3dMark 2003 performance factors(interesting)

[McArra]

Just have a look at this.
Quite interesting I think.

 

[titanmiller]

Originally posted by: McArra
Just have a look at this.
Quite interesting I think.

Very interesting, personaly I think it should be more processor dependent because most games are. If you score 5K with a 350Mhz PII and you score the same with a 2.8Ghz P4, you are going to become painfuly aware of the slow processor as soon as you start up any game.

 

[Lonyo]

It says that it's a system benchmark and will give an indication of how your system will performn in the latest games.
From the article it is easy to ascertain this is a complete and utter lie, as a P4 2.8GHz will easily outperform a P2 350MHz even if the P2 has a better card (as in the tests).

Basically it's an article to point out that 3D Mark 2003 is useless at doing what it says it does (indicate overall system performance in games).

 

[codehack2]

Originally posted by: McArra
Just have a look at this.
Quite interesting I think.

FYI... I started a thread on this topic in GH yesterday.

CH2

 

[niggles]

well that's just sad... at least the 3dmark demo is pretty though 😀

 

[nemesismk2]

 

[Pete]

I don't consider it very interesting, though it seems a lot of people are making a mountain out of a molehill of the article's main contention (like NVNews' MUYA calling it "Pretty Damning" 🙄 ). Maybe if Ace's had found another fully DX8 game to compare, or a current game that requires a minimum of a P2-350....

Just as 3DM01 moved from GPU- to CPU-limited in time, so will 3DM03--but it'll take another year or so.

 

[1ManArmY]

Yes I would agree, it is PRETTY!

 

[nemesismk2]

I don't care at all, I've always thought that 3dmark 03 was worthless and now it's been confirmed. We will have alot more dx9 game benchmarks to use soon and hopefully people will abandon 3dmark and use them instead.