• Competitor rules

    Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.

Where did Dx10.1 from Vantage go, Nvidia knows

Its laughable really, nvidia may have the faster cards at the minute but they clearly are pretty dated in terms of features. Apparently speed is all that matters.
 
It's just speculation. Whoever writes this stuff on Fudzilla's a muppet.

Why would Futuremark put in a test that is unavailable to over half of it's users? It wouldn't be much of a useful benchmark then would it! :rolleyes:

The fact that they've made it exclusively DX10 already alienates a large portion of it's users.
 
wolvers69 said:
It's just speculation. Whoever writes this stuff on Fudzilla's a muppet.

Why would Futuremark put in a test that is unavailable to over half of it's users? It wouldn't be much of a useful benchmark then would it! :rolleyes:

The fact that they've made it exclusively DX10 already alienates a large portion of it's users.
Click to expand...

At the least it should be a test for those that have the option to run it, if people are afraid of their epeen shrinking then maybe futuremark could make the test not count towards the score. Just an eyecandy test or something along those lines. They already have the physics test which supports ageia cards, and theres really not many of them in ome pc's id assume.
 
wolvers69 said:
Why would Futuremark put in a test that is unavailable to over half of it's users? It wouldn't be much of a useful benchmark then would it! :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

They did it with the Nature test back in 3DM01 when only the 8500's could run it... so why wouldn't they put a 10.1 test in... its meant to demonstrate the latest graphics tech.
 
Lanz said:
Any dx8 cards could run the nature test in 3dmark01, it wasn't just the dx8.1 of the Radeon 8500.
Click to expand...

When Nature came out the 8500's were the only cards that could run it, nVidia only had the GeForce2 cards out at the time which were only DX7, it wasn't until the GeForce3's came out they could run it too.
 
wolvers69 said:
It's just speculation. Whoever writes this stuff on Fudzilla's a muppet.

Why would Futuremark put in a test that is unavailable to over half of it's users? It wouldn't be much of a useful benchmark then would it! :rolleyes:

The fact that they've made it exclusively DX10 already alienates a large portion of it's users.
Click to expand...

So the inclusion of nvidia owned IP, Physx, which has a market penetration far lower than say... ATI... thats included?

Its a benchmarking program, it tests the latest and greatest, that is DX10. Get with it... I wouldn't want it benching DX7 simply cause I have Win95.
 
It just seems a rather unusual step. Sure, build a DX10 benchmark that looks awesome but don't bring it up to the latest specification?

There probably is a sound reason behind the decision, but none of you can blame the conspiracy theorists for querying it.

It would be something along the lines of them dropping SM3.0 support from 3Dmark06. So what? It's one of the key elements of DirectX 9.0c which the Raeon X8** series of cards were not capable of processing, but the Geforce 6*** series were. Those same conspiracy rheorists would have had a field day at that point, would they not?

In light of such details, the decision by Futuremark does seem a bit perculiar but I'm not privy to their policy-making processes and I can't run Vantage, anyway. So I'm not fussed.
 
So much nVidia bashing on these forums these days. :/

What's the big deal with DX10.1 not being included? It's used in how many games? I can't even name one. It might be the "latest" technology, but if it's not used yet, why include it?

I know ATI made a big deal about 10.1 and all, but it really is just a miniscule update to the already struggling DX10, so including it seems pointless at this current time.
 
spicypixel said:
So the inclusion of nvidia owned IP, Physx, which has a market penetration far lower than say... ATI... thats included?.
Click to expand...

Yep, fair point.

spicypixel said:
Its a benchmarking program, it tests the latest and greatest, that is DX10. Get with it... I wouldn't want it benching DX7 simply cause I have Win95.
Click to expand...

Erm.........that's what I was getting at. DX10.1 tests would half the number of users again after already making it Vista exclusive. I don't care cos I'm running Vista but I know that there are probably more people still on XP.

In reality I would imagine that they are sponsored by Nvidia and Microsoft but who cares, it's just a bit of benchmarking, epeen software. As long as ATI keep making good graphics cards with good drivers and good game support then no problem. ATI could always enlarge their own epeens by creating their own benchmarking suite.
 
Dont think its so much that its not used in games at the moment, but the fact is that it is considered the most up to date technology, and that is what 3D Mark should include.

/me puts on flack armour

And tbh, if ones card does not have support for DX10.1 then tough luck.

/me takes off flack armour
 
MystaEB said:
I know ATI made a big deal about 10.1 and all, but it really is just a miniscule update to the already struggling DX10, so including it seems pointless at this current time.
Click to expand...

If the Assasins Creed benchmarks are correct and it improves performance with 4xAA applied then it is a pretty important "miniscule update" in my eyes.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom