• 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.

Post your Final Reality scores!

2500mhz opty 170 + X1900XT

Tells me i got 14.49, my system is only 15 times faster than a pentium 150 hahahah. I was expecting a number that would shoot off the side of the screen :frown:
 
Is this the same final fantasy benchmark that was released a while back? I remember trying it once, the graphics looked DX7-ish, and it ran for so long that I ran out of patience before it finished the benchmark.
 
It apparently doesnt like newer hardware or perhaps its the dual core cpu, also that was painful to watch.

Scored 1.38 Reality marks even tho the framerate was flawless the entire time.

 
I had around 22ish overall reality marks on a 2.5ghz Opteron and 7600GT. That was funny 🙂
 
Wow, what a blast from the past. I remember running this way back on my first AGP card, an ATI Rage Pro....

I'll give it a try later tonight. 🙂
 
Flashback ... Haven't run this for ages.

My notebook (Sempron 2600, SiS Mirage-2 chipset integrated graphics) gave a total score of 7.87.
 
Originally posted by: dguy6789
The graphics in it look sub DX6. It tries to wow you by showing you a polygonal object with "Textures".
Click to expand...

Filtered textures, although just bilinear. lol
 
I'm really surprised. It says I have 28.07 the 2d image processing speed of the baseline system, which may be true.
It also says I have 25.08 the bus transfer rate, which is a larger difference than even PCI to AGP 8x would give.
However, it says I only have 7.23 the 3d performance. I know my cpu is definetely more than 7.23x faster than a pentium 150mhz, and my x800xt should blow an s3 virge away. Oh wait, the benchmark probably leaves vsync enabled, thus lowering the results.

BTW, interesting to note that in the bus transfer rate test, it only gets 644MB max out of AGP 8x, perhaps latency is a killer?
In the AGP test, with a 36Mb texture size, it gives the result of 239.18 images/s, which is rather meaningless. Maybe frames/s? Assuming that each image is 36Megabits, that would be 1076.31MB/s over the AGP bus (maybe, it could all be staying in graphics memory since it's so small), which is about AGP 4x. Still, I think vsync is enabled, artificially limiting this benchmark.
 
Originally posted by: Fox5
I'm really surprised. It says I have 28.07 the 2d image processing speed of the baseline system, which may be true.
It also says I have 25.08 the bus transfer rate, which is a larger difference than even PCI to AGP 8x would give.
However, it says I only have 7.23 the 3d performance. I know my cpu is definetely more than 7.23x faster than a pentium 150mhz, and my x800xt should blow an s3 virge away. Oh wait, the benchmark probably leaves vsync enabled, thus lowering the results.

BTW, interesting to note that in the bus transfer rate test, it only gets 644MB max out of AGP 8x, perhaps latency is a killer?
In the AGP test, with a 36Mb texture size, it gives the result of 239.18 images/s, which is rather meaningless. Maybe frames/s? Assuming that each image is 36Megabits, that would be 1076.31MB/s over the AGP bus (maybe, it could all be staying in graphics memory since it's so small), which is about AGP 4x. Still, I think vsync is enabled, artificially limiting this benchmark.
Click to expand...

Ok, with vsync off, the score went up to 256.91 images/s, or 1156.095MB/s. Well, unless that lower case b in the program is a mistake, and it really is megabytes, in which case 9248.76MB/s is about half the speed of my video ram. (cpu limited test then?) Take your pick, this benchmark either half stresses VRAM or half stresses the AGP bus. Hmm, what if you have PCI-Express?
 
Originally posted by: Fox5
Originally posted by: Fox5
I'm really surprised. It says I have 28.07 the 2d image processing speed of the baseline system, which may be true.
It also says I have 25.08 the bus transfer rate, which is a larger difference than even PCI to AGP 8x would give.
However, it says I only have 7.23 the 3d performance. I know my cpu is definetely more than 7.23x faster than a pentium 150mhz, and my x800xt should blow an s3 virge away. Oh wait, the benchmark probably leaves vsync enabled, thus lowering the results.

BTW, interesting to note that in the bus transfer rate test, it only gets 644MB max out of AGP 8x, perhaps latency is a killer?
In the AGP test, with a 36Mb texture size, it gives the result of 239.18 images/s, which is rather meaningless. Maybe frames/s? Assuming that each image is 36Megabits, that would be 1076.31MB/s over the AGP bus (maybe, it could all be staying in graphics memory since it's so small), which is about AGP 4x. Still, I think vsync is enabled, artificially limiting this benchmark.
Click to expand...

Ok, with vsync off, the score went up to 256.91 images/s, or 1156.095MB/s. Well, unless that lower case b in the program is a mistake, and it really is megabytes, in which case 9248.76MB/s is about half the speed of my video ram. (cpu limited test then?) Take your pick, this benchmark either half stresses VRAM or half stresses the AGP bus. Hmm, what if you have PCI-Express?
Click to expand...

I doubt these questions are really worth thinking about. The benchmark is 9 years old. I'm just glad it even runs. Ahhhh memories.
 
Still works in Windows 7 x64 with XP SP3 compatibility, or else it will crash on exit. It can even work with 3x SLI!

FR-1.png


Reminds me of how much Remedy is such a sell out to Microsoft whenever I see the Aesir Corp, Remedy, and Max Payne logos displayed throughout the benchmark.
 
It doesn't want to install for me 🙁 Tried Compatibility with XP SP3, Win95, Win98/Me... No dice.



Brings back so many memories though!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top