3Dmark2001 SE OUT!!!!!!!!!!
great now we can have another d*** measureing contest between the usuall wankers
|
12:44pm 13/02/02 Permalink
Yay I will get even lower 3d marks now, not that i care though.
|
12:47pm 13/02/02 Permalink
instead of making 3Dmark2001 SE, why didn't they just make 3Dmark2002?
|
12:52pm 13/02/02 Permalink
Saratoga, CA - February 12, 2002 - MadOnion.com™, a leading provider of PC performance information and web services, today released 3DMark®2001 Second Edition, a major enhancement to its 3DMark® benchmark solution originally launched in 1998.
Combining DirectX 8.1 support with the latest in 3D graphics, 3DMark2001 SE objectively measures how effectively a PC runs 3D graphics applications and provides users with an online results comparison tool that allows them to make informed hardware assessments and upgrade decisions. 3DMark2001 SE runs a wide range of tests to measure both overall 3D performance and speed, analyzing and displaying all system specifications from the driver versions to the exact hardware components of the PC. A completely new test utilizing pixel shader 1.4 has been incorporated in the new SE version. An updated 'System Info' now also detects installed hard drives as well as AGP settings that are crucial for 3D performance. The upgrade detects all the latest processors such as the AMD® Athlon™ XP, Intel® Pentium® 4 and the Mobile Intel® Pentium® III Processor-M. 3DMark2001 SE provides detailed benchmark results by comparing the performance of PCs against a performance database of more than 4 million system results. This allows users to compare their own system performance with other users from around the world. "Since the release of the first version of 3DMark in 1998, we've been continually striving to improve our benchmarks to help gamers maximize their experience and PC performance," said Patric Ojala, 3DMark project lead for MadOnion.com. "3DMark2001 SE meets this goal by supporting DirectX 8.1 and providing detailed 3D performance measurements for existing systems, while offering challenging, new tests for current, cutting-edge hardware and technologies yet to be released." |
12:54pm 13/02/02 Permalink
instead of making 3Dmark2001 SE, why didn't they just make 3Dmark2002? because not enough new technology has come out to warrant more advanced graphix features to benchmark, if you get what i mean |
01:06pm 13/02/02 Permalink
So they released 3DMark 2001 in 1998 !?!?!?! OMG BACK TO TEH FUTURE. And leading provider of PC Performance what a joke, SiSoft Sandra lays the ALPHA SMACKDOWN over any Mad Onion product. End Abusive Rant |
01:24pm 13/02/02 Permalink
the SE is Second Edition, not Special Edition.
|
01:27pm 13/02/02 Permalink
The only thing that ever owned in benmchmarks for me was my cd-rom drive, before it died.
|
01:31pm 13/02/02 Permalink
They announced earlier that we could expect to see 3dMark2002 after or about the same time as DirectX 9 comes out. Which seems fair enough. Although, honestly I can't see the point in having a 3dMark2001 SE.
And as for the penis measuring... do you want me to show you all of it or just enough to win? ;) |
06:45pm 13/02/02 Permalink
I got 9.1498x108 ImaginaryMarks™
Note: ImaginaryMarks™ are the performance measure from the ImaginaryMark2020 Synthetic Benchmark and do not relate in any way to actual performance in games. Q3 timedemos are still where it's at. 3DMark has proven too inconsistent in the past to take it seriously in my opinion. |
07:19pm 13/02/02 Permalink
Yeah I found that myself. But I actually wasn't sure whether it was due to errors being produced by trying to run the chip to fast. It's not that inconsistency that bothers me, what really bothers me is the fact I can run three benchmarks one after the other without rebooting the PC, changing drivers, running other programs, etc and get three different scores - in some cases with quite large differences...
Q3 is much more consistant. |
07:33pm 13/02/02 Permalink
sKryBe: yeah, I found that too.
Morgish: see that's the thing - overclocking is should increase your score, yet it's not guaranteed to with 3dmark because it's ghey. Like sKryBe said - you can run it two times in a row and get two scores that are up to 20% different, despite not changing any settings. That just should not happen. |
07:38pm 13/02/02 Permalink
It does... up to a limit. I was testing my card over the last week and got it from about 3400 to 3900 by changing drivers and then slowly bumping up the core and memory speeds of my vid card. But when I pushed it past a certain point the performance dropped off and if I kept pushing it started to get artifacts and if I pushed that little bit further again it locked up completely :)
The one good thing about 3DMark is that it gives you a good "burn in" or stability test. I figure if I can loop 3dmark for an hour then that level of overclocking is stable :) |
07:43pm 13/02/02 Permalink
who is 3dMark?? I know a guy called 3d_mike and his son 3d_rik
I get 99fps in HL, that's all I need to know I have a decent video card. |
07:47pm 13/02/02 Permalink
