their tests and demo scenes are now in the pay category. Why is this? If there are ads and sponsors, wanting to get us to upgrade our hardware, why do the Average Joe’s have to pay anything?

If I would already be done if I were using a Falcon, would I even need the benchmark to tell me so?

I look at these benchmarks more as a tech demo, and lately, that demo is loosing its luster. How cool was the "Neo" demo, or, if I remember correctly, the precursor to Max Payne (or was that another benchmark?)?

Now, on an Athlon XP 2600+ with a 5800U, I am hitting the minimum baseline for the bench, and it is barely watchable (haven't had time to test it on my 3500 with X800XTPE). I can run Far Cry on my 1800+ with an old GeForce 3:Ti with much eye candy.

I guess my point here, is that this engine that they have built isn't scaleable. Wouldn't it be cool to have a benchmark that told you how much of your video card you could use and maintain a 45 FPS, or 60 FPS rate? A really powerful system might be able to run with full shadows at 1280x1024 with 16xAA and 8xAF, where a lesser system my need to run at 1024x768 with no AA and 2xAF and low detail shadows.

Base each factor with a point scale, but make it so that a lower resolution with higher AA and AF would be near a higher res with lower AA and AF, since visually they may be the same. Also, you could possibly put in flexible polygon LOD, reducing until you hit the FPS level. The higher the polygons, the higher your score. And the great thing, it would be possible to get this thing to scale nicely to new generations of video cards. Just make incredibly highly detailed base objects that probably wouldn't be fully renderable for many years.

The problem with that from a company’s perspective is that it shortens the revenue stream. Well, then they would just need to come out with new demos that plug into their engine. Load them up with adverts like they do now. Leave in the website type benchmark stuff for the pro version, but change the financial model to a yearly based one, and maybe halve the cost, or leave it at 2 years for the same price. Having plug in demos would also reduce the risk of cheating, since they could write demos that should get nearly the same score, but using a different type of scene.

Also, letting me store a few bits of data on server really doesn't cost a whole bunch and should be imbedded in the cost of advertising. It promotes usage of the software by users and that in turn promotes the usage of the benchmark by companies trying to sell their hardware. Limiting me to 5 benchmarks is quite restrictive.

Keith

 

[Tidy_Sammy]

Try not to turn this into a flamewar. He was only expressing his opinion. Opinions and reaction to said opinions are the subject of this thread.

Crap - just had a moderator moment. Sorry.

I'm sorry if it seems that way but please note I'm not trying to start one, merely saying that if you're going to post in this thread, atleast don't post bs, and if you do post stupid things, post some relevant sources that aid your claim, rather then come out with daft one liners that do nothing but bring this thread down.

 

[Tekara]

awww, I got the generic email reply. . . makes me feel all warm and fuzzy inside. . . .still not going to support them anymore though. . .

Dear ,

Thank you for your feedback. While I do regret my reaction this
morning,
please let me explain reasons for it.

We have tried to work years with Kyle and his team and tried to solicit
feedback on how we can make a better product. Unfortunately, we have
not
received it and at this point we're just frustrated about it.

I totally respect everyone's personal opinion. However, I was just so
frustrated to see again just one line of saying we have a bad product
without offering any reasons as to why he so thinks. That does not
benefit
anyone and that is what I hope would stop. I am totally okay for airing
opinions and we welcome all feedback, good and bad, that somehow helps
the
industry move forward.

Sincerely,



Tero Sarkkinen
Executive Vice President of Sales and Marketing

Futuremark Corporation
[email protected], http://www.futuremark.com

 

[rashly]

This is a dumb move by FM, anyone can see that. Kyle has every right to post what he wants on his website, especially if it's an opinion.

If I were FM, I would be pissed too at Kyle's constant jabs at how their benchmark relates to the industry. Of course a synthetic benchmark isn’t going to show exactly how certain games will play. The only thing that will show that is benchmarking that game. Why do you use D3 as a benchmark for graphics cards when it will show nothing about FEAR, and will only show how D3 plays? How can the D3 benchmark be used to show how cards will play in the future? How can we make a decision on a purchase when the game that we play the most isn’t on a reviewer’s list? Can we assume that if a certain piece of hardware runs better on all other games it will run better on a game not benchmarked, or are generalizations a bad thing?

3Dmark has done a great job at giving a general idea of which hardware will perform the best in future games. Of course it won’t show what’s best for a particular game. Assuming that it will is just plain ignorant, and Kyle seems to be the only one thinking that that’s what the benchmark is supposed to do. Look at the track record and say that 3Dmark hasn’t done a good job at making predictions. 3Dmark2001 showed how much better the nv25 was over the r200. 3Dmark03 showed how horrible the nv3x was (this application showed the nv3x’s dismal ps20 before anything else) and how great the r3x0 was. 3Dmark05 shows how even the nv40 and r420 are, with the r420 having a little bit of an edge. So far this has shown true in the newer games, with D3 being the exception to the rule for obvious reasons. We’ll have to wait until UE3 engine games and the like are released to see if FM is correct (once again) this time around.

While I defend Kyle’s right to say whatever he pleases, and I think FM is way out of line, Kyle’s opinion is just that. An opinion, which he backed up with incorrect statements. FM has done a great job at predicting future 3D performance. We know that to be true. Kyle’s stance to only use actual games in reviews is also respectable. That is a great way to show how today’s games are going to perform, but it says very little about future games. The only things that can show future performance are time and synthetic benchmarks. 3Dmark just happens to be the best synthetic benchmark out there, based on its previous history of predicting performance.

If anything, talk about how DST makes the benchmark biased and FM is going against their own DX only specs. Attacking synthetic benchmarks is just dumb, especially with weak arguments like “it doesn’t show how my particular game will perform”. That just seems to be grasping for straws there.

Nevertheless, Kyle brought this about himself, and this could prove to be very beneficial to him. The constant jabbing at FM, which is sometimes excessive and unwarranted, like, ”3DMark05 sucks as a benchmark, but it sure is pretty and great fun to watch,” is nothing but flame bait (and on a very childish level at times). The IL debacle must’ve generated many hits, and getting another lawsuit against FM would generate many more (especially since everyone would side with [H] over this issue). If (page hits from this) > (lawyer fees) then Kyle’s flame bait worked.

 

[M3ltd0Vvn]

]Yes it is known as real games and fraps, you should give it a try sometime.

That supposed to mean something? I have 77 games in my drawer beside me - can I not be interested in a [H] benchmark utility that I had thought I heard existed?

Fraps? Got it right here.

Props to Boogerbomb for answering my post - yes that was what I was thinking of - the [H] Unreal BM ute.

-=M=-

 

[Tidy_Sammy]

yea fuck 3dmark...bunch of babies, instead of whining about people saying their product sucks, why dont tehy make a product that people like? too hard i guess

Lets make a "fuck futuremark" fund and everyone donates like $2 or something so if futuremark takes HardOCP to court, which would be soo stupid, HardOCP can jsut walk all over them.

Since they don't charge you to use the base (and most important) features of their benchmark why don't you?, I hear people complaining but unless you plan on making a better benchmark or helping them improve theirs then you really should keep schtoom.

Noone forces you to download it, if you don't like it, fair enough, don't download it, is that to complicated for your brain to analyze and coherently react to?

 

[[LG]BLaRG]

or wahtever.

3dmark is a VERY useful benchmark. It benchmarks 3dmark performance, and nothing benchmarks 3dmark better than 3dmark. it also looks pretty. LOL

First of all your comment = "wahtever"

How is 3DMark usefull? I totally agree with [H] on this. Ever since 3DMark03 came out it seemed like they were catering to certain GPU manufacturers.

 

[AH786]

I'm sorry if it seems that way but please note I'm not trying to start one, merely saying that if you're going to post in this thread, atleast don't post bs, and if you do post stupid things, post some relevant sources that aid your claim, rather then come out with daft one liners that do nothing but bring this thread down.

make a poll. "which engine looks best". d3, farcry, 3dmark 05 (insert return to proxicon or whatever u think is best)

i guarantee you the 3dmark 05 option would get the lowest posts.

 

[micah]

I hope every reader of [H] never buys a thing from Futuremark again also any company that goes along with them be it NVIDIA or ATI or anyone else.
That is the only way to put a stop to foolish people like them that think they are above every one else. Hit them where it hurts the most in their bank accounts.

[H] is one of the best sites online if not the best about this sort of stuff. They tell it how it is for the most part and really are not to brand loyal. Some sites are very brand loyal and I for one stop reading them as soon as I see that they are.

I am glad to see [H] sticking up for itself and I hope they never back down from anyone Great job [H] staff keep up the great work

 

[Casual Lurker]

[LG]BLaRG - i think the batteries ran out on your sarcasm detector

 

[HighwayAssassins]

Since they don't charge you to use the base (and most important) features of their benchmark why don't you?, I hear people complaining but unless you plan on making a better benchmark or helping them improve theirs then you really should keep schtoom.

Noone forces you to download it, if you don't like it, fair enough, don't download it, is that to complicated for your brain to analyze and coherently react to?

im not talking about 3dmark as a benchmark, i am talking about futuremark as a company attacking HardOCP...you dont attack people who dont like your bench mark, you take their advice and make the next one better, not try to take them to court. I think kyle represents 90% of us gamers.

 

[DiscardME]

I bet we are all getting these now:

Thank you for your feedback. While I do regret my reaction this morning, please let me explain reasons for it.

We have tried to work years with Kyle and his team and tried to solicit feedback on how we can make a better product. Unfortunately, we have not received it and at this point we're just frustrated about it.

I totally respect everyone's personal opinion. However, I was just so frustrated to see again just one line of saying we have a bad product without offering any reasons as to why he so thinks. That does not benefit anyone and that is what I hope would stop. I am totally okay for airing opinions and we welcome all feedback, good and bad, that somehow helps the industry move forward.

Sincerely,



Tero Sarkkinen
Executive Vice President of Sales and Marketing

Futuremark Corporation
[email protected], http://www.futuremark.com

First of all - YEARS? Surely that is an overstatement. And if you want proof for his comments, there Tero, use Google. It appears that Kyle has in fact tried to work with you as well. I agree with Kyle - sounds like a communication channel issue. Like a user and a trainer trying to talk about proper product use. Sometimes they just can't see the other's position. Especially when it comes to buzzwords like "value" and "solution".

The definition of value and solution can have completely different meanings for Kyle and Tero - they will never agree. So we have an arguement, and we are all in thread that grows faster than we can refresh.

F5 F5 F5.

 

[GavinJCD]

3DMark has its place. It does a good job of stressing you rsystem and using parts of the graphics cards that most games wont for another few years or so. To say that it is so useless that nobody should ever use it shows how short-sided some people are. Its just not good for being a benchmark for how a game will perform on a system its more suited as to how a piece of hardware will improve performance on your system. Why does Kyle not use it for this purpose? Think people will interpret it the wrong way?

Right I haven't read every post, there are a lot of them. But in response to this...

Maybe he does use it for that purpose, but the fact is that's not what it was DESIGNED to do. 3Dmark05 is designed to test the 3D performance of your system, and compute the result in a nice easy-to-understand number that will reflect real world performance of the hardware in question. A lot of companies including Nvidia and Ati spend quite a bit of money on the beta program so they can have their say etc on how it should work. And at the end of the day it DOES NOT DO WHAT IT IS SUPPOSED TO DO, at all.

So what do we say about it, this piece of software is very well known, famous in fact. Everyone talks about it. Futuremark market it around the world. But again at the end of the day it simply doesn't work as it was intended.

Now if I ran a popular hardware site I KNOW that I would take every oppurtunity to point this out as much as possible. Whinging and complaining to hardware sites who point this out isn't going to get you anywhere.

Gavin J. C. Doherty

 

[BoogerBomb]

shit i keep clicking refresh thank you for the f5 note lol.

 

[archevilangel]

Well I guess they realized that sueing to get what you want is the american way... Then again I think they'll learn the [H]ard way that americans also have the right to speak their opinions. Just you wait, they'll find a lawyer that doesn't mind getting paid to lose rofl.

 

[Rabbit]

I hope every reader of [H] never buys a thing from Futuremark again also any company that goes along with them be it NVIDIA or ATI or anyone else.

You propose we run without graphics cards because they side with another company? NVIDIA and ATI are basically 100% of the graphics card market.. it's hard not to buy anything from them when they pwn 100% of the market..

 

[GavinJCD]

You propose we run without graphics cards because they side with another company? NVIDIA and ATI are basically 100% of the graphics card market.. it's hard not to buy anything from them when they pwn 100% of the market..

Actually I think Intel is the market leader, because of their nasty onboard extreme graphics.

Gav

 

[R3D33M3R]

Jeebus, do I have to start up www.whereis3dmark.com?

Chris Morley
Founder - WhereIsPhantom.com

Man, i was soooooo laughing at this !!!!! ( btw domain is already registered , so if u need hosting , pls let me know i will gladly pay for a year at least, PM me if so )
Kyle bro , i am not an American and i dont live in USA but i did aply to join the US troops in IRAQ twice but got rejected due to my health condition.
The thing about 3DMark is that it looks nice. PERIOD ! I dont like threats, no one does, so threatning someone is not a solution, so i fully understand Kyle's reply to whoever that guy was.
Keep the good work !

 

[BoogerBomb]

Right I haven't read every post, there are a lot of them. But in response to this...

Maybe he does use it for that purpose, but the fact is that's not what it was DESIGNED to do. 3Dmark05 is designed to test the 3D performance of your system, and compute the result in a nice easy-to-understand number that will reflect real world performance of the hardware in question. A lot of companies including Nvidia and Ati spend quite a bit of money on the beta program so they can have their say etc on how it should work. And at the end of the day it DOES NOT DO WHAT IT IS SUPPOSED TO DO, at all.

So what do we say about it, this piece of software is very well known, famous in fact. Everyone talks about it. Futuremark market it around the world. But again at the end of the day it simply doesn't work as it was intended.

Now if I ran a popular hardware site I KNOW that I would take every oppurtunity to point this out as much as possible. Whinging and complaining to hardware sites who point this out isn't going to get you anywhere.

Gavin J. C. Doherty

Oh I did skip over pages 3 thourgh 10 beacuse after the first few posts all I saw was "fuck you futuremark you suck donkey balls" and "thanks Kyle for standing up" and I use quotes because those aren't the actual words just the gyst of most posts. Lots of people say they are going to uninstall the free version of the product or not install the free version of the product. And this is supposed to hurt FM how? This will not help FM put out a better benchmark. Instead just email FM and tell them what you expect a banchmark to be and that will do much more to help it than not using the free version.

 

[mamisano]

I guess 3Dmark, and comparing the results is sort of like how guys benchrace their results from dynoing their car. I have 350RWHP! So what, I have 380RWHP! In the end, its what happens out on the track that makes the most difference, not the numbers from the Dyno.

Same goes with 3DMark....

 

[Rabbit]

Actually I think Intel is the market leader, because of their nasty onboard extreme graphics.

Gav

LOL hahhaha i'm glad i wasn't eating or drinking i surely would have choked hahahha

 

[BoogerBomb]

LOL hahhaha i'm glad i wasn't eating or drinking i surely would have choked hahahha

He is right though.

 

[[BB] Rick James]

Futuremark sucks pigs nut sacks. The only reason I use it is to see what performance increases I got from an overclock; even then it doesn't mean diddly dick.