|01-26-2006 09:47 PM|
Sorry ive been away fromt eh puter for a while.
Im not saying there are actual game demos there. They just seem to take alot of cues fromt eh hardware and game devleopers out there be incorperating new shader model techniques into the tests, most of which are then later touted by a particular developer as being a new custom shader setup they developed just for this or that game.
I just dont believe that inthe current market of computer hardware, with as much driver cooking as goes on, with as much marketing hooha that goes on, that 3dMark is a valid test anymore. It doesnt prove anything other then your system is capable of running it, at a reasonable frame rate. And even then, the actual numbers it pumps out, do not necesarly mean it had steller FPS.
To me its like reading an issue of Car & Driver. The issue with the new Mustang vs. the GTO comes to mind. The GTO got better gas milage, stopped from 60 MPH faster. Slolomed quicker. Lapped faster. Accelerated harder. And not by a small margin either mind you. But the Mustang won the review, and got top number becuase it scored a killer "GOTTA HAVE IT!" rating, which pushed it a few points over the GTO to be the ultimate winner of the contest. In essence...its BS. And this is the type of testing method i belive 3dM uses to build its scoring system. And i doubt its validity.
It does make your e-penis look bigger though.
|01-22-2006 08:37 PM|
|Rob Williams||I'm waiting.|
|01-20-2006 11:16 PM|
|Rob Williams||It looks like the main reason you bash 3D Mark is because it just pimps upcoming games, like Max Payne in '01. Please tell me which retail games can be found in '03, '05 or '06.|
|01-20-2006 10:38 PM|
Ahhh, im sorry, i was under the impression that the Athlon 64 was a dual-core too.
However, my stance on 3DMark still stands.
|01-20-2006 01:29 PM|
|01-20-2006 04:37 AM|
Im guessing that Intel spent a crap ton of money to get 3dM06 optimized for their CPU, to use it as heavy marketing to attempt to pull themselves up from the hammer fisted beating from AMD this year.
Strange, the Intel get better 3dMarks...yet any game ou there on teh market runs faster on AMD hardware. Hmmmm....i wonder why that is?
3dMark is preaty to look at and all. But seriously, its nothing more then a marketed tech-demo showing off new design techniques for companies to get extra exposure from to help boot a new title coming out from them (think 3dm01 and the Max Payne esque demo). And its becoming more then obvious over the last three editions, that its nothing more then a paid advertisment for hardware companies to get their name outthere to the highest bidder.
As far as i can tell the only people walking away a winner here, is the guys at MadOnion, or whatever the hell their company name is this year.
Sorry for the rant. But i really hate 3dmark.
|01-19-2006 11:43 AM|
I guesstimate that you will get 2,300.
Do it. DO IT.
|01-19-2006 11:09 AM|
|Word.||Ill run it sometime.. and prolly get about 600 marks...... if that.|
|01-19-2006 11:08 AM|
|Word.||10k was soooooooooo yesterday lol|
|01-18-2006 11:41 PM|
It's nuts, there is a 9,500 score atm.. shouldn't be long before someone hits 10k.
|01-18-2006 08:08 PM|
|Jakal||I can't wait to get my pc done and see what it can do. I can't even imagine trying to run that on this one lol. It probably wouldn't! Those pictures are awesome; that high-def stuff should really show what a system's made of.|
|01-18-2006 08:04 PM|
have you had the chance to test your system and if so what score do you obtain?
|01-18-2006 04:42 PM|
|Rob Williams||Hehe, thanks! That's still a pretty good score. I seen a 431 score earlier, so you are way past that|
|01-18-2006 03:52 PM|
great review by the way!
|01-18-2006 03:52 PM|
i scored 2808 at 1024x786 with amd64 3200+ and 6800gt, this bench is pretty but makes me want a new puter
|This thread has more than 15 replies. Click here to review the whole thread.|