• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

3DMark06 Beta

Quoted from: vr-zone.com.sg

Futuremark has started talking about their next 3DMark publicly over at Beyond3D interview. The key feature and effect present in 3DMark2006 are Shader Model 3.0 support and HDR implementation that requires full SM3.0 support and FP16 textures & blending. Others cool implementations and changes include CSM (Cascaded Shadow Maps), soft shadows, heavier pixel processing load, increased arithmetic to texture ops ratio for the SM3.0 tests, at least 256MB of graphics memory to ensure no disk swapping, a new CPU test (most probably multi-core support).

According to our friends from HKEPC, some manufacturers have received a copy of 3DMark2006 Beta for internal testing but there is no scoring function yet in the beta copy for confidential reasons. There is particular game test in 3DMark06 which is similar to the Game Test 3 "Canyon Flight" of 3DMark05 but now it utilizes lots of HDR and SM3.0. Certainly the sea monster looks a lot better indeed from what we have seen. Things are not looking too rosy for ATi previous generation cards such as X300/500/600/700/800 that don't support SM 3.0 but it is fine for NVIDIA GeForce 6 series.
Click to expand...

Source: http://www.vr-zone.com.sg/?i=2930
 
Originally posted by: nts
Beyond3d interview

The minimum required shader model will be 2.0, but we will also have a couple of graphics tests requiring SM3.0 with support for FP16 textures and blending of these.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...

Perhaps you're right, but I believe it would get low points since those SM 2.0 cards cannot complete the full benchmark.
 
Originally posted by: malG
Originally posted by: nts
Beyond3d interview

The minimum required shader model will be 2.0, but we will also have a couple of graphics tests requiring SM3.0 with support for FP16 textures and blending of these.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...

Perhaps you're right, but I believe it would get low points since those SM 2.0 cards cannot complete the full benchmark.
Click to expand...

We need to wait and see what the full benchmark actually is. If they use SM3 and FP16 blending as stated then obviously SM2 cards can't run those. But would there actually be a point to testing that generation? NV40s are gonna support more features (SM3) but the benchmark is going to run very slow on them too (FP16 blending...) and some tests wont even run.

If they decide to add AA and HDR (with the FP16 format) then the only cards that can complete it is the R520 generation.

I think its best to just wait for the final specs of it before starting to speculate. Keep in mind that this benchmark is going to be built for the G70/R520 gen (as low end) and above, no real point benching anything below them.
 
Originally posted by: malG
Originally posted by: nts
Beyond3d interview

The minimum required shader model will be 2.0, but we will also have a couple of graphics tests requiring SM3.0 with support for FP16 textures and blending of these.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...

Perhaps you're right, but I believe it would get low points since those SM 2.0 cards cannot complete the full benchmark.
Click to expand...

This is exactly how DX7/8-only cards are handled in 3DMark03/05, so it's not exactly surprising.
 
All I can say is that if you can run this benchmark with SM2.0 cards then it's just an upgraded 3DMark05 and we all know how crappy that benchmark is.

Ok, maybe a lot of people don't agree that 3DMark05 is a crappy benchmark, but I've never really cared what the masses think, for the most part. When an X850XTPE does 1000 points higher is '05 than a 6800 Ultra it's just crap. It's not even remotely that far apart in games.
 
Originally posted by: Jeff7181
Originally posted by: malG
Link: http://www.hkepc.com/bbs/viewthread.php?tid=503391

Looks like it's exclusively for shader model 3.0 cards, hence the X800 and X850 series will be left out in the cold.
Click to expand...

Damn, so people who own those cards won't be able to play this game? Oh wait...
Click to expand...
I know you're trying to be witty, but 3DMark isn't a game, nor does it pretend to be. It's a benchmarking tool to compare your system to others, that's it, nothing more, nothing less.

Yes, there are plenty that give 3DMark hell, but they don't see it for what it is. It doesn't matter which company cheats in drivers or how high your resulting number is. 3DMark is simply to compare your system to similar systems of others. A long time ago, back in the 3DMark01 days, I was able to locate that my graphics had a problem, and I was able to fix it based on the fact that my benching of 3DMark was way below what others were getting.
 
Originally posted by: blurredvision
Originally posted by: Jeff7181
Originally posted by: malG
Link: http://www.hkepc.com/bbs/viewthread.php?tid=503391

Looks like it's exclusively for shader model 3.0 cards, hence the X800 and X850 series will be left out in the cold.
Click to expand...

Damn, so people who own those cards won't be able to play this game? Oh wait...
Click to expand...
I know you're trying to be witty, but 3DMark isn't a game, nor does it pretend to be. It's a benchmarking tool to compare your system to others, that's it, nothing more, nothing less.

Yes, there are plenty that give 3DMark hell, but they don't see it for what it is. It doesn't matter which company cheats in drivers or how high your resulting number is. 3DMark is simply to compare your system to similar systems of others. A long time ago, back in the 3DMark01 days, I was able to locate that my graphics had a problem, and I was able to fix it based on the fact that my benching of 3DMark was way below what others were getting.
Click to expand...

So explain why anyone should give a rat's ass if a next gen benchmarking program won't work on last gen hardware. Does anyone really care how a GeForce 4 performs in 3DMark 2003 or 2005?
 
Who gives a crap about what hardware 3dmark supports or doesn't? It's just a piece of software designed for the rich kiddies with LN2 systems to help them measure their e-peens and make themselves feel good about being single and lonely.

Edit: Woot 1000 posts. Finally a golden member...I like goooooooolllld.
 
I like 3dmark, because it lets me know that my card is operating how it is supposed to be when I get the same scores as everyone else.

*Edit*
And everytime a new version comes out, it looks sexy.
 
Originally posted by: Jeff7181
Originally posted by: blurredvision
Originally posted by: Jeff7181
Originally posted by: malG
Link: http://www.hkepc.com/bbs/viewthread.php?tid=503391

Looks like it's exclusively for shader model 3.0 cards, hence the X800 and X850 series will be left out in the cold.
Click to expand...

Damn, so people who own those cards won't be able to play this game? Oh wait...
Click to expand...
I know you're trying to be witty, but 3DMark isn't a game, nor does it pretend to be. It's a benchmarking tool to compare your system to others, that's it, nothing more, nothing less.

Yes, there are plenty that give 3DMark hell, but they don't see it for what it is. It doesn't matter which company cheats in drivers or how high your resulting number is. 3DMark is simply to compare your system to similar systems of others. A long time ago, back in the 3DMark01 days, I was able to locate that my graphics had a problem, and I was able to fix it based on the fact that my benching of 3DMark was way below what others were getting.
Click to expand...

So explain why anyone should give a rat's ass if a next gen benchmarking program won't work on last gen hardware. Does anyone really care how a GeForce 4 performs in 3DMark 2003 or 2005?
Click to expand...
I could care less if people give a "rat's ass" if the next gen benchmarking program won't work on last gen hardware. I'm just explaining the purpose of the program, which is often overlooked when people start badmouthing it.
Originally posted by: Unkno
real world performances > 3DMark
Click to expand...
See, this is what I was talking about in my last post. 3DMark isn't supposed to be about real-world performance, it's about comparing your system to others. Of course you can't judge real world performance from a 4 or 5 digit number, I never understood why you guys think that's what this program is for. 3DMark doesn't simulate sound or AI as far as I know, so even then you can't put real world benchmarks in the same category. If you guys would get this through your thick skull, you'd be alright.
 
What's the big deal about last gen hardware? Everyone already knows an x850xt(pe) is faster than 6800u in almost all games, sm3 or not, so it's a moot point on how it does in 3dmark 2006. Moreover, I'm sure it will make last gen hardware cry regardless if it's a 6800 or an x850. The benchmark is more relevant towards newer cards.
 
hahaahahh funny stuff, read future mark sight and discover you can really only compair pc's if you have vertually identical pc's, or its just not accurate, its not [ as a gamer hard core bfv ,bf2 etc ] a real world test by any means , thats just an outright joke, its to be accurate is just and average of the overall performance of the whole pc, it has a rendering section etc etc yes for specialising tests like on your video card , but ALL other components will effect that score still , so lve found benching ingame to be the go for benchmarks, on top of that lm a regestered owner of all years pc mark and every year its coded more to the nvidia cards more so than ATI, so an ATI v NVIDIA compair on futuremark ,for those in the know dont waste there time !
Its just an average test , it can tell you alot about you pc , but it is not accurate in ATI v NVIDIA tests due to its coding.

Bench ingame , bench farcry , bench bf2 , bench ingame for a real good idea of how your pc will perform, real benching with real comparable results.


l rather find futuremark benchtests more for the overclocker, there they can rock !
 
I could care less if people give a "rat's ass" if the next gen benchmarking program won't work on last gen hardware. I'm just explaining the purpose of the program, which is often overlooked when people start badmouthing it.
Click to expand...

The phrase is "couldn't care less."

I'm not badmouthing the program, I'm making fun of the morons who are disappointed that it won't run on old hardware.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top