Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 37

Thread: Nvidia blames nvidia for driver cheating in H.A.W.X. 2

  1. #11
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    5,411

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by deanjo View Post
    Cheating would be requesting 4x AA and then the drivers providing only 2x AA.
    nvidia cheat on SSAA to.. they only give you grid-sample SSAA and not the real true Rotated Sample SSAA

  2. #12
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Third Rock from the Sun
    Posts
    6,587

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Qaridarium View Post
    its just cheating if the dev programm an app and wana have highest AA

    then 8x-RotatedSample-SuperSampleAA is the true wanted AA and not that nvidia Joke AA
    LMFAO, then the application should show that option. Seriously Q give your head a shake. The true wanted AA mode is the one selected by the user. Only you would consider unexpected behavior caused by not honoring a deliberate end user setting a "cheat". If the same situation was applied to retail for example:

    You go in to buy a TV at an advertised price. You get the TV but a higher quality one is in the box but lists the same specs but when you get to the till they try to charge you more for the TV without giving a reason. In most countries that is even illegal, it's called "bait and switch".

  3. #13
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    5,411

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by deanjo View Post
    LMFAO, then the application should show that option. Seriously Q give your head a shake. The true wanted AA mode is the one selected by the user. Only you would consider unexpected behavior caused by not honoring a deliberate end user setting a "cheat". If the same situation was applied to retail for example:

    You go in to buy a TV at an advertised price. You get the TV but a higher quality one is in the box but lists the same specs but when you get to the till they try to charge you more for the TV without giving a reason. In most countries that is even illegal, it's called "bait and switch".
    "The true wanted AA mode is the one selected by the user"

    no the true wanted AA mode is the one selected by the DEV!

    the user do only use the app and the user belive in the DEV and they wana have what the DEV programms.

    you think the AA mode selected in the source code is wrong and i tell you only the written text in the app is wrong the source code is right.

    its a cheat in your definition the DEV force the highest AA mode means in real 8xRSSSAA and nvidia only gives 4xAA out.. thats a cheat!

    cheat because only the sourcecode care in the software world.

  4. #14
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Third Rock from the Sun
    Posts
    6,587

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Qaridarium View Post
    "The true wanted AA mode is the one selected by the user"

    no the true wanted AA mode is the one selected by the DEV!
    No it isn't as if it was then it would stipulate that on the bloody menu. It's a case where the dev used one method of requesting what they thought was the correct way to request the mode but the end result wound up requesting something other then what was desired.

    the user do only use the app and the user belive in the DEV and they wana have what the DEV programms.
    This has to be the absolute stupidest argument I have read. Speaking as a DEV you are wrong wrong wrong. Having code that pulls in incorrect results is never the wish of any dev.

    you think the AA mode selected in the source code is wrong and i tell you only the written text in the app is wrong the source code is right.
    See above comment.

    its a cheat in your definition the DEV force the highest AA mode means in real 8xRSSSAA and nvidia only gives 4xAA out.. thats a cheat!
    If my TV is set to 720p and an attached device is set to 720p but it gives 1080i that is not a cheat, that is a bug.

  5. #15
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    5,411

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by deanjo View Post
    No it isn't as if it was then it would stipulate that on the bloody menu. It's a case where the dev used one method of requesting what they thought was the correct way to request the mode but the end result wound up requesting something other then what was desired.
    This has to be the absolute stupidest argument I have read. Speaking as a DEV you are wrong wrong wrong. Having code that pulls in incorrect results is never the wish of any dev.
    See above comment.
    If my TV is set to 720p and an attached device is set to 720p but it gives 1080i that is not a cheat, that is a bug.
    its so easy to check if its an app bug or an driver cheat.

    an app bug should only be fixed in the APP sourcecode

    and not in the nvidia driver thats because fix the so called 'bug' in the app fix that on any GPUs intel,amd,via and not only for nvidia

    so its easy to check its in the driver then its a cheat! is the bugfix in the app then its not a cheat.

  6. #16
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Third Rock from the Sun
    Posts
    6,587

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Qaridarium View Post
    its so easy to check if its an app bug or an driver cheat.

    an app bug should only be fixed in the APP sourcecode

    and not in the nvidia driver thats because fix the so called 'bug' in the app fix that on any GPUs intel,amd,via and not only for nvidia

    so its easy to check its in the driver then its a cheat! is the bugfix in the app then its not a cheat.
    Absolutely a bug "should" be fixed in the apps source. Unfortunately that is not always the case. Video drivers are crammed full of app specific fixes. Look at ANY driver release from ANY vendor and you will see thousands of these examples where the bug was addressed at the driver level instead of at the app level. IF the desired effect of the setting in the app was to use the best option provided by the hardware then the dev should have made the setting with options such as "Good, better, best" and not a specific setting such as "2x AA, 4x AA, 8x AA, etc" as they have no direct correlation to what would be chosen and results would vary with different devices.

    I'll use one example of a project I am working on. It is a video encoding app. If I have a setting that says CD for size but the system detects a DVD in the drive and it winds up producing a size that will only fit on a DVD then that is a bug. Now if I specify encoding a video file at a constant 13.5 Mbit CBR stream then that end stream better damn well be a 13.5 Mbit stream and not a 14 or 15 Mbit stream just because I have room to accommodate such bitrates, if it does it is a bug. Now if I set the system to give me a good,/better/best quality on a video encode then it will do what it has to do to give me that quality regardless of size.

  7. #17
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Saskatchewan, Canada
    Posts
    466

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Qaridarium View Post
    an app bug should only be fixed in the APP sourcecode
    LOL... I can tell you've never written hardware drivers. We often had to work around braindead programming in applications by detecting that said application was running and doing something other than what they asked for. For example, in one case we implemented a feature in hardware that the competition did in software, and an application was reconfiguring it hundreds of times a second which required barely any effort in software but caused a major stall in hardware; we had little choice but to detect that application and push it into a software implementation of the feature because what it was doing was simply insane.

    Actually, it's worse than that in that we actually had to _put bugs into our drivers_ because some applications relied on bugs in the drivers they were testing with in order to function, so if our drivers didn't have the same bugs then their application would fall over.

    Ah, the joys of proprietary closed-source software where no-one wants to take responsibility for fixing their bugs!

  8. #18
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Third Rock from the Sun
    Posts
    6,587

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by movieman View Post
    LOL... I can tell you've never written hardware drivers. We often had to work around braindead programming in applications by detecting that said application was running and doing something other than what they asked for. For example, in one case we implemented a feature in hardware that the competition did in software, and an application was reconfiguring it hundreds of times a second which required barely any effort in software but caused a major stall in hardware; we had little choice but to detect that application and push it into a software implementation of the feature because what it was doing was simply insane.

    Actually, it's worse than that in that we actually had to _put bugs into our drivers_ because some applications relied on bugs in the drivers they were testing with in order to function, so if our drivers didn't have the same bugs then their application would fall over.

    Ah, the joys of proprietary closed-source software where no-one wants to take responsibility for fixing their bugs!
    Heh well said. GO RIDERS!!!!

  9. #19
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Toronto-ish
    Posts
    7,569

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Qaridarium View Post
    its so easy to check if its an app bug or an driver cheat. an app bug should only be fixed in the APP sourcecode and not in the nvidia driver thats because fix the so called 'bug' in the app fix that on any GPUs intel,amd,via and not only for nvidia so its easy to check its in the driver then its a cheat! is the bugfix in the app then its not a cheat.
    I have to disagree here. A lot of the "driver bug fixes" are really workarounds for app bugs - apps tend not to get updated once they have released so the only practical solution for customers is to work around the problem in the driver. That's one of the reasons you need to refactor/rewrite driver components periodically -- they end up full of so many app workarounds that the code becomes very difficult to maintain.

  10. #20
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Linuxland
    Posts
    5,328

    Default

    Considering the issue, it's absolutely none of Nvidia's business to go circumventing the action like this.

    It's not a misrender, crash etc, it just shows better quality than requested. Since this is done regardless of graphics vendor, the only reason for N to do this is to show "X % increase in fps by this driver".

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •