Futuremark: 3DMark06

[Moloch]

I was gonna post a comment about the drivers .. but didn't. Still it's been two months since the X1800XT came out. You'd think they would have the drivers sorted.

I was hoping to get a X1900XT .. but that might change to the G71 now.

US

Ya.. you'd think they wouldn't have to rely on app specific optimizations to perform well.
It is pretty much inline with pure shading performance though right?... a GTX 512MB trounces an X1800XT.

 

[Unknown Soldier]

Ya.. you'd think they wouldn't have to rely on app specific optimizations to perform well.
It is pretty much inline with pure shading performance though right?... a GTX 512MB trounces an X1800XT.

It's expected that the GTX 512 trounces the X1800XT .. it's been shown in most games. What's gets me is that the X1800XT loses to the GTX256MB.

 

[Unknown Soldier]

Ok .. that's interesting .. at 1280x1024 .. it seems X1800XT beats the GTX 256

http://diy.yesky.com/imagelist/06/01/86k6w787p1dy.jpg
http://www.pcper.com/images/reviews/199/3dmark06-sm3.gif

Weird .. two sites .. two different results?

US

 

[N00b]

My stomach feeling tells me that Catalyst 6.1 is close and will correct the 1800XT/7800 GTX 256 ...eh... "situation". I don't think it will be able outscore the 7800 GTX 512 though.

 

[Moloch]

It's expected that the GTX 512 trounces the X1800XT .. it's been shown in most games. What's gets me is that the X1800XT loses to the GTX256MB.

Well I guess yes.. without FSAA the 1800XT has no business being in the same zipcode
with fsaa it does ok though depending on game.
Since there are HDR tests are the scores inline with what we've seen so far?

 

[tEd]

I guess there is alot potential not used for x1300/x1600 and x1900 as i assume 3dmark06 won't use the 24bit dst and fetch4 functionality for the shadowmap rendering.

Also if they use fp16 filtering for hdr rendering nvidia will have an advantage as ati don't support fp16 texture filtering and it has do be done in the shader

 

[Unknown Soldier]

I'm impressed with the work done by Futuremark.

Hope games in the very near future(3months) come out looking so sweet.

Congrats Futuremark

US

 

[Hubert]

My stomach feeling tells me that Catalyst 6.1 is close and will correct the 1800XT/7800 GTX 256 ...eh... "situation". I don't think it will be able outscore the 7800 GTX 512 though.

512 Mb GTX is a phantom. It's score is rhater close to the coming G71, IMO. (runs and hides)

 

[N00b]

512 Mb GTX is a phantom. It's score is rhater close to the coming G71, IMO. (runs and hides)

A phantom that I own actually. So the 7800 GTX 512 scores matters very much to me. ;-)

 

[Hubert]

I guess there is alot potential not used for x1300/x1600 and x1900 as i assume 3dmark06 won't use the 24bit dst and fetch4 functionality for the shadowmap rendering.

Also if they use fp16 filtering for hdr rendering nvidia will have an advantage as ati don't support fp16 texture filtering and it has do be done in the shader

And could you really blame them ? X1800 XT 's been around only for two months.
I guess, Nvidia, having SM 3.0 capable products for so long, pretty much paved the way shaping current generation applications, and "SM 3.0 done right" will not be an advantage in R5xx lifetime. Ati needs serious GITG activity to make use of R5xx-s unique features.

 

[Hubert]

A phantom that I own actually. So the 7800 GTX 512 scores matters very much to me. ;-)

Good for you. You won't have to buy the G71, than.

 

[Neeyik]

Thread closed for a few minutes while I split the thread up - it's no longer about FM driver updates, so there needs to be two separate topics.

Edit: All done now.

 

[Hubert]

the pc perspective review suggests - actually, shows, not only suggests - an Nvidia victory, but where are the AA+ AF results ?

I would not be surpriesed if X1800 would reduce the gap or even win now and there with decent quality settings. Who'd use a GTX or X1800 without AA+AF anyway ?

 

[trinibwoy]

the pc perspective review suggests an Nvidida victory, but where are the AA+ AF results ?

I would not be surpriesed if X1800 would reduce the gap or even win now and there with decent quality settings.

Wasn't the argument a while back that AA/AF is not a DirectX feature hence not enabled in the default settings? But there are a couple sites that do AA/AF on 3dmark so you should get those scores soon. Something tells me, 3dmark06 will be even less popular than 05. Especially with the scarcity of new content.

 

[Unknown Soldier]

I would think AA+AF would be automatically added .. especially if you using Application Preference in the CP.

 

[Martin Eddy]

Techconnect have got a mirror up for it now if anyones interested.
I won't post the link in case that gets me in trouble.

 

[Hanners]

the pc perspective review suggests - actually, shows, not only suggests - an Nvidia victory, but where are the AA+ AF results ?

Considering the HDR requirements of the relevant tests in 3DMark06, AA isn't going to be possible on NVIDIA parts....

 

[Hubert]

Erm. Thing's are messed up than. Oh, the good old 3DMark 2001 days ... you got a score, and you were the king. Now, you have to consider AA+AF, HDR, and whatnot. Ati has to fight uphill again.

 

[Dave Baumann]

Considering the HDR requirements of the relevant tests in 3DMark06, AA isn't going to be possible on NVIDIA parts....

Are 6100/6150/6200 still classed as "Shader 2.0" parts because they don't have FP16 Blending?

 

[Hanners]

Are 6100/6150/6200 still classed as "Shader 2.0" parts because they don't have FP16 Blending?

You can't run the HDR/SM3.0 tests in 3DMark06 on a GeForce 6200 for that very reason, and I'd safely assume that the 6100 and 6150 are the same.