Allright, now that the thrill is gone, what do you REALLY think about 3DMark2001?

[MichaelD]

Hi everyone,

I was thinking that it was time for a nice "personal opinion type post". This has been on my mind for a few days now. I've got my own opinions about this new program. There are no right or wrong answers to this question. Here's how I feel about it and why.

3DMark 2001 had some mighty big shoes to fill. After all, it's Papa, 3DMark200 was the de facto benchmarking program for video cards, and for checking lots of other things on your system. I.E. "well, I just went from a 105FSB to a 107FSB...I wonder how it'll affect my 3DMark score?" Well, at least in my own little world, that's what I did!

Before you break out the Railgun and start firing off "but it's just a synthetic benchmark" type stuff, let me say...I know. Thanks. However, 3DMark gives a nice universal way of measuring "my system vs. yours" and stuff like that. It's a nice "Universal Yardstick". Synthetic or not, it works.

While the Matix lobby scene in the demo of 2001 DOES look and sound awesome...I don't feel that the REAL PURPOSE (benchmarking) of the application is any better than the old 3DMark2000. You get "jitters and screen flashes" (my terminology) between tests. The tests take much longer to load than the old program. (I have a fast system...it's not my hardware), and it just doesn't feel right when you're watching it.

The bottom line is, I'm not impressed. Could I do better? Oh heck no! I'm not a coder or a programmer...and I'm not complaining about it...just voicing my opinion. Unfortunately, loading DX8 hosed my old 3DMark2000, and I haven't had the time to try to reload it. I will try this weekend. I'll keep 2001, just to keep up with my benchmarks vs. the rest of the world, but for measuring changes within my system, I'm going to use the old 3DMark. I think they could've done better. The demo rocks (Matrix scene and the trees with the leaves blowing around)...but that's it. I think this is going to a looong thread. Have a very nice weekend.

 

[rickn]

To me it was ok. most of it was just a bunch of knockoffs from other stuff. The dragon riding was a knockoff of Drakan, granted the graphics were impressive. And the Matrix type scene was...well..a knockoff of the movie

Overall, 7.5/10

 

[Oyeve]

IMO its only so-so. 2000 had more of an "OH WOW" affect on me. The max Payne was pathetic. I see better effect playing UT. The demo was rather boring. The demo from 2000 was, IMO, much better. The advertisements between test loads annoyed me as well, but what the hell, its free. The only thing that somewhat impressed me was the second dragon test. That was cool. Plus, in the demo, it was annoying that it loaded a second game demo (Max Payne). 3dmark2001 is a big advertisement for Max Payne. I bet Madonion got mad money from the Max Payne people.

 

[TravisBickle]

well, what I could see was visually impressive, very beautiful, on the V5. i'm gonna have to mosey along to see it on a Radeon.
I am sure that horse in 3dmark is just like the ATi demo. isn't that pandering? people complain about 3dmark being in tandem with nvidia...

 

[Vinny N]

I didn't think the Matrix lobby scene was all that great. The nature scene and dragon riding though were impressive though.

What do I think of 3dMark 2000? I think it was dull and boring. I can't imagine anyone liking it better. There wasn't even decent eye candy to munch on.

If it's just for the sake of comparison, I'd take 3D Mark 2001 over the previous version without another thought. Why? I can actually stand to watch 3dMark 2001. They're both synthetic benchmarks so I'll take the one I don't mind looking at. 3dMark 2000=bleh.

 

[MichaelD]

Thanks to those that have answered so far. Hmm..I kind of imagined that this thread would attract more replies...being that 3DMark2001 was the "Return of the Long-Awaited Benchmark Messiah" and all that type stuff. Let's bump this up the flagpole again and see who salutes. ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

 

[Quaggoth]

I could care less for benchmarks (Especially synthetic ones), but HOLY FREAKIN CRIPES ON TOAST THAT LOOKS COOL!!!! I want to be playing a half-orc Barbarian hiding in that grass bihind a tree swaying in the wind waiting for the opposing army's cavalry to charge up the hill and I give the command for my 5000 troops behind be to advance to the top of the hill. It's funny though, my 3d graphics desires have ALWAYS been 2 or 3 years ahead of the technology. Luckily, there are people like me at Nvidia and MAdonion.com

 

[RGN]

It crashes my system.

 

[MCS]

I think there's a whole lot of marketing going on with 3DMark2001. Look how well the P4 performs vs everything else. Look how unless you've got a Geforce 3 then 4 of the tests won't run (in my case anyway). Will it make me rush out and buy a P4/GF3?

I don't think so!

 

[Mem]

I liked the Matrix scene but was disappointed with the rest of 3dMark2001 compared to 2000 which seemed better to me.

 

[Bartman39]

Yada yada yada... I liked it but it will wear off pretty soon...


Just think of this though...? The people that have not even seen 3dmark2000 (and yes there are alot that have not...) will be totally amazed with 2001...


Uh also remember when benchmarks were extremly boring??? Remember Wintune???

 

[ganesha]

The swaying grass was cool but that was about it. I would like to see something that gave more of an "ooh-ahh" effect like Final Reality did back in 97. It's funny they were advertising Max Payne all the way back than too

btw...I get 6.23 Reality Marks on my current system

 

[dukdukgoos]

The demo in 3DMark2000 was certainly better, especially the music. The 2001 music was boring.

 

[christoph83]

Some tests wont run because they are for a fully supported DX8 card which I heard is only the Geforce 3 and Radeon 2. It seems they were planning on the release of new technology and they wanted the software to stress the card and not see these 8000's in scores. 3dmark2001 rules in my opinion,

 

[SiliconVandal]

I thought it was pretty nice..

 

[Adul]

I just love the nature scene in 2001. The demo in 200 was better. Just had a over more cool effect. Maybe it was the music?

 

[LuciferHaze]

I really liked the graphics. That 1st-person shooter looked real good.

My score was 1450 so I guess it's time to upgrade. What do you think?

 

[MichaelD]

Thanks once again to all that posted. It's nice to see that folks who've helped me out w/my system probs and questions posted too! I dunno....It just seems to me like 3D2001 sucked eggs to most folks. As I said in my original post, there is no wrong or right answer to this...I just wanted opinions, that's all.

Someone said earlier that the advertising (Falcon systems....oh boy, I'm impressed..I built my system for about $200 less than their equivalent) bothered them. I didnt' say it earlier, because I wanted to stay "on topic" for lack of a better term. This bothered the crap out of me as well. This isn't cool at all, IMHO. YES! I do realize that its' Freeware, and none of us have a say as to what it looks like or advertises. But I honestly think that the success of the original 3DMark caught Madonion by surprise and they never expected it to become the "universal benchmark" that it did. Trying to ride the coat tails of the original one, they sold some "advertising space" to the highest bidder. Again, my opinion, but I dont' think I'm to far off. Is this 3DMark2001, or a banner ad at the top of some tech-oriented website? WTF?

I just got home from Job #2, and don't feel like screwing up my computer completely. I.E. trying to reload DX7 so I can get my old 3DMark2000 back...maybe tomorrow. Thanks for listening. Peace, Love & Lego Blocks.

 

[JellyBaby]

Going ga-ga over a benchmark suite folks? A benchmark's destiny is not to entertain but to measure. Anyway as soon as I install DX8 (won't happen until I actually have a game that requires it) I'll tell you what I think.

 

[apoppin]

Well, it whet my appetite for 3DMark2002.

Actually, I am looking forward to the Max Payne game as well as affordable new technology ala Geforce3.

 

[billyjak]

I really think it shows how fast technology is moving, my 32 meg Herc is hardly enough to get a desent score anymore. The standard is now 64meg with 32 bit, just shows what a year can do in the computer business.
To bad games won't be out till the end of the year to take advantage of this technology.
By then the GF3 will be affordable.

 

[Muadib]

I HATE IT!!! It locks my system. :|:|:|:|:|:|:|:|:|:|

 

[monotone]

The nature scene looked good although i only got like 3 fps
Still 3dmark 99 was better, not to speek of final reality. 3dmark 2000 bored me, same as 2001. The "demo" was a typical "i-wanna-be-artistic-but-im-not" show i've seen a 1000 times before. Nice effects, no contents.

BTW i got 750 3dmarks!!!

 

[UNLTuba]

My 3DMark2001 score wasn't actually that bad. I got a 2628 on my first run of the default benchmark. My current (not shabby at all - Creative Labs Annihilator Pro) video card though didn't have the capabilities to run all of the benches. It skipped a few of the tests that I would've liked to have seen. All in all though, I wasn't hugely impressed with 2001. I'm sure it'll be the new standard sooner or later though. It'll grow on me if I give it some time I guess just like 2000 did. Catch you all later...

-Eric

PS - If you're interested, my 3DMark2000 score is around 6878 or so. I'm about to instal new drivers though so all of these scores could change soon.

 

[JayPatel]

3 words.. Pure Eye Candy.