3DMark03 not made out to be?

Judas · Aug 15, 2003, 04:02 PM

OK, i think this is ticking me off a little bit....3DMARK orginally was to only test graphic preformance... not the rest of the computer.... it only relies on part of the computer to do the benchmarks it needs to ...and load the nessary stuff to fully make use of the graphics cards...

WHY THE HELL are people going nutz... get PCMARK2002 or whatever to test out the rest of the computer your morons..... i think the product name gives away the reason to use it.... 3DMARK... wait, the 3D part of it should make you all come to the conclusion that it's built to test the 3d Capabilities..... not hardrive.... or more on CPU speed..... and if you want to get some better acurate results using different cpus.... try switching the sucker to SOFTWARE TNL to see the difference....

Dimension_IV · Aug 15, 2003, 07:55 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Judas
OK, i think this is ticking me off a little bit....3DMARK orginally was to only test graphic preformance... not the rest of the computer.... it only relies on part of the computer to do the benchmarks it needs to ...and load the nessary stuff to fully make use of the graphics cards...

WHY THE HELL are people going nutz... get PCMARK2002 or whatever to test out the rest of the computer your morons..... i think the product name gives away the reason to use it.... 3DMARK... wait, the 3D part of it should make you all come to the conclusion that it's built to test the 3d Capabilities..... not hardrive.... or more on CPU speed..... and if you want to get some better acurate results using different cpus.... try switching the sucker to SOFTWARE TNL to see the difference....

Maybe because 3Dmark 99, 2000, and 2001 all were a much more even and complete system AND gaming benchmarks.

Judas · Aug 16, 2003, 02:04 AM

exactly...... they were....but now that PCmark2002 is out..... why would they (3dmark was there only product back then)....

MSX · Aug 16, 2003, 03:15 AM

3d mark doesn't test what is needed for all games which means 03 = not as good as 02 = problem. Especially when they stamp on "the gamers benchmark" on it and include CPU and sound tests that mean dick all to your score. When I can perfectly foresee games that need hefty processing power in the future.

IT makes it so you can have a video card with gets you your thousand score and the rest of the stuff in your PC that just nudges the score a bit in either direction. Which is horsecrap because I know people who can play plenty of new games with a great computer with an older video card.

Another thing that bugs me is it thinking my soundcard cant do EAX without a soundblaster installed and it botches me some marks there when soundstorm does have EAX.

Another interesting note is that when I turn fastwrites on I get the exact same framerate and load times but I get an extra 200 points.

I'm starting to believe the problems are a bit deeper in them ranking hardware and settings like that.

In the end its just a stupid benchmark. All I ever want to know is I'm going to be able to play the next generation of games and thats all benchmarks show me.

Judas · Aug 16, 2003, 04:39 AM

oh, i agree with it not being a true to life gamers benchmark...and that it most likely grades you on "what you have for options on the video card" then what real preformace it has...... I actually hated 3dmark03..... for some reason.... it felt unorginal...... the demo over sucked..and it really is a bitch when the demo and the benchmark are exactly the same.... come on.... even the tests show the same damn thing.....

Logla · Aug 16, 2003, 04:50 AM

Thing is, with it being probably the most popular, it will end up being the unnoficial standard that people bench against.

About time someone released a benchmarking tool which tests everything. Graphics, DX features, sound cards, processor, HDD etc

allup · Aug 16, 2003, 08:50 PM

if this is a flame area then this is my flame to all the video benchmark companies and vid card companies

wow just think of all the money spent on cpu`s, memory and video cards...just to be high in the benchmarks............damn....... and do you gain anything from this other then your name in futuremarks registry?????not really..... just bragging rights i guess? so some people are spending upwards of $$3000 or so depending on if you can even build a system?..capable of reaching high benchmarks...or know enough about overclocking to reach the same high test scores....in the end the only ones who win are futuremark by selling this stuff as a needed item and all the vendors...cuz "framerate is life"??????.....ya right...what all this upgrading or building can be good for is high benchmarks and servers...why dont the companys go for a little less framerate and alot more quality in grafix..better quality software and better grafix balanced system componants for the end user who should not need to upgrade every 2 months cuz hims benchmarks have been beaten....just a thought

Aug 16, 2003, 09:33 PM

i dont worry about testing my video card... i worry more about my entire computer when it comes to gaming. Thats what i look for... is i want it to test my WHOLE system for gaming performance...

Aug 16, 2003, 09:38 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by allup
if this is a flame area then this is my flame to all the video benchmark companies and vid card companies

wow just think of all the money spent on cpu`s, memory and video cards...just to be high in the benchmarks............damn....... and do you gain anything from this other then your name in futuremarks registry?????not really..... just bragging rights i guess? so some people are spending upwards of $$3000 or so depending on if you can even build a system?..capable of reaching high benchmarks...or know enough about overclocking to reach the same high test scores....in the end the only ones who win are futuremark by selling this stuff as a needed item and all the vendors...cuz "framerate is life"??????.....ya right...what all this upgrading or building can be good for is high benchmarks and servers...why dont the companys go for a little less framerate and alot more quality in grafix..better quality software and better grafix balanced system componants for the end user who should not need to upgrade every 2 months cuz hims benchmarks have been beaten....just a thought

you know your right!!! except for of course that some of us upgrade so that we can get the best in gaming... not just benchmarking like you seem to think! Personally i upgrade because i dont like to see lagging in my games... i like to play games as smooth as fucking possible... and am willing to spend $100-150 on it... nothing i have ever bought has cost more than $150... so i dont spend upwards of $3000 on my computer... nor would i... i agree it's not worth it... instead my computer is never worth more than $1000... yet i STILL get great performance out of it.

allup · Aug 16, 2003, 09:52 PM

Well Gen.

That is a good thing.....
i build high end desktops and servers for people and alot want high benchmarking systems and if i`m getting it here in montana then there are many more out there beleve me and some of the systems these guys and gals..."yes gals too"

I do alway try to show them with systems i have how they can save time money and frusteration
and some listen and some don`t want to hear it so i take there money and the systems i build range but most are upwards of 2 grand or more the ones that listen only cost about 1400 incl. monitor
the funny thing is execpt for the benchmarks and case you can`t tell the diff. in preformance.so it goes to show ya just cuz someones machine has more expesive stuff does not make it better.....
weather a cloced radeon 7200 or 9600stock you can almost not tell the diff when done right

I`m not saying all people but i am saying that there are many....

Aug 16, 2003, 08:50 PM	#7
allup DriverHeaven Newbie Join Date: Aug 2003 Location: rancho smokey montana Posts: 3 Rep Power: 0	if this is a flame area then this is my flame to all the video benchmark companies and vid card companies wow just think of all the money spent on cpu`s, memory and video cards...just to be high in the benchmarks............damn....... and do you gain anything from this other then your name in futuremarks registry?????not really..... just bragging rights i guess? so some people are spending upwards of $$3000 or so depending on if you can even build a system?..capable of reaching high benchmarks...or know enough about overclocking to reach the same high test scores....in the end the only ones who win are futuremark by selling this stuff as a needed item and all the vendors...cuz "framerate is life"??????.....ya right...what all this upgrading or building can be good for is high benchmarks and servers...why dont the companys go for a little less framerate and alot more quality in grafix..better quality software and better grafix balanced system componants for the end user who should not need to upgrade every 2 months cuz hims benchmarks have been beaten....just a thought __________________ imallupinya if not yet soon

Aug 16, 2003, 09:52 PM	#10
allup DriverHeaven Newbie Join Date: Aug 2003 Location: rancho smokey montana Posts: 3 Rep Power: 0	Well Gen. That is a good thing..... i build high end desktops and servers for people and alot want high benchmarking systems and if i`m getting it here in montana then there are many more out there beleve me and some of the systems these guys and gals..."yes gals too" I do alway try to show them with systems i have how they can save time money and frusteration and some listen and some don`t want to hear it so i take there money and the systems i build range but most are upwards of 2 grand or more the ones that listen only cost about 1400 incl. monitor the funny thing is execpt for the benchmarks and case you can`t tell the diff. in preformance.so it goes to show ya just cuz someones machine has more expesive stuff does not make it better..... weather a cloced radeon 7200 or 9600stock you can almost not tell the diff when done right I`m not saying all people but i am saying that there are many.... __________________ imallupinya if not yet soon

Aug 16, 2003, 03:15 AM	#4
MSX Burning the frozen... Join Date: Sep 2002 Posts: 1,202 Rep Power: 0	3d mark doesn't test what is needed for all games which means 03 = not as good as 02 = problem. Especially when they stamp on "the gamers benchmark" on it and include CPU and sound tests that mean dick all to your score. When I can perfectly foresee games that need hefty processing power in the future. IT makes it so you can have a video card with gets you your thousand score and the rest of the stuff in your PC that just nudges the score a bit in either direction. Which is horsecrap because I know people who can play plenty of new games with a great computer with an older video card. Another thing that bugs me is it thinking my soundcard cant do EAX without a soundblaster installed and it botches me some marks there when soundstorm does have EAX. Another interesting note is that when I turn fastwrites on I get the exact same framerate and load times but I get an extra 200 points. I'm starting to believe the problems are a bit deeper in them ranking hardware and settings like that. In the end its just a stupid benchmark. All I ever want to know is I'm going to be able to play the next generation of games and thats all benchmarks show me.

Aug 16, 2003, 04:50 AM	#6
Logla DriverHeaven Extreme Member Join Date: May 2003 Posts: 3,310 Rep Power: 48	Thing is, with it being probably the most popular, it will end up being the unnoficial standard that people bench against. About time someone released a benchmarking tool which tests everything. Graphics, DX features, sound cards, processor, HDD etc

Aug 16, 2003, 09:33 PM	#8
generalstupid Guest Posts: n/a	i dont worry about testing my video card... i worry more about my entire computer when it comes to gaming. Thats what i look for... is i want it to test my WHOLE system for gaming performance...