I don't want to hear the usual dumb conspiracy theory of ATI bought Futuremark or something like that... I don't care about rumours, so unless you got a reciept showing ATI bought Futuremark-keep it to yourself.

I just wanna know, why does ATI cards do so damn well on 3DMark2005?

taking a look at my 5900XT I can get about 1300 points from it.
but I see 9800 Pros getting 3 times more then this.
now I know, logically, the difference between these two cards is no where near this...
so the benchmark doesn't make much sense when trying to compare cards for real world performance.

so I am wondering-what exactly is it that makes all Nvidia scores so damn low compared to ATI scores?

did futuremark heavily weigh towards ATI cards cause of Nvidias past drivers cheating on 2003?
is Nvidias drivers just that bad?
is it benchmarking something that Nvidia cards just don't have?
is the benchmark using only the 2D speeds of FX based cards?

what is it?

cause real world games show plenty of times that ATI and Nvidia have always been pretty close together, so why do 9800 pros score 3 times better then FX 5900's?
why are 6800 ultras so low, and almost getting beat by X800 Pros?

the benchmarks beautiful...
but the results are questionable.