PDA

View Full Version : 3DMark 2003 score of12,535



reyalp_player
04-05-2004, 01:18 PM
NV40 3DMark 2003 scores revealed

http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=15169

reyalp_player
04-05-2004, 01:18 PM
NV40 3DMark 2003 scores revealed

http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=15169

oeqvist
04-05-2004, 01:34 PM
I am sorry but this kind of rumours is absolutely pointless.

First of all it´s the Inquirer
Second it´s a synthetic benchmark
Third you can have a Geforce 3 getting that score with nvidia optimized drivers http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

It´s not like nvidia hasn´t done it before is it?

I still don´t see why people still care about synthetic benchmarks. It has been showned over and over again that it ain´t worth anything. It don´t give you any indications on how the cards performs in real games.

reyalp_player
04-05-2004, 01:42 PM
Third you can have a Geforce 3 getting that score with nvidia optimized drivers

geforce 3 getting 12535 lol dream on

did the ati fanboy comment upset u
we will have to see when they pci express comes out

Emsoda
04-05-2004, 01:43 PM
Its not like nVidia doesnt infalte 3dmark scores anyways.

Process73
04-05-2004, 01:44 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by oeqvist:
I still don´t see why people still care about synthetic benchmarks. It has been showned over and over again that it ain´t worth anything.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I'd like to see even one piece of evidence supporting your claim. Maybe a web page or something?

Fugazi1976
04-05-2004, 01:50 PM
Third you can have a Geforce 3 getting that score with nvidia optimized drivers

no pixel shader support on a geforce 3 so your wrong

did the ati fanboy comment upset u
we will have to see when they pci express comes out

Hmm...I thought this forum was for theEnglish language.

ROFL LOL OMG AUTOEXEC.BAT!!!! A/S/L!

oeqvist
04-05-2004, 01:52 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Process73:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by oeqvist:
I still don´t see why people still care about synthetic benchmarks. It has been showned over and over again that it ain´t worth anything.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I'd like to see even one piece of evidence supporting your claim. Maybe a web page or something?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Take Far Cry? Compare Far Cry scores with everything maxed out with say a 9800 XT and 5950 ULTRA. then Run 3DMARK 2003 with everything maxed out http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

And about the Geforce 3 optimized drivers for you who didn´t get it I meant Geforce 3 cheating drivers especially targeted for 12500 fps in 3DMARK 2003 http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

reyalp_player
04-05-2004, 02:10 PM
Synthetic Benchmark Versus Games as Benchmarks
3DMark03 is a synthetic benchmark that is designed for the sole purpose of enabling objective
performance measurement of DirectX 9 compatible hardware today. There are no other significant
DirectX 9 applications published yet, and the most awaited DirectX 9 game is most likely at least six
months away. 3DMark03 is a forward-looking tool that provides unique value to consumers in the form of
impartial information to support their purchasing decisions today.
We continue to recommend to independent testers to complement their analysis by using published
games in measuring performance. However, it has to be noted that those results are valid only for that
game, whereas 3DMark03 can provide a forward-looking overall view of the performance and features of
the hardware.
Additionally, benchmarks in games have not necessarily been created with the same diligence and
attention to detail that Futuremark puts into ensuring the benchmark's independence and reliability.
Games may contain specifically created code paths for different vendors' products; either for marketing or
application compatibility reasons, invalidating at least the generalization of measured results to other
games.
Well-built synthetic benchmarks measure computer hardware performance within a specific usage area in
an impartial way. Only good synthetic benchmarks enable true apples to apples comparisons. 3DMark03
fulfills both criteria.

El-Gordito
04-05-2004, 02:15 PM
Synthetic benchmarks are for suckers. Who cares what your score is in a synthetic program...do you spend hours at a time playing 3dmark? I sure don't. The only benchmarks that have any real bearing on my opinion are those done using actual, modern games that I play.

and links pointing out why 3dMark is useless:

http://www.hardocp.com/article.html?art=NDI4LDQ=
http://www.tech-report.com/etc/2003q2/3dmurk03/
http://news.com.com/2100-1046_3-1012553.ht

oeqvist
04-05-2004, 03:14 PM
The thing is companies like nVidia slaughter 3DMARK2003 as a believable benchmark. I mean what they end up doing is optimize their drivers for great 3DMARK scores not for real game.

So MadOnion wants it to be impartial there is an optimization war going on where nVidia is by far the biggest sinner.

I mean what´s up with renaming 3DMARK to 3DMURC and loose 20-30 % performance on nVidia video cards.

What´s up with nVidia video cards loosing 10-20 % performance after applying a patch to kill the nVidias game specific optimizations?

What´s it up with nVidia flaming madonion and bash 3DMARK 2003 for not being a viable benchmark and then rejoining them again when their thought it would gain them. That not only shows what nVidia is good for but also make MadOnion loose all their credibility.

3DMARK 2003 don´t do anything to help us gamers. Neither do it give a good view of the performance in real games since the techniques in 3DMARK 2003 isn´t very well representative as what techniques will be used in games neither do it help the video card developers concentrating on 3DMARK performance except for real in game performance...

I find 3DMARK and other utter useless as other than stabilitity tests. And if I like to watch a good show 3DMARK2001SE is much more entertaining to watch than 3DMARK2003.

Name one positive side effect of having those synthetic benchmarks?

Stereophile
04-05-2004, 04:28 PM
Take it with a grain of salt people. Jeez.

DEFX1980
04-05-2004, 05:41 PM
nv40 is gonna rule. but im going to wait till 2005 and get a nv50, a mobo with pci-express, and an amd64 fx-53

makerstrom
04-06-2004, 01:33 AM
With a Vapochill or a nVentive phase change cooler....

My wet dream is a Vapochilled FX-53 with a waterchilled chipset & gfx...Man, that machine will be OC'd....

Sys 1 : P4C 3.0/Asus P4C800Deluxe/1 GB DDR400 TwinMos/Radeon 9700Pro/SB Audigy 2 Platinum/Logitech Z-680/*Asetek Waterchilled*
Sys 2: Creative Slix/P4@2.53/1 GB Samsung DDR333/Radeon 9600XT 128 MB/SB Audigy 2 Platinum Ex/Creative Labs 250D speakers
Sys 3 : Athlon 64 3200+/Abit KV8 Max3/1 GB Kingston DDR433 HyperX/Radeon 9800XT 256 MB

oeqvist
04-06-2004, 05:36 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by DEFX1980:
nv40 is gonna rule. but im going to wait till 2005 and get a nv50, a mobo with pci-express, and an amd64 fx-53<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

The question is not wether it´s gonna rule the current competition it´s weither it will be able to compete with the R420 on equal grounds http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

It´s yet to see if true 12x1 is better than fake 16x1