Wait, what? 3DMark isn't a great tool, but it'll certainly give you a general idea of your graphics cards performance. It might lean towards one architecture or another like any graphics engine might, but if you score great on a 3DMark test your games are not going to suddenly play like shit...
3DMARK Vantage Brief Test
- Thread starter mao5
- Start date
Wait, what? 3DMark isn't a great tool, but it'll certainly give you a general idea of your graphics cards performance. It might lean towards one architecture or another like any graphics engine might, but if you score great on a 3DMark test your games are not going to suddenly play like shit...
I think it was a fairly ambiguous statement... One interpretation is that often, 3dmark can show you some great scores (or even great performance), which in no way translates to accurate game performance. People can run it, get a score of 8000 or something (average videocard with a good quad core CPU, perhaps?) and find that a lot of games still run fairly poorly, and find themselves chuffed.
Granted, you'd have to be pretty daft in this age to fall into such a 'trap', but damned if I don't see it on a weekly basis. 3dmark score != Gaming performance (though we know that! :smile: ) A system with an average videocard (and hence overall average performance levels) with a decent quad core CPU can typically display a far higher score than a system that has a higher end videocard (and hence typically much better gaming performance since so many games are more affected by GPU grunt than CPU) and an average CPU. As a comparative gaming tool, 3dmark isn't so hot. I can look at a 3dmark score and see it's 10,000, but I can't really be sure it's going to be a system that runs most games great.
That still makes no sense at all. A 3DMark score is actually generally accurate in telling you the performance whereabouts of your hardware. If you have a top 3DMark score you're pretty damn likely to have top performance. If you have a middle of the range score you're pretty damn likely to have a pretty middle of the road gaming performance. Does it scale the same? Nope, but then again games don't scale exactly like each other either.
I'd love to see this grand disparity people talk about. I know it's pretty cool to always say "3DMark is pointless" and it is, but not in the way people try to convey it as. Running 3DMark is a bit like running a game benchmark, getting good results, and then saying other games will do just fine as well. The truth is other games are likely to do just fine, there are exceptions but there are ALWAYS exceptions. So saying it's useless is basically saying the same thing for all other single benchmark conclusions, be it a dedicated program or a game.
I'd love to see this grand disparity people talk about. I know it's pretty cool to always say "3DMark is pointless" and it is, but not in the way people try to convey it as. Running 3DMark is a bit like running a game benchmark, getting good results, and then saying other games will do just fine as well. The truth is other games are likely to do just fine, there are exceptions but there are ALWAYS exceptions. So saying it's useless is basically saying the same thing for all other single benchmark conclusions, be it a dedicated program or a game.
I was very excited when I tested my Radeon HD2600Pro 128bit DDR2using 3DMark05 default test and it scored higher then my ATI Radeon AIW X800XT 256bit GDDR3.
For an actual reason, your 2600 Pro supported a shader model your X800XT didn't, therefore in a number of ways the 2600 Pro is superior (not always, but just like I said, 3DMark is directly comparable to a game in its actual value as a singular benchmark), it can play some games the X800XT could not. It your responsibility to have enough sense to know that no single benchmark is good enough to gauge a product. Would people rely solely on Crysis to determine to buy a new graphics card? I really hope, not just like people wouldn't rely solely on a 3DMark test, yet 3DMark is treated like once you run it you can never run another benchmark ever. It's a bit unfair.
Yes I know that
In my situation 3DMark doesn't look at memory advantage of X800XT over HD2600Pro plus ROP's, TMU's.
But in reality most games will run faster on X800XT(SM2) vs. HD2600Pro(SM3)
Last edited by a moderator:
I still believe that 3DMark2001SE treats better value understanding how your system performs.
BlizzardOne
Newcomer
My 8800 Ultra always craps out during Game 4 in 3DMark2001se
I've even recently reformatted, and it still doesn't like it.
Aerows
Regular
My 8800 Ultra always craps out during Game 4 in 3DMark2001se
And it is probably the video memory
. Sobek is right about that.And it is probably the video memory
Well, some people had a good luck with GF8800Ultra!
http://www.ripping.org/benchmarks.php?act=graphicscores&graphic=3DMark01
Edit:
Last edited by a moderator:
Similar threads
