Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices Message Board

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: Cirruslvr who wrote (69236)	8/19/1999 12:48:00 PM
From: Ali Chen	Read Replies (2) of 1573243

From the FutureMark press release: 3dmark.com ----------------------------------------------- "Correct usage of AMD's Athlon specific K7 DLL with 3DMark? 99 MAX In conjunction with the launch of AMD's Athlon (K7) processor AMD has distributed an Athlon specific version of Futuremark's 3DMark 99 MAX. Although this happened with the permission of Futuremark Corporation, it is not meant to replace 3DMark 99 MAX as the official benchmarking product. We must emphasize the following items related to the usage of AMD's Athlon specific K7 DLL with 3DMark 99 MAX: - This Athlon specific DLL has been done by AMD engineers, at AMD labs, independently by AMD, and without any support from Futuremark. - No other CPU manufacturers have been given a chance to make optimizations. As such, it is inappropriate to compare the AMD special DLL version results with the official 3Dmark 99 MAX version results. - No end-users will be given the opportunity to verify and replicate the performance using the AMD special DLL version as the DLL will not be made available to the general public. - This DLL should not under any circumstances be treated as an official product release. It is not under any circumstances meant to replace or be a new version of 3DMark. - The official use and/or reporting of scores should be based solely on 3DMark 99 MAX as provided by Futuremark, and should not include results based on any AMD specific engineering version of the software. Any other use or reporting of the scores is considered to be a violation against Futuremark's trademarks." -------------------------------------quote ends -- It looks to me like a clear Intel hand all over the FutureMark butt - poor little guys! The whole press release is an apparent "I didn't do it" excuse for mighty Intel legal department. I think it is AMD who need to bring legal actions against the FutureMark for such potentially damaging statements as they appear in EBNonline. Regards, - Ali

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next