3DMark06 is out

[Raphie]

while i LIKE vsync becuase you don't get the tearing, what you say is exactly true. this is why i'll score upwards of 640fps on dragothic in 3dmark01se. with vsync on it's lower.

 

Guys, all nice for CRT, not valid anymore for LCD, that's the whole ponit....

[finagle69]

Guys, all nice for CRT, not valid anymore for LCD, that's the whole ponit....

 

LCD's still tear.

[Redbeaver]

i'm sure it won't be long if it hasn't happened yet. i thought i read someone got pretty close, like upper 8's or lower 9's

 

EDIT: looks like 10K is gone. http://service.futuremark.com/compare?3dm06=10834

 

jesus christ almighty......... is that 2x7800GTX 512???

 

edit: yup it is... dualcore Fx-60 with 2x7800GTx 512........ damnnnnn

 

oh but look at the CPU test, 0.7FPS lmao

[monsterzero]

Default settings using 81.98 drivers.

 

[finagle69]

jesus christ almighty......... is that 2x7800GTX 512???

 

edit: yup it is... dualcore Fx-60 with 2x7800GTx 512........ damnnnnn

 

oh but look at the CPU test, 0.7FPS lmao

 

someone already broke 11K also.

[Cythrawl]

LCD's still tear.

 

Yes you are quite correct...

 

hehe, ok g33k slave boy...lmao

 

Yay I'm a slave boy... my life is now complete...

 

(My wife will kill me!! But I bet she'd sell me to you for 50 cents somedays.)

[red930]

someone already broke 11K also.

 

Wouldn't surprise me I guess, 5600 for a single card with only moderate overclocking....should be easy enough to double that with Sli and some watercooling.

[Sorrento]

Thats ok, it was just that you quoted me and it really does look like that its just referring to me...

 

So yes I am sorry for replying in kind. but however when you quote one person then reply in

large bold letters

it looks like you are implying that I didnt know that and are questioning my post. Hence the sarcasm. Really if you wanted to make a statement then quoting someone and replying with FYI in big letters ISNT the way to do it. A more constructive post that doesnt seem like is its just centered on one person you would not get such replies back atchya.

 

If it was the other way round and I had posted that way to one of your posts then you would feel the same way, hence why I posted the way I did.

 

Just my 2 cents on that.

 

Anyway I think as I said before that the 1280x1024 thing its totally bogus. As stated before some people cant even display that res on some CRTS' and I think they should patch it back down to 1024x768 to keep it conistant with the previous 3DMark as you CANNOT do an objective comparison with the previous version due to the extra overhead put on the card with the higher resolution.

 

That is why I did them all at the same res (1024x768)

That way you can see a fair decrease in my results instead of a bigger drop due to futuremarks oversight of making the res even higher to reduce scores even more... Why did they do this?

Who knows, but my theory (note that its my opinion too) is that FT is in cahoots with the video card mfg's. they make a new 3DMark every couple of years to make the top line cards at the time of release look worse than they actually are (I'll guarentee that it will run everything just fine otherwise) in order to get people to upgrade to the latest and greatest, because it runs 3DMark great.

 

You only have to look in this thread on the amount of people saying thier score sux0rs, or that they are dissapointed and suchlike that thier scores dont meet the grade.

 

I say, get over it people its a becnhmark that really doesnt mean squat right now. Sure its probably telling you that your PC will suck like that in a year or two for games (but only the cutting edge ones at that) but right now it means nothing..

 

I dont know ANYONE who's using thier PC for games keep the same video card for more than 12 months... not a one.. but to upgrade becuase of a benchmark score is just way to sad for me to comprehend..

Once again I was just trying to make a point for everyeone, since not everyone knew the resolution was 1280 x 1024... and it was better to use larger font letters than also use LARGER AND CAPS AT THE SAME TIME

 

I agree with what you said, its funny how every release of 3dMark took a couple of years: 99, 2001, 2003 and then 2005, but this time the new one was released something arond 16 months since the release of 3dMark05 back in late 2004, sounds funny like you said.

 

Well I scored a little above 5000 pts, and I don't think this score sucks; the frequency of my cpu and graphic cards is exactly the same in 24/7 use than when I tested 3dMark06, nothing of those suicidal runs I now hate so much, also in 3D my system is faster than any single card system out there. What really worries me are games like F.E.A.R. which really stressed my two 6800GT's nearly as much as this new 3dMark06; F.E.A.R. sucked as a game, nothing in common to Half Life2... but if if this way games are going to be then by all means welcome 3dMark06 which is showing us when it is really time to upgrade.

 

I believe I might start an adventure with an X2 first, probably an Opteron 175 or a 4400+ Toledo... then perhaps a 7900 or x1900, or maybe two... or maybe not. This is an expensive hobbie, but it is not as expensive as the one I had last decade (drag racing). I need more info on these X2's and when the new GPU's are going to be released.

 

Good luck

[Cythrawl]

What really worries me are games like F.E.A.R. which really stressed my two 6800GT's nearly as much as this new 3dMark06; F.E.A.R. sucked as a game, nothing in common to Half Life2... but if if this way games are going to be then by all means welcome 3dMark06 which is showing us when it is really time to upgrade.

 

FEAR is a prime example on how poorly coded a game can get. I personally loved the game (granted its not as good as half life 2 as a game). but the performance sucks.. It still sucks with SLI PC's (try the best shadow settings and look at it die)

 

Now if John Carmak had written the FEAR engine, I would bet my left and maybe my right testicle that it would run superb on the same hardware.

 

Monolith suck... Thier game engine tho impress, sucks... its about as optimized as a 12 year old computer user's hard drive..

[finagle69]

i loved the FEAR engine, ran kinda crappy, but a spectacular show of tech. Doom3 engine while being new and cool and has neat lighting just seems off to me. there's just something about it that says "even though i'm awesome, i'm fake". FEAR is definitely a huge step up from Doom3 engine in terms of presentation and feel. the Source engine is the ultimate in looks, naturality™, and presentation. your eyes just accept it as beautiful and life-like.

[Cythrawl]

i got 2635 is that any good?

OK Alex, here are my scores.. For system spec see my sig.. You should be getting better than this..

 

Benchmark

Width 1280

Height 1024

Anti-Aliasing None

Anti-Aliasing Quality 0

Texture Filtering Optimal

Anisotropic Level 1

VS Profile 3_0

PS Profile 3_0

Force full precision No

Disable HW shadow mapping No

Disable post-processing No

Force software vertex shader No

Color mipmaps No

Force software FP filtering No

Repeat tests Off

Fixed framerate Off

 

3DMark Score 3705 3DMarks

SM2.0 Score 1662

HDR/SM3.0 Score 1659

CPU Score 922 (eeek!)

 

GT1 - Return To Proxycon 13.071 FPS

GT2 - Firefly Forest 14.622 FPS

CPU1 - Red Valley 0.290 FPS

CPU2 - Red Valley 0.469 FPS

HDR1 - Canyon Flight 14.230 FPS

HDR2 - Deep Freeze 18.950 FPS

Fill Rate - Single-Texturing 4828.789 MTexels/s

Fill Rate - Multi-Texturing 9239.626 MTexels/s

Pixel Shader 173.365 FPS

Vertex Shader - Simple 154.758 MVertices/s

Vertex Shader - Complex 44.227 MVertices/s

Shader Particles (SM3.0) 14.023 FPS

Perlin Noise (SM3.0) 28.504 FPS

8 Triangles 2.690 MTriangles/s

32 Triangles 8.702 MTriangles/s

128 Triangles 27.703 MTriangles/s

512 Triangles 69.221 MTriangles/s

2048 Triangles 101.070 MTriangles/s

32768 Triangles 118.188 MTriangles/s

[Sorrento]

FEAR is a prime example on how poorly coded a game can get. I personally loved the game (granted its not as good as half life 2 as a game). but the performance sucks.. It still sucks with SLI PC's (try the best shadow settings and look at it die)

 

Now if John Carmak had written the FEAR engine, I would bet my left and maybe my right testicle that it would run superb on the same hardware.

 

Monolith suck... Thier game engine tho impress, sucks... its about as optimized as a 12 year old computer user's hard drive..

With SLI FEAR is more or less ok at maximum settings and 1280 x 1024 with FSAA 4x and 16x Aniso... but I don't like FPS drop lower than 24 fps, which sometimes it does. Game might be "poorly coded" like you said, but I believe it is something else like heavier textures and shadows and other things this game is rich with. It is a bad game because like many people said the plot and storyline were predictable, but the game is very pretty to the eyes.

 

I wouldn't go so far as to bet parts of my body on John Carmak's ability to make games, if you believe Doom3 and Quake4 are great games then you are forgetting about all the people who own ATI cards and all the problems they have to work with with these two games. OpenGL might not be the ATI's forte, as we all know, but one thing is to have slow performance and something entirely diferent would be to have poor performance in comparison to the other brand video cards with similar performance. There are other OpenGL games with nearly as good quality out there which are proof of what I am saying... yet I agree both Doom3 and Quake4 are very good games which were focused on storyline, plot, and fun for the people who actually play the games... they weren't made to win a contest of "who made the prettiest game". Maybe this is one of the few things John Carmak is good enough foryou can bet body parts... and still I would advise NOT to

 

Half Life 2 is the other side of the coin: a game that punish nVidia cards and favors ATI cards. The same thing as Doom3 and Quake4 I guess, and like those two HL2 is a great game by itself because of the story, plot and all the adventure it takes place; game is like living the story in a book, or a Wolfang Petersen movie... its just too damn good to really worry about what video card was favored or which one was punished.

 

FEAR was not like this, still I wouldn't say the game's 3d engine was as bad as you said... maybe it is, I think it is just too damn big and that is very easy to see on the screen. Lets see what the new games will show us, maybe this 3dMark06 isn't as wrong as everybody thinks... don't get me wrong, I hope it is but right now it showed me what cpu I need.

 

Good luck