3D Mark 2003 Release date

We talked about this earlier Ostsol, higher precision must be there for a reason (maybe for professional rendering) but it does look like one card will be 96-bit vs 64-bit if Carmack is correct.
 
Ostsol said:
Doomtrooper said:
From B3D's Nv30 vs 9700 Comparison:

The CineFX architecture also allows for an alternative lower precision FP16 format, which allows for 16-bits per component, thus giving a lower overall overhead in performance. This lower precision 64-bit format is compliant with the minimum level of DirectX9 compatibility

That makes even more sense when you consider the precision hint available in PS2.0 that allows for instructions to use a lesser precision if directed to do so.

Considering DX9 documentation says:

The partial precision hint (represented as _pp in the assembly) can be used by the application to indicate to the device that the operation can be performed and the result stored at a lower precision (at least s10e5). This is a hint and many implementations might ignore it.


you'd think the full precision is supposed to be something more than 16-bit float though...
 
worm[Futuremark said:
]*dumdedumdedum*




;)

Minimum Graphics Card Requirement:
DirectX®9.0 compatible graphics adapter that has 32MB of memory and is fully DirectX®7.0 compliant.

Minimum CPU Recommendation:
div20.gif
-->1000MHz x86 compatible processor (PCMark2002 CPU score of over 2500)

At least its a start.
 
I Haven´t had one insider "NDA" info for somone untill now.
If the info is right i vill deff buy a R350 because off the lower price comp to the G-FX and more mature in the DX9 drivers...
And that you actually sees that ATI is the market leaders and it has to stay in the lead, the concerns i have is the drops in fps to basically zero in games and is #the# /my/ major concerns..
 
Heh, the teaser trailer reminds me of the beginning of the Halo 2 trailer. Very similar looking with the spinning red lights.
 
What I want to know is...

Who actually has a GeForceFX card to try 3D Mark with? Do the original review sites still have their cards, or did they have to send them back?
 
Geeze, Joe, you started a teasathon! :(

I've been saving my pennies, and I've been wondering...

[Kristof should highlight and read this text]
How much do you charge for physical abuse of Dave again, Kristof? The going rate for something like a noogie is what I have in mind, though if you have a favorite in mind, I'd be willing to consider it...
[/private text]

[Wavey should highlight and read this text]
How much would you charge for physical abuse of Kristof, Dave...like a good old fashioned head bonking? Or maybe a traditional "point at shirt and flick their nose with your finger when they look down."
[/private text]

:LOL:

Also...
HardOCP seems to have indicated they are keeping theirs, so we'll likely see results from them atleast on Tuesday.

EDIT: durned "background" color doesn't work. :(
 
Er does Tom Bombadil have anything to do with the release of 3DMark2k3? ah me so sorry, I mean 3DMark03?

And demalion I ony have one thing to say about your above post... edit it real faaaaaaast. :LOL:
 
Kristof said:
Make sure to check the credits...

*dumdedumdidum*

:rolleyes: :p
Yup! :D

I would have put in thanks to B3D forums, but some guys here have been so negative about 3DMark, so I thought, naaaah.. ;) Maybe next time!
 
Me sorry for not posting 50 threads in B3D stating 3DMark03 is the greatest thing since sliced bread but I think John Reynolds and Dava Baumann may have minded. ;)
 
Tahir said:
Me sorry for not posting 50 threads in B3D stating 3DMark03 is the greatest thing since sliced bread but I think John Reynolds and Dava Baumann may have minded. ;)
:LOL: Good one! I think Dave is looking at you all like this now: :devilish:
 
Back
Top