3DMark 2001 or 2003?

[DonIsHere]

I noticed a lot of people here are still using 2001. Is that the norm? Why are people still using 2001 versus the new 2003 version?

 

[MangoTBG]

I personally don't use 3dmark anymore, probably because nothing new has changed from my system. But I'd rather know someone's 2001 score than 2003 because the 2003 is solely based upon the graphics card. I think they had a review somewhere where an extremely outdated PC w/ a 9700pro stomped on a newer CPU w/ something like a GF3. Something rediculous. With all of the jibba jabba on the side, I still prefer 2001. I know the difference from a machine that can score 10,000 and one that scores 17,000. Where as all I know about the machine that scores 5,300 versus 4,900 in 2003 is....well...I don't know.

 

[poppyq]

I use aquamark for testing

 

[CraigRT]

i use UT2003
but for 3dmark.... i prefer 2k1

 

[aka1nas]

Well 2001 is a DX 8 benchmark and 2003 is a DX9 benchmark. If you don't own a DX9 card, then 2003 is a waste of your time I think as your card doesn't have most of the neccessary features and will be doing a lot in software. 2001 is also nicer for stress testing as it allows looping even in the unregistered version.

 

[modedepe]

People still use '01 cause not everybody has a dx9 card. If you run '03 on a dx8 card, it will skip one of the tests altogether, which makes it not even worth it to compare with new dx9 cards.

 

[sharkeeper]

01 if you're testing a computer made in 01

03 if you're testing a computer made in 03

Got that?

01 on today's equipment is essentially a CPU/MEM benchmark.

Cheers!