FutureMark 3DMark06 Benchmark Overview [Now with Download Link]

[Ackmed]

Originally posted by: Fadey
Not really the 7800gtx without aa beats the x1800xt in alot of games..

Yeah the GTX is much closer, and even faster sometimes than the XT, without AA. Who is going to buy a top end card, run it at 1280x1024 with no AA/AF? Not anyone I know.

FS has a review of sorts up as well. They use 2xAA and 4xAA, with 8xAF. The GTX is still faster in every test but two I believe at those settings. Which as I said.. its not what real games show.

 

[Yreka]

Originally posted by: nitromullet

Originally posted by: fierydemise

Originally posted by: Matt2
Nice to know that I'll be scoring higher than X1800XT CF

actually the X1800XT crossfire scores a 5815 and 7800GT SLI scores 5732, unless of course you have overclocked cards, which isn't mentioned in your sig so I'm assuming otherwise.

Either way, it's not a good thing. In the real world, the XT Xfire setuo would beat the 7800GT SLI setup in almost every case. Once 3DMark has gotten to the point where it doesn't actually reflect the performance of one card in relation to another it pretty much loses all usefulness.

Nvidia added an SLI profile for 3dmark 06 with their last driver release, ATI may not have theirs done yet. If this is the case, it may help explain the questionable results.

 

[kamranziadar]

Damn time to upgrade is coming.

 

[NFS4]

Download Here

 

[Therk]

40 min dl, going 240 kb/s >_<

It looks like they changed the tests from 3d05 quite a bit

 

[BroadbandGamer]

Yeah, turn on 4x AA and I'll bet the X1800 XT wins.

 

[the Chase]

Looking forward to seeing this. Not sure if having the cpu performance included in the overall score is a good thing though. No way to compare video card to video card easily anymore and too many variables introduced. So you scored 4600 in 3D Mark 06-well what processor were you running? Dual core? What speed? Memory timings? 1 gig? 2 gigs? Memory speed? It will be a neat score for people to try to improve their whole system and a big bragging rights tool.(Especially for the dual core on phase change with SLi on liquid nitrogen peeps...)

Edit-just saw a screenie with score(s) on it- looks like the score is broken down into 3 pieces on the same "page" as the final score with the cpu score being the 3rd score-should be easy enough to seperate that out I guess...Wish I had a shader model 3 card now...

 

[BlacKJesuS]

Originally posted by: kamranziadar
Damn time to upgrade is coming.

can i have your old "crap"?

 

[the Chase]

sup BlacKJesuS? "sidewinder"

 

[DAPUNISHER]

Pretty

3163 X2 3800=@2.477ghz 6800GS@530/1200

Smacked a single core FX55 around pretty heavily :shocked: I hope this and Q4 are indications of gains to be expected in future titles.

 

[Rage187]

Originally posted by: Frostwake
I guess Ati is getting low scores because it was tested without AA... and we all know nvidia > ati without AA so.. lets wait for some AA results and check it after

yes, lets keep changing the default test until ATi wins and then it's a valid test.

 

[MBrown]

I think my system is going to get recked.

I wish there was a place that had faster downloads other than bittorrent.

 

[biostud]

Torrent:
http://www.majorgeeks.com/downloadget.p...7&evp=9a5b77c39e7fa5601593befa996343bd

 

[DAPUNISHER]

Anandtech's is up

 

[Ackmed]

Originally posted by: Rage187

Originally posted by: Frostwake
I guess Ati is getting low scores because it was tested without AA... and we all know nvidia > ati without AA so.. lets wait for some AA results and check it after

yes, lets keep changing the default test until ATi wins and then it's a valid test.

When synthetic tests do not have the same results as real games, its a problem with the benchmark. Also, who buys a high end card, such as a X1800 or GTX and doesnt use AA/AF? Honestly. Most reviews of high end cards, dont show low resolutions, or tests without AA/AF for a reason.

I dont have a problem with synthetic benches in themselves, but as I said, when results dont match real world gaming, I dont see how anyone can count them as valid. Just as Sisoft Sandra shows a huge (about 1000 point or about 20%) increase from 2T to 1T, games show nothing, but perhaps a 1-2fps gain. While I do like the graphics in 3dmarks, I just dont see how anyone can take the results over real games.

 

[rise]

Originally posted by: DAPUNISHER
I'm looking forward to promised the follow-up using different CPUs. Very interested in wether the gains from dual core or even HT, are indeed significant.

me too

 

[DAPUNISHER]

Originally posted by: rise4310

Originally posted by: DAPUNISHER
I'm looking forward to promised the follow-up using different CPUs. Very interested in wether the gains from dual core or even HT, are indeed significant.

me too

Well we confirmed dual core makes a big difference. My X2@2.477ghz kicked the shat out of that FX55 in the CPU scores.

 

[DeathReborn]

I'm glad they've stopped the CPU rendering the same scenes as the GPU as that was always a slideshow to me, and I mean what modern games uses Software Rendering?

I do however find the downloads incredibly slow. I'm getting a paltry 121KB/s on a 10Mb Cable Connection and that's the best I could find on the download mirror list. The torrents were crap as usual and some of the sites are simply unreachable, lol.

Will post my scores when I finally get it downloaded.

 

[MBrown]

40 seconds left

 

[BlacKJesuS]

woooop 2111 3dmarks.....

MY GOD i left the computer and came back....i thought my computer froze....one test in space or somthin was moving like a picture book

 

[Avalon]

BitTorrent Download Link

Might as well help each other out while we're downloading it, right?

 

[deadseasquirrel]

Originally posted by: Ackmed
I dont have a problem with synthetic benches in themselves, but as I said, when results dont match real world gaming, I dont see how anyone can count them as valid. Just as Sisoft Sandra shows a huge (about 1000 point or about 20%) increase from 2T to 1T, games show nothing, but perhaps a 1-2fps gain. While I do like the graphics in 3dmarks, I just dont see how anyone can take the results over real games.

100% agree. Anytime a website benchmarks cards, I always skip the 3dmark scores and go right to the games-- usually focusing at the resolutions *I* play at and the games (or types of games) I play.

That being said, it is a good tool for identifying whether your system meets the general consensus of what score it is "supposed" to reach. It's a standard that everybody can run and recreate the results quickly and easily. That's difficult to do with most games. i.e. you benchmark BF2 and let me know what you get and I'll do the same. (what map, how many bots, where do you spawn, what's in your FOV right now compared to me, what are your exact settings for all the video choices, etc).

 

[Keysplayr]

Originally posted by: Ackmed

Originally posted by: Rage187

Originally posted by: Frostwake
I guess Ati is getting low scores because it was tested without AA... and we all know nvidia > ati without AA so.. lets wait for some AA results and check it after

yes, lets keep changing the default test until ATi wins and then it's a valid test.

When synthetic tests do not have the same results as real games, its a problem with the benchmark. Also, who buys a high end card, such as a X1800 or GTX and doesnt use AA/AF? Honestly. Most reviews of high end cards, dont show low resolutions, or tests without AA/AF for a reason.

I dont have a problem with synthetic benches in themselves, but as I said, when results dont match real world gaming, I dont see how anyone can count them as valid. Just as Sisoft Sandra shows a huge (about 1000 point or about 20%) increase from 2T to 1T, games show nothing, but perhaps a 1-2fps gain. While I do like the graphics in 3dmarks, I just dont see how anyone can take the results over real games.

If the ATI card did better, you would not be making a peep. You're unhappy with the results, so automatically there must be something wrong with the testing methods, without a doubt. ATI may have a better AA implementation above 4x, but everyone runs 3dmarkXX with default setting for a good baseline to compare to. Don't worry, with a few optimizations on ATI's part, I'm sure they'll be ahead.

 

[professor1942]

0 points!

 

[Looney]

Originally posted by: Rage187

Originally posted by: Frostwake
I guess Ati is getting low scores because it was tested without AA... and we all know nvidia > ati without AA so.. lets wait for some AA results and check it after

yes, lets keep changing the default test until ATi wins and then it's a valid test.

How many people play games without AA these days? If you want to mimick real-world performance, you need to put it through what you would do in the real-world.