3Dmark06 rumours..

[Ubermann]

http://translate.google.com/translate?u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.hardspell.com%2Fnews% 2Fshowcont.asp%3Fnews_id%3D19525&langpair=zh-CN%7Cen&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&prev=%2Flanguage_tools

Futuremark Corporation flagship product 3dmark series had to add new style again, because 3dmark05 already quite was obsolete, did not support newest HDR, the displacement pastes the chart, Normal Map and so on the newest technology. Therefore 3dmark06 nearly in at present, according to what is stated new version 3dmark06 will dispose above Radeon X1800XT in below is quicker than GeForce 7800GTX 12%.

http://www.hardspell.com/newsimage/2005-11-30-10-55-5-682558695.jpg

[mikeguava]

Looking forward for 06! New game!

[Hicks]

Cool, yeah i think a HDR test is needed.

So it's saying a X1800XT will score 12% more than a GTX at stock?

[flopper]

Since x1800Xt seems to be more for the future candy that wouldnt suprise me.
However, its just not offical yet ;)

Just hope they get some boosts with the next catalysts.

[Kadaj]

Since x1800Xt seems to be more for the future candy that wouldnt suprise me.
However, its just not offical yet ;)

how did you come to that conclusion?

[flopper]

Just the memory controller and the support for hdr and aa.

Not for being highly technical in this matter that if the result indicated in that site are correct seems to presuppose that.

And indicated by my reply, nothing is offical ie roumours atm.
so it can be fully backwards ;)

[Kadaj]

Just the memory controller and the support for hdr and aa.

Not for being highly technical in this matter that if the result indicated in that site are correct seems to presuppose that.

And indicated by my reply, nothing is offical ie roumours atm.
so it can be fully backwards ;)
NV40's and G70s memory controller support up to 2GB of DDR3(possibly even GDDR4) ram . . twice as much as R520s. HDR and AA is useless anyway, ATi has support, nothing more, at < 20FPS in every instance it's used(on some extremely fast computers). . . there's no way you're going to be running it.

[spajdr]

NV40's and G70s memory controller support up to 2GB of DDR3(possibly even GDDR4) ram . . twice as much as R520s. HDR and AA is useless anyway, ATi has support, nothing more, at < 20FPS in every instance it's used(on some extremely fast computers). . . there's no way you're going to be running it.

And who in these times cares if G70 support 2GB? what game could use that? G70 card will never see the light with 2GB DD3, its already old card :) and who knows how much R580 will support? Truth is that when HDR will be used alot, newer gfx cards will be already out.

[speed bump]

Who cares about HDR why not just build 3dmark01(06) reloaded into DX9c?:)

[ugp]

I look forward to a new 3DMark...it is about time they released one. 3DMark05 is starting to get smashed but clocks.

[Kadaj]

And who in these times cares if G70 support 2GB? what game could use that? G70 card will never see the light with 2GB DD3, its already old card :) and who knows how much R580 will support? Truth is that when HDR will be used alot, newer gfx cards will be already out.
ATI will be using the R520's memory controller for a while, R580 will be using R520's controller, so it will support 1024mb ;). I don't think G70 will see 2GB, however the debate was that ATI was more ready for the future than Nvidia. . not if G70 will use 2GB of buffer.

[twiggy]

ATI will be using the R520's memory controller for a while, R580 will be using R520's controller, so it will support 1024mb ;). I don't think G70 will see 2GB, however the debate was that ATI was more ready for the future than Nvidia. . not if G70 will use 2GB of buffer.


Oh I forgot future-proofed just means to add more RAM..... :slap:

I didnt read the link but did they say if it was a GTX or the 512mb version?

[Kadaj]

Oh I forgot future-proofed just means to add more RAM..... :slap:

I didnt read the link but did they say if it was a GTX or the 512mb version?
no, but when you claim a card is more future resistant because of it's memory controller and the competetor's is superior in a way. . . that's not too strong an argument. :nono:

[saaya]

wow, thats beautifull! :slobber:
thx for that screenshot :D

[Hicks]

NV40's and G70s memory controller support up to 2GB of DDR3(possibly even GDDR4) ram . . twice as much as R520s. HDR and AA is useless anyway, ATi has support, nothing more, at < 20FPS in every instance it's used(on some extremely fast computers). . . there's no way you're going to be running it.

ATI's ring bus memory controller, have you not read any reviews on the R520 arcitecture?

HDR and AA is only useless if you have an Nvidia card.

[Cybercat]

ATI has an advantage in 3DMark, so what else is new? Futuremark always went overboard on the vertex load, many times deciding not to use bump mapping methods (such as paralax) to fake geometry. It always ends up being completely different from realworld implementations.

[Kadaj]

HDR and AA is only useless if you have an Nvidia card.
:rolleyes: ATI's own benchmarks were in the range of 17-25FPS iirc.
ATI's ring bus memory controller, have you not read any reviews on the R520 arcitecture?

ringbus is a way to support faster speeds through not connecting all the traces to one point, which also increases cooling effectiveness, however the 7800GTX Ultra managed faster speeds on a traditional design, with some overhauls, such as 512bit width paths(R520's is the same @ 512bits, except with 8 32bit channels).

[Hicks]

ATI has an advantage in 3DMark, so what else is new? Futuremark always went overboard on the vertex load, many times deciding not to use bump mapping methods (such as paralax) to fake geometry. It always ends up being completely different from realworld implementations.

Ive found, that my Gainward 7800GTX 256mb at 520/1400, was a fair bit faster than my X1800XT at 722/1700 in 03. I get 18.8 on the XT, and the GTX got 19.5k, im surprised by the results myself.

[Cybercat]

Ive found, that my Gainward 7800GTX 256mb at 520/1400, was a fair bit faster than my X1800XT at 722/1700 in 03. I get 18.8 on the XT, and the GTX got 19.5k, im surprised by the results myself.
03 is quite old by now, plus it used lots of stencil shadows. It's most apparent in 05, where paralax, displacement mapping, or other 'depth-faking' techniques would have been the most viable (since all of its tests use at least SM2.0). The main reason I believe the X1800XT did so well against the 7800GTX 256MB in that benchmark was because of the high core clockspeed helping its vertex throughput. The amount of vertex units between the cards was the same. With the 7800GTX 512MB, it's still not at the same level (as far as stock speeds go) but the shader performance advantage eventually overcame the vertex disadvantage, if only by a marginal amount.

[OpTiX]

cant wait to see 3dmark06 in action

[perkam]

Where does it have ATI logo on it ??? It just says that a random source came to a conclusion that with the setup shown on the webpage showed a 12% increase with the X1800XT 512MB vs 7800GTX (most likely 256MB).

Does this matter? Heck no. Driver optimizations for the current 3dmark are still being updated as wek speak, no one knows how the cards will fare with ATI's 6.xx drivers and Nvidia's 9x.xx drivers. (3dmark06 is still a year away.)

Perkam

[[XC] leviathan18]

nice looking photo.... from this new version of 3dmark06

i think we should wait until next gen arraives that should be quite soon

[perkam]

I've seen better rendered lava in RE4 for the GC...Hope the real thing is more impressive.

Perkam

[[XC] leviathan18]

now you have to edit your post :P no more HW speculation :slapass:

[mnewxcv]

maybe its me..but i think that ss looks like its out of 3dmark2001(i know it really isnt, but the detail) maybe its just cuz they ran at low res or somehting

[Ubermann]

Maybe cuz its a low res bad picture..

[weeds]

Its fake. That screenshot is from a 3-D film called Haunted Castle.

http://www.nwave.com/hauntedcastle/

And here are some screens from it, look about halfway down the page.

http://www.1a-dvdshop.ch/scs.asp?idf=1164201&bn=imax%5Fhauntedneu%5Frc2&ss=18

[LowRun]

Its fake. That screenshot is from a 3-D film called Haunted Castle.

http://www.nwave.com/hauntedcastle/

And here are some screens from it, look about halfway down the page.

http://www.1a-dvdshop.ch/scs.asp?idf=1164201&bn=imax%5Fhauntedneu%5Frc2&ss=18

Hehe, good job inspector.

[Geforce4ti4200]

I look forward to running a slideshow on 3dmark 2006 with my radeon 9700pro. Good thing it doesnt correlate to games as all my games run fluid. 3dmark 2001 is still my fav :)

[bakalu]

Radeon X1800XT in below is quicker than GeForce 7800GTX 12% in 3dmark06 isn't the meaning that Radeon X1800XT will be faster than GeForce 7800GTX in HDR games.

[Dissolved]

Radeon X1800XT in below is quicker than GeForce 7800GTX 12% in 3dmark06 isn't the meaning that Radeon X1800XT will be faster than GeForce 7800GTX in HDR games.



omfg where did the thread go? all i see is a sig bigger then my screen! :nono:


please remove all those pics, what a waste of my screen! :slapass:

[drunkenmaster]

I look forward to running a slideshow on 3dmark 2006 with my radeon 9700pro. Good thing it doesnt correlate to games as all my games run fluid. 3dmark 2001 is still my fav :)


errm, 3dmark does correlate to games pretty well, all versions. in 3dmark 01 when you could get 8-10 k at first it meant in those games you could normally play at 1600x1200 full detail. scores change but mean something, like i can get circa 10k on 05 now and i can just about play at 1600x1200 decent lvl's of detail. you with that card can't get a "decent" score, and neither can you play at a huge resolution. a 9700 pro will get a lowish score and that correlates to playing newer games at lower res.

[NickS]

wow anohter ati vs nvidia thread.

--

New 3D Mark looks cool Futuremark! :):)

[ahmad]

I can't see the picture anymore...

NV40's and G70s memory controller support up to 2GB of DDR3(possibly even GDDR4) ram . . twice as much as R520s. HDR and AA is useless anyway, ATi has support, nothing more, at < 20FPS in every instance it's used(on some extremely fast computers). . . there's no way you're going to be running it.

I have seen the numbers. Its around 30FPS for the x1800XT. I am sure you could turn down the level of AA and the resolution if want to enjoy HDR+AA. And because the hardware is capable, they might be able to do it more efficiently as drivers age. Nvidia has no chance of doing this because the hardware is not capable.

Also, the nvidia controller requires work to accept anything other than what it has now. They can't simply slap on new chips like ATI could with their memory controller.

I will also add, these features (HDR+AA) are similer to adaptive AA and super AA. Only people who can really take advantage of those are Crossfire/SLI configs anyways.

[perkam]

The validity of the info provided is going to be tested...doesnt look all too credible after weeds's discovery that the image is actually a still from a 3d movie.

Perkam

[ugp]

LoL so this thread just may be for nothing...

[bazx]

hehe just read the hole thread

[Ubermann]

Hardspell and HKEPC use very odd pictures for their news. Even the INQ is more trustable i think.