3dmark06... anyone else disappointed?

Raikiri · 21 Jan 2006 at 16:29

ajgoodfellow said:
I'm unimpressed with it. As said, it doesn't really have any new demos

I don't like the fact that it's nVidia biased either - the 7800GTX 256MB outperforms the X1800XT 512MB but the X1800XT is faster in games! I don't like the way that it kills your score if you don't have SM3 - my X800Pro performs like a 6600GT in 3DM06 but it's far faster in games!

3D Mark 05 was a far better indication IMO

Yeah i agree with that... looks nice though

But, it is another tool for people such as egt to use when comparing cards unfortunately.

And people will base what they buy on these scores alone, clearly an x1800xt is faster than my 7800GT but they score similarly in the benchmark

james.miller · 21 Jan 2006 at 16:31

'05 wasnt a good indication either. i've said it before, '01 is still the best. 6600gt's are scoring stupidly close to what i can pull with my rig in '05 (x800gto2, opty @ 2.9ghz - 6,655)na dbeating me in '06. yet back in the real world, im running rings around them (30k for my rig, around 18-20k for theirs in '01)

stigggeh · 21 Jan 2006 at 17:11

james.miller said:
'05 wasnt a good indication either. i've said it before, '01 is still the best. 6600gt's are scoring stupidly close to what i can pull with my rig in '05 (x800gto2, opty @ 2.9ghz - 6,655)na dbeating me in '06. yet back in the real world, im running rings around them (30k for my rig, around 18-20k for theirs in '01)

i agree here, i some of the results seem fishy too. i am sure some drivers are optimized or something.

i score 34k in 01 with my 6800gt but was getting owned on 06 by an A-XP@2200 with a 6800gt clocked lower than mine :confused:

LoadsaMoney · 21 Jan 2006 at 17:17

Yeah those results you'ld think the 256mb GTX would be better at gaming than the x1800 XT, sadly it aint.

Lt_Col_Jack_ONe · 21 Jan 2006 at 17:35

Never seen such a big bunch of babys in my life.....

3DMark06 dosnt represent real world gaming, but what is does represent is what bleeding edge tech is capible of, i.e dual cores and sli/crossfire..... while they may not be the best for gaming at the moment they will be in the future, hence the use of the word Future-mark.......

The only people I see around here moaning and crying about it is Single Core users and none SLi/Crossfire adopters

stigggeh · 21 Jan 2006 at 17:42

Lt_Col_Jack_ONe said:
Never seen such a big bunch of babys in my life.....

3DMark06 dosnt represent real world gaming, but what is does represent is what bleeding edge tech is capible of, i.e dual cores and sli/crossfire..... while they may not be the best for gaming at the moment they will be in the future, hence the use of the word Future-mark.......

The only people I see around here moaning and crying about it is Single Core users and none SLi/Crossfire adopters

excellent, so a 6600gt will be faster than a X850XT in the future, great.... i will buy 10 now......... dont you think its a bit misleading ?

Lt_Col_Jack_ONe · 21 Jan 2006 at 17:45

stigggeh said:
excellent, so a 6600gt will be faster than a X850XT in the future, great.... i will buy 10 now......... dont you think its a bit misleading ?

Didnt say that did I, what I said was Dual Cores & SLi/Crossfire........

The only reason the ATI cards fair so bad is there poor adoption of SM3 nothing else, if ATI got that right then there wouldnt be a conflict between low performance cards and the ubber ones would there

Dave2150 · 21 Jan 2006 at 17:48

Lt_Col_Jack_ONe said:
I dont think people are really getting the point of this release from Futuremark, its what the future will be like when Dual Core is optomized in games, how many Single cores are in the top 10 in the rankings in the benchmark thread 1, yes 1 out of 10 and its sits in 10th place 1-9 are Dual Cores and the top 2 are SLi rigs to boot... nobody says life fair.... but its a glimpse of what might be if overpaid programmers ever get round to optimizing both Intels and AMD's Dual Core's.......

The Futures Bright... The Futures DUAL CORE

Yeh exactly, the FUTURE.

Now is the PRESENT, so dualcore is not worth it yet IMO, paying hundreds of pounds for a chip that will be much slower than the same price chip when Dual core really takes off.

Im talking about using it for games btw - for multimedia/multitasking applications dual core is the best today.

Lt_Col_Jack_ONe · 21 Jan 2006 at 17:54

Dave2150 said:
Yeh exactly, the FUTURE.

Now is the PRESENT, so dualcore is not worth it yet IMO, paying hundreds of pounds for a chip that will be much slower than the same price chip when Dual core really takes off.

Im talking about using it for games btw - for multimedia/multitasking applications dual core is the best today.

No figure, why would your 2.8Ghz opty out perform my 2.75Ghz dual core...... it dosnt FACT. clock for clock a dual core will beat a single FACT, think you really need to do your research a bit more.....

stigggeh · 21 Jan 2006 at 17:59

nevermind... cba getting drawn in to this... :rolleyes:

Mundu · 21 Jan 2006 at 18:00

I thought the HDR was well done.

I mainly use 3DMark just to compare again other users systems and in that my system performs as it should but generally in games I'm dissapointed with performance probably because I set my expectations too high but when I hear of people with the same system as my running everything on ultra high with 4xAA at 1600x1200 and no slow down I get annoyed even though it's probably 100% they're lying.

james.miller · 21 Jan 2006 at 18:10

Lt_Col_Jack_ONe said:
Didnt say that did I, what I said was Dual Cores & SLi/Crossfire........

The only reason the ATI cards fair so bad is there poor adoption of SM3 nothing else, if ATI got that right then there wouldnt be a conflict between low performance cards and the ubber ones would there

who cares what you think its meant for. the fact is it is the 'wolrds leading 3d benchmark', one which everybody who doesnt know better will look for when choosing a card. It will influence them more than just about anything else so yeah, it's damn well misleading.

MuSsEr · 21 Jan 2006 at 18:25

tbh, im sure the main pont of this thread was the fact that 3dmark06 IS 3dmark05 with sm3 and HDR....

THE POINT of the thread im sure was.....if we're gona sit there and watch something to see how pretty our comps make it, atleast make it different each time

all the 3dmakrs have been good because they all have different sequences in them, lobby fights, monster trucks, men fishing, ogres, planes etc......this one was almost identical to 05 with a little extra bit in it, the point of the thread was it was boring to watch coz it was exactly the same as the previous one

the point WAS NOT...

ooo whine whine my x800 gets a crap score coz it doesnt do SM3
and it was not
hahaha I get a great score coz my dual core gets a better score than your single core even though it makes no difference in game CURRENTLY

idiots

ajgoodfellow · 21 Jan 2006 at 18:28

That might be but an X1800XT performing worse than a 256MB 7800GTX is not representative at all. The X1800XT is a faster card! (And it has SM3/HDR/etc)

Lt_Col_Jack_ONe · 21 Jan 2006 at 18:50

james.miller said:
who cares what you think its meant for. the fact is it is the 'wolrds leading 3d benchmark', one which everybody who doesnt know better will look for when choosing a card. It will influence them more than just about anything else so yeah, it's damn well misleading.

Whatever ! :rolleyes:

james.miller · 21 Jan 2006 at 18:52

nice comeback

MuSsEr · 21 Jan 2006 at 19:27

lol, "whatever" that was deffinately a worthwhile, matue and imformative post/argument

Emlyn_Dewar · 21 Jan 2006 at 19:32

lol @ being disapointed by a benchmark program!

I only use these programs to test overclocks and to compare with others to make sure I'm running at right speeds.

LoadsaMoney · 21 Jan 2006 at 19:38

james.miller said:
who cares what you think its meant for. the fact is it is the 'wolrds leading 3d benchmark', one which everybody who doesnt know better will look for when choosing a card. It will influence them more than just about anything else so yeah, it's damn well misleading.

Could'nt agree more it is misleading, and does influence ppls decisions to buy, a lot of ppl will be going for the 256mb GTX thinking its faster than the x1800 XT, but yeah in a benchmark it is, not in games, which is what matters.

Things change I've changed · 21 Jan 2006 at 20:16

LoadsaMoney said:
Could'nt agree more it is misleading, and does influence ppls decisions to buy, a lot of ppl will be going for the 256mb GTX thinking its faster than the x1800 XT, but yeah in a benchmark it is, not in games, which is what matters.

too true, I find it very misleading, I,ve beaten many fx57 rigs on 3dmark 2006 with the same mem, gpu, as me and I know damm well in a real world situation the fx57 rig would woop my butt so how does that make any sense ?