FutureMark 3DMark06 Benchmark Overview [Now with Download Link]

[Ackmed]

Originally posted by: otispunkmeyer
yeah thats valves HDR, it looks good but its not the proper FP16 way of doing it. kudos to them for making something everyone can use though, but its just not proper

It looks good to me. Going from indoor to outdoor doesnt look as good though, and overall Farcry's HDR looks better most of the time to me. But as you said, at least they have it. It may not be "proper", but it gets a boost from SLI, unlike the HDR in Farcry. Crossfire does get a boost in HDR in Farcry however.

Something I think 3dmark is lacking is parallax mapping technique. Its going to be used a lot in upcoming games. Its a huge part of Unreal 3, and its already in F.E.A.R. Whch is part of the reason the X1K cards do so well in F.E.A.R. But oh well, thats why we have real games to judge cards on.

 

[cronic]

still testing

 

[otispunkmeyer]

wtf?

i get an error that says "display changed" half way through the CPU test......doesnt even explain why!

 

[Cookie Monster]

R580s 3dmark06 score from VR-Zone.

 

[allies]

3DMark Score: 4767
SM 2.0 Score: 1938 Marks
SM 3.0 Score: 1907 Marks
CPU Score: 1822 Marks

Everything is in my sig, this is not after a fresh reboot with firefox with many tabs open, aim open, etc. I think I'll be able to make it until G80/R600 without an upgrade in the GPU/CPU department

 

[cronic]

what am i missing here. does the free version run a different set of test than the advanced version. i am seeing people score 2000 points higher than me with very similar setups that have bought the advanced version. what am i missing here?

 

[otispunkmeyer]

http://service.futuremark.com/orb/projectdetails.jsp?projectType=14

5521 not bad

that test at the end looked well sweet.

 

[RobertR1]

http://www.games-fusion.net/filedb/pafiledb.php?action=file&id=984

Already a patch out????

 

[otispunkmeyer]

Originally posted by: cronic
what am i missing here. does the free version run a different set of test than the advanced version. i am seeing people score 2000 points higher than me with very similar setups that have bought the advanced version. what am i missing here?

the advanced vversion lets you chose resolutions too, its likely that these people are running the bench at 10x7 to compare to older 3d marks since they ran 10x7 by default

 

[xtknight]

3508. Not terrible. Too bad deep freeze was the only good-looking one.

 

[TheRyuu]

The only download sever that I actually got working was the Chinese one

about 200kb/s with it, guess I'll have to wait.

 

[TecHNooB]

Originally posted by: Cookie Monster
R580s 3dmark06 score from VR-Zone.

Score seems low.. Only 5348 when coupled with an FX-60?

 

[xtknight]

So this time CPU is factored in? And what about all the settings in ForceWare/CCC? Does 3DMark account for those in the score or is the score just as-is? For example, will the score be the same at high quality and high performance under the driver config dialog?

 

[Elfear]

Originally posted by: xtknight
So this time CPU is factored in? And what about all the settings in ForceWare/CCC? Does 3DMark account for those in the score or is the score just as-is? For example, will the score be the same at high quality and high performance under the driver config dialog?

I imagine that, like 3DMark05, driver settings will have an impact on your score.

 

[DidlySquat]

Originally posted by: otispunkmeyer
wtf?

i get an error that says "display changed" half way through the CPU test......doesnt even explain why!

pwned

 

[stevty2889]

heh, ran in on my pentium-M system thats got an X700. Scored a whopping 591
SM2.0 score 278
HDR/SM3.0 score n/a
CPU score 1027

 

[rise]

Originally posted by: Elfear

Originally posted by: xtknight
So this time CPU is factored in? And what about all the settings in ForceWare/CCC? Does 3DMark account for those in the score or is the score just as-is? For example, will the score be the same at high quality and high performance under the driver config dialog?

I imagine that, like 3DMark05, driver settings will have an impact on your score.

yeah, i got ~400 points different from high quality to quality.

 

[Beef Taco]

Wow, my download is topping out at 110KB/s. Is there any place out there faster? Any faster torrents?

 

[cronic]

when you post scores please post the resolution and tests run to acheive those scores

 

[xtknight]

The torrents ran at 8kb/sec max for me in both Azureus and uTorrent even with a forwarded port. Pretty weak.

 

[imported_wolf359]

3936 using defaults

http://service.futuremark.com/compare?3dm06=7555

 

[cronic]

still testing

 

[beggerking]

Originally posted by: munky

Originally posted by: beggerking
correct, unbiased way of reporting a invalid comparison

We can't run the test with anti-aliasing and get scores for both cards to compare, since Nvidia's cards don't generate a score.

its unprofessional/biased to just post a 0 score on SM3.0 for 7800 as the FS review.

So should the reviewers have refused to run games in SM3 last year because the x800 series did not support it? The fact that the hardware does not support a feature should be noted when reviewing it. Maybe it would have been more "politically correct" to just exclude Nv totally when running the HDR+AA tests, but that does not change the fact that Nv card can not do FP HDR with AA, while the competitor's cards can.

so, is it fair if they run this test? and give x1800xt a BIG 0?

New to 3DMark06 is a shader particles test that runs simple particle physics in the pixel shader and then uses the results through vertex texture fetches. This test requires SM3.0 with hardware Vertex Texture Fetch support, so it doesn't run on ATI hardware

 

[Munky]

Originally posted by: beggerking

Originally posted by: munky

Originally posted by: beggerking
correct, unbiased way of reporting a invalid comparison

We can't run the test with anti-aliasing and get scores for both cards to compare, since Nvidia's cards don't generate a score.

its unprofessional/biased to just post a 0 score on SM3.0 for 7800 as the FS review.

So should the reviewers have refused to run games in SM3 last year because the x800 series did not support it? The fact that the hardware does not support a feature should be noted when reviewing it. Maybe it would have been more "politically correct" to just exclude Nv totally when running the HDR+AA tests, but that does not change the fact that Nv card can not do FP HDR with AA, while the competitor's cards can.

so, is it fair if they run this test? and give x1800xt a BIG 0?

New to 3DMark06 is a shader particles test that runs simple particle physics in the pixel shader and then uses the results through vertex texture fetches. This test requires SM3.0 with hardware Vertex Texture Fetch support, so it doesn't run on ATI hardware

Yes, in this case the x1800 would score a 0. Somehow, though, I dont see VTF as useful as HDR+AA in actual games.

 

[Beef Taco]

Wow, if you wait for the fileshack download, it's worth it. I'm downloading at 390KB/s currently. 10 Minutes left .