Print 31 comment(s) - last by James Holden.. on Mar 5 at 11:37 PM

The RyderMark "screenshot" that was published in July 2006
My take on RyderMark's newest incarnation

Fudo posted something about Rydermark today, and the hate mail is already starting to kick up.

In a previous article, we pretty thoroughly debunked the authenticity of Fudo's "screenshots."  In the original article, Fudo published an expose claiming NVIDIA would not allow developers to use 24-bit or 32-bit precision -- whatever that means -- inside the benchmark.  Fudo then published the screenshots of an ATI and an NVIDIA card side by side.

Our rebuttal was to disprove his analysis of this situation based on the two images, at least one of which was just a Photoshop manipulation.  I have my doubts about Candella as well, but the gist of that article -- Fudo's accusations that NVIDIA was pulling some sort of scam with developers -- was untrue given the evidence.

So here's the gauntlet: If Fudo or Candella can supply me with a version of the RyderMark benchmark by midnight tonight, I will donate $1,000 to a charity of Fudo's choosing.  The software must show, in full-motion video, all three screenshots displayed in the article Fudo published today.  I'll donate another $1,000 if it can display the images from the RyderMark "screenshots" published in July 2006.

Update 2/20/2007: Neither individual was able to provide me with the software even after direct requests.  Fuad declined to send me the binary and Candella did not respond to my emails.

Update 2/20/2007: Ryan Shrout from PC Perspective has uploaded the teaser video for the benchmark on Fileshack.  I'm beginning to think this whole thing has been a horrible hoax played on Fudo.

Comments     Threshold

This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

By KristopherKubicki on 2/20/2007 2:11:51 PM , Rating: 2
I highly suggest everyone take a look at the video on Fileshack. It's, uh, interesting.

RE: Video
By Ratwar on 2/20/2007 3:26:07 PM , Rating: 2
... You know, that video looks... Well... Let's just say I've seen more convincing videos from freshmen in a Java class...

RE: Video
By MrTeal on 2/20/2007 9:04:03 PM , Rating: 2
Weird. What's with the triangle of water in front of the left boat with no fancy twinkly lights?
Why don't the colored sphere cast light on the buildings?
Why is it so strangly jerky?

I know almost nothing about such things, but as a layman I have to say that such a video makes me less likely to believe this.

RE: Video
By nurbsenvi on 2/20/2007 10:24:33 PM , Rating: 2
My question is why is Fudo doing this?
Though he might be cold blooded cynic I thought he was at least kinda entertaining.

I can't help notice his bias towards ATI time to time (I think he has close friend working there) and now going so far as fabricating a none existing benchmark is just timid and stupid!

Any way, Kris why do you hate The Inq so much? I think they are entertaining if you take it with grain of salt.

RE: Video
By KristopherKubicki on 2/20/2007 10:36:11 PM , Rating: 2
I don't hate them at all. If Anand wrote the same rubbish Fudo did I would just as surely refute his claims as well.

RE: Video
By Le Québécois on 2/21/2007 1:18:22 AM , Rating: 2
If Anand wrote the same rubbish Fudo did I would just as surely refute his claims as well.

THAT would be entertaining!!!

But back on the video, I've seen it and must say that I'm not sure how to react. While the water effects are ok the models are pretty simple, the background doesn't seem to have any effect and except for the light and the waves on the water, nothing is moving...

Maybe someone with better knowledge than I have on:

* True 64-bit High Dynamic Range Lighting with Antialiasing
* Parallax Occlusion Mapping
* Soft Shadows
* Normal Mapping
* Soft Particles
* Full Scene Motion Blur
* Depth-of-Field
* Heat Haze
* Volumetric Explosion
* Realistic Water Physics

...could explain to me what is special with this benchmark. As far as I'm concern, it could use all the most advance effects in the world, if the end result is ugly, I don't see the point.

RE: Video
By johnsonx on 2/21/2007 11:42:13 AM , Rating: 2
oh dear... that is rather sad, isn't it? The 2001 music makes the whole thing pathetic, or funny depending on your mood going in. S3 should ask for their 50 cents back.

Why don't the lights affect the boat models or the buildings? While I have no idea how to do what is shown, I strongly suspect it's trivial for someone who does know. It kinda looks like some kid trying out all his tricks after reading 'Direct3D for Dummies'.

RE: Video
By GaryJohnson on 2/21/2007 1:23:02 PM , Rating: 2
That was Xtreme.

"The whole principle [of censorship] is wrong. It's like demanding that grown men live on skim milk because the baby can't have steak." -- Robert Heinlein
Related Articles

Most Popular ArticlesSmartphone Screen Protectors – What To Look For
September 21, 2016, 9:33 AM
UN Meeting to Tackle Antimicrobial Resistance
September 21, 2016, 9:52 AM
Walmart may get "Robot Shopping Carts?"
September 17, 2016, 6:01 AM
5 Cases for iPhone 7 and 7 iPhone Plus
September 18, 2016, 10:08 AM
Update: Problem-Free Galaxy Note7s CPSC Approved
September 22, 2016, 5:30 AM

Copyright 2016 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki