An alleged screen capture of the ATI version of Rydermark (saved and reposted to preserve metadata)
An alleged screen capture of the NVIDIA version of Rydermark (saved and reposted to preserve metadata)
A difference map of the two images
"Rydermark developers" make bold claims which turn out to be nothing more than a Photoshop hoax
It would appear The Inquirer was quick to jump the gun on a story accusing NVIDIA of lying about full DirectX 9 support.
The story accused NVIDIA of not allowing developers to use
24-bit or 32-bit shader precision. Instead it claims NVIDIA forces
developers into using 16-bit shader precision as the technique is faster. This is a
problem as DirectX 9 compliancy requires 24-bit shader precision or
better. "Rydermark" is not a commercially shipping application yet, and has had very little information published to confirm its authenticity.
The original story lacked
any type of physical evidence and The Inquirer claimed its sources were
developers for the program. Images allegedly proving that NVIDIA forces developers into using 16-bit shader precision were posted on The Inquirer. The posted images compared a rendered scene in Rydermark 2006 between ATI and NVIDIA
graphics cards.
It turns out the images "proving" NVIDIA’s
wrongdoings were nothing more than poorly done Photoshopped images. The
NVIDIA rendered image appeared to have blurrier water while the ATI
rendered image had sharper water detail. However, the
ATI rendered image just didn’t look right with poor cut offs and a
creation date three minutes after the NVIDIA rendered image. A difference image of the two JPG files can be seen to the right, with the outline of the modified area clearly visible in the ATI image. This would suggest the NVIDIA image was the original source image, and that the ATI version was modified afterwards.
A difference of the metadata from both images reveals that the NativeDigest delimiter is identical for both images, but has two different InstanceIDs. This would be consistent with an image that was modified and saved twice. In the author's defense, images that are created and saved on his computer have distinct metadata tags that are very easily identifiable. These are not present in the two images supplied by The Inquirer for "Rydermark" -- suggesting the images may not have been modified by the author.
There’s been an outcry of The Inquirer images on various forums including Ace’s Hardware, AnandTech and Beyond3D.
Update 07/19/2006: The Inquirer has posted something resembling a rebuttal to this article. Incredibly, a user from the ModTheater.com forums managed to track down some of the stock art used in the screen renders, and believes the entire image is actually fraudulent.
"Vista runs on Atom ... It's just no one uses it". -- Intel CEO Paul Otellini
|
Most Popular ArticlesHigh School Student Creates Storage Device that Can Charge in 20 Seconds
May 20, 2013, 6:51 AM
Apples Tries to Use Decade-Old Patents to Ban Samsung Galaxy S IV
May 22, 2013, 3:00 PM
NASA Awards $125,000 Grant for 3D Printed Food on Long-Term Space Travels
May 21, 2013, 1:32 PM
Microsoft Announces Voice-Controlled "Xbox One"
May 21, 2013, 12:55 AM
Cure For Baldness Could Be on Store Shelves within Two Years
May 22, 2013, 8:29 AM
|
