After needing a card upgarde I decided its either going to be the Fx5900 or the new radeon 9800 256mb. After some research and benchmark scores I come to find out that nVidia is boosting its 3DMark game test scores by cutting corners in the 44.03 DetonatorFX driver that is being used for testing. WHAT ARE EVERYONES THOUGHTS??GO HERE FOR THE INFOhttp://www.extremetech.com/article2/0,3973,1086025,00.asp

Old hat. Nvidia's been "cheating" on 3dmark2k3 since it was released. Nvidia had a "falling-out" with futuremark over the testing methodologies used in 3dmark2k3 and has been "cheating" to overcome some of the problems in what they view as a flawed benchmark. Despite their "cheating", Nvidia is barely ahead of ATI in the overall 3dmark scores. Imagine if ATI were to "cheat" ;) We'd be seeing benchmark scores double with every new driver release. Kind of defeats the purpose of benchmarks, eh?-Max Cowgill

That explains the results. Results related to benchmarks was good for Nvidia. Results in real games not related to benchmarks was not. http://www.extremetech.com/article2/0,3973,1075335,00.asp Nothing like running out and buying a card expecting 50 frames per second based on the results and ending up with half that in you game.

I guess this will make my decision a little bit easier between choosing the FX5900 or the radeon 9800 pro, and can you believe it when confronted, they said it probally is a driver fluke LOL and will be exploring the issues that are raised. BTW does anyone know exactly when the radeon 9900 will be coming out, I here it should be out just in time for FS2004 (by the end of JULY) could anyone confirm this??? THANKS

If you're not in a hurry to get a video card, I'd wait a while and see if these benchmarks are re-run fairly. Then make your decision. Especially if you're partial to Nvidia cards. Nothing wrong with having a favorite. Just because the FX5900 may not be as advertised, it still appears to be a very good card. The leaf blower is gone. The 9800 Pro with 256mb ram should be out very soon. Probably before the FX5900. Five hundred bucks is a lot of money to be spending on a video card. Patience is usually a good thing.

Are you obsessed with the topic ? How many more posts you will do on the subject ? I suggest you start reading spy novels if conspiracies is your favorite theme. :-lolMichael J.

>Results in real games not related to>benchmarks was not.I guess it depends whoes benchmarks you believe. I personally believe Toms Hardware benchmarks (similar to anandtech benchmarks) and they tell different story. I have zero faith in extremetech.Michael J.

>After needing a card upgarde I decided its either going to be>the Fx5900 or the new radeon 9800 256mb. After some research>and benchmark scores I come to find out that nVidia is>boosting its 3DMark game test scores by cutting corners in the>44.03 DetonatorFX driver that is being used for testing. >WHAT ARE EVERYONES THOUGHTS??>>GO HERE FOR THE INFO>http://www.extremetech.com/article2/0,3973,1086025,00.aspThat really remains to be seen, Nvidia have made an official statement concerning the so called "cheating" and its only a matter of time before the obvious becomes clear.Would you also accuse ATI of "cheating" because their 95-9800pro cards do not use Anisotropic filtering between vertical and horizontal surfaces (FX-ultras do), which degrades terrain texture quality in FS when banking especially on approach?Or that the 95-9800pro cards do not Antialias alpha textures so that any objects such as trees, fences etc. shimmer while the Nvidia GF3/4/-ultra does full Alpha texture AA?Frankly what "we" need is the best of both cards, but If I had to make a choice right now for the best it would have to be the NV card, and that