Nvidia logo on new games?

Whats with nvidia putting their logo on all the new games? things like http://iax-tech.com/video/3870/38705.htm really make me wonder.

Do all nvidia cards simply not display all the detail so to get better fps? I always felt that ATi cards had better picture quality, could this be because the ATi card is actually rendering everything on the map?

That was a driver glitch that the new 169.09 drivers have fixed. It may very well have been an attempt by Nvidia to "cheat" in order to get better reviews for the Crysis demo, but we will probably never know for sure.

edit: this is in response to the first post. I have no idea what that second one is talking about.

its advertising...

advertising... shoving it down our throats. just like mircosoft and vista

How about you stop being a troll...

It was a beta driver... it had bugs... get over it.

That'd be fine if reviewers didn't review with beta drivers and nVidia didn't rely on beta drivers instead of WHQL certified releases.

If EB didn't publish this would nVidia have said anything before the launch of Crysis and after the HD3800 launched or would they have waited, then changed things after the performance results were published and then later say what everyone is using as an excuse now. "They're beta drivers..."

Seriously, if there was no history of such shenanigans fine, but considering that the Crysis floptimization is very similar to the FartCry floptimization, where renaming the file turned off the floptimization but at a slight performance hit, why should anyone not consider this an issue?

Hopefully the one thing to come out of this will be the return to using certified drivers instead of the hand delivered betas plopped on the doorstep conveniently for the latest review.

How would you take this up with the BBB?
Reviewers had to back track in the days when people seemed convinced that there was blatant cheating in the past, there's no way this would make a case for the BBB.

That doesn't make sense. I assume you meant only 2 work/function. That' si a safety issue, these issues are essnetially preference issues. The discussion of IQ has gone on since well before the 'Quack' optimization. And what usually changes something from a potential cheat to a true benificial optimization is if it appears overtly in future driver release to the benifit of rht gamer. Floptimizations usually dissapear once they are notice because either they are a bug or else a discovered 'questionable advantage' which is not desired in the next release.

Sometimes while it reduces quality it might be for a beneficial reason. If the GF6300 cannot play Crysis at all, some partial precision calls to allow it to play on low setting and low resolution would be worth it versus a prettier still painting. Just like those who enjoyed Oblivion as OLDblivion on their FXs, GF4s, Radeon 8500 and intel GMA 9xx cards were likely happy to simply play the game, even if it wasn't the way it looks on a GF7/X1K card.

Explain how that would work? What part of it is fraudulent? You buy the hardware and nVidia provides the drivers, there is no promise or guarantee on the results other than the vague "best played on..." "for the best graphics" etc, which are always subjective enough to not have any legal weight to them.

The main thing is scrutiny, and hopefully the latest round of issues will bring greater scrutiny to the reviews, most of which were probably fine with running 'fire & forget' benchmarks and not looking any deeper.

In the end it's still up to the consumer to weigh which issues matter to them, and whethe they're enough to overturn the benifits of product a vs product b. We just need to rely on the reviewers to do their job in finding out all they can including these potnetial issues so everyone looks at the products in their full capacity, not some unbalanced comparison.

i just wish that amd would come out with another Athlon 64-pentium4 shaker and put nvidia on proper course.

I wouldn't worry about TWIMTP marketing PR anymore than DX10.1, they both have about equal weight.

Many TWIMTBP games play better on ATi cards and many GITG games play better on nV cards, so it doesn't mean all that much other than occasionally giving you a few days better beta support (both are usually good around the actual launch date).

nVidia LOGO on games, like the ATi one means, that the developer was given all the support they asked for from the IHV (ie nVidia / ATi), and likley some other incentives. However it doesn't mean that it will play better, that it will be better or worse optimized. Looking at Oblivion as an example, it was a TWIMTBP game, and yet almost all the development was on Radeon 9800s and then X1900s, with the addition of the Geforce cards at about the end of development. This happens both ways, and I'm sure any game that has the ATi stamp released this winter likely started early on primarily on Geforce8800 rigs before being then run on HD2K/3K rigs, and may even have gone back and forth from GF6 to GF7 to X1K to GF8 to HD2K+.
Developers just hurt themselves is they don't build for both companies' hardware.