<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Windows out-WoWs OS X</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.p2pnet.net/story/8576/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.p2pnet.net/story/8576</link>
	<description>p2pnet.net - reader powered</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 01 Feb 2012 15:11:09 -0300</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Reader's Write</title>
		<link>http://www.p2pnet.net/story/8576/comment-page-1#comment-38913</link>
		<dc:creator>Reader's Write</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 21 Apr 2006 17:11:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">#comment-38913</guid>
		<description>This large difference in preformance on the exact same hardware is interesting in light of the fact that video card manufactorers refuse to tell anyone how to use the hardware they produce.

Video card manufacturers are not trustworthy, they have been caught cheating time and again.  Producing incorrect images in order to get better preformance stats, detecting the software that&#039;s running in order to do the former, disabling unstable features only during WHQL certification, etc...

Here&#039;s a smatering of supportting links from a google search:

Detecting the exe name and other cheating, how primitive.
http://techreport.com/etc/2003q2/3dmurk03/

A microsoft employee says they not only cheat benchmarks, but WHQL bug testing as well.
http://blogs.msdn.com/oldnewthing/archive/2004/03/05/84469.aspx

cheating on 3dmark (couldn&#039;t linkify, cut and paste)
http://www.extremetech.com/article2/0,3973,1105259,00.asp

I predict that if anyone leaked the source to the drivers of either of the two major players&#039; offerings, we&#039;d be seing revelation after revelation of dubious application specific optimizations (cheating).</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>This large difference in preformance on the exact same hardware is interesting in light of the fact that video card manufactorers refuse to tell anyone how to use the hardware they produce.</p>
<p>Video card manufacturers are not trustworthy, they have been caught cheating time and again.  Producing incorrect images in order to get better preformance stats, detecting the software that&#8217;s running in order to do the former, disabling unstable features only during WHQL certification, etc&#8230;</p>
<p>Here&#8217;s a smatering of supportting links from a google search:</p>
<p>Detecting the exe name and other cheating, how primitive.<br />
<a href="http://techreport.com/etc/2003q2/3dmurk03/" rel="nofollow">http://techreport.com/etc/2003q2/3dmurk03/</a></p>
<p>A microsoft employee says they not only cheat benchmarks, but WHQL bug testing as well.<br />
<a href="http://blogs.msdn.com/oldnewthing/archive/2004/03/05/84469.aspx" rel="nofollow">http://blogs.msdn.com/oldnewthing/archive/2004/03/05/84469.aspx</a></p>
<p>cheating on 3dmark (couldn&#8217;t linkify, cut and paste)<br />
<a href="http://www.extremetech.com/article2/0,3973,1105259,00.asp" rel="nofollow">http://www.extremetech.com/article2/0,3973,1105259,00.asp</a></p>
<p>I predict that if anyone leaked the source to the drivers of either of the two major players&#8217; offerings, we&#8217;d be seing revelation after revelation of dubious application specific optimizations (cheating).</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>


