Printable View
Well it seems FM isn't approving the 60.72 either :D
No LOD tweaks yet. Has Coolaler upped his score yet? I've compared all 3 Nature runs on 60.72, 60.85, 61.11 and none went over 100 fps. He got 110 fps in that screenie.Quote:
The 60.72 drivers are not WHQL, and therefore they will not be listed in any official lists. The ORB default search will only search for WHQL Approved drivers. As soon as there will be WHQL drivers which are approved, the results can appear in the Hall of Fame.
Very nice.... hell of a good job...
C
so what drivers are approved for Nvidia NV40 officially for Futuremark 3dmark03 ORB? none as of yet? Maybe they'll find a slower driver and approve that one.
Yep, like they did with ATi X800!:mad: :DQuote:
Originally posted by Kanavit
so what drivers are approved for Nvidia NV40 officially for Futuremark 3dmark03 ORB? none as of yet? Maybe they'll find a slower driver and approve that one.
You think ps 3 is slowing down nature for you?Quote:
Originally posted by LardArse
Well it seems FM isn't approving the 60.72 either :D
No LOD tweaks yet. Has Coolaler upped his score yet? I've compared all 3 Nature runs on 60.72, 60.85, 61.11 and none went over 100 fps. He got 110 fps in that screenie.
so stupid regulating which driver you can submit. i say any driver offically released by ati or nvidia should be fm approved. thats just horse puckey.
Awesome scoreage Lard:toast: Brutal stencil shadow power of 6800 helps a bit:)
It usually is... eventually.Quote:
Originally posted by megahurtz-oc
so stupid regulating which driver you can submit. i say any driver offically released by ati or nvidia should be fm approved. thats just horse puckey.
I can think of a couple of drivers that I'm glad FM didn't approve. This benchmark is not just there for us to see how big of number we can put up. Its used by average users to decide which card to buy. If the benchmark is to have any validity it has to be rendered correctly.Quote:
Originally posted by megahurtz-oc
so stupid regulating which driver you can submit. i say any driver offically released by ati or nvidia should be fm approved. thats just horse puckey.
yea but ultimately Nvidia should decide how the graphic drivers should work on their video card, not futuremark. it's not their place, they didn't design the freakin video card. Nvidia create drivers to work specifically for NV40. ATI can't do it for them. i believe these approved drivers is BS personally.Quote:
Originally posted by pkrew
I can think of a couple of drivers that I'm glad FM didn't approve. This benchmark is not just there for us to see how big of number we can put up. Its used by average users to decide which card to buy. If the benchmark is to have any validity it has to be rendered correctly.
only 52.16 forceware are approved officially at FM now. 60.72 is approved for 6800 ultra only, but the WHQL ones, which isn't even out yet. lol 61.11 is out already. so what the hell , what gives? seriously , this is shameful. No wonder so many review sites are dropping 3dmark03 from the benchmark suites.
I bet if Lardarse score 17k with 52.16 and submit it, it would not be approved because 52.16 was not approved for the 6800 series.
FM doesn't decide drivers for Nvidia or Ati. They just decide whether the driver runs their test properly and they are well within their rights to do so. Allowing drivers that fail to render the benchmark properly so that one company can sell more cards doesn't benifit anyone except for that company. It also would make 3do3 a sham.
You can still run your card with any driver you choose. FM does nothing to stop you from doing this. There just telling us that a particualr driver may have taken shortcuts to get a better score. I'm all for that.
Think about it this way. If FM didn't regualate their benchmark we'd all be running crappy drivers as each company would continue to skimp just to stay ahead. Granted sometimes its frustrating and you have to wait for their approval, but in the end its good for the consumer. Too bad AM3 doesn't do the same thing.
I dunno about letting the sales staff run free with the reigns on drivers.... Imagine wireframe mode kicking in when 3dmark03.exe runs. IMO there needs to be guidance on what is "acceptable".
true, but asking Nvidia to script a driver for FM is unethical. FM is the only site that regulates drivers , NO ONE ELSE does it. sorry for me being skeptical folks. All drivers are approved in all gaming benchmarks except 3dmark03. btw, im sure 60.72 are not showing wireframed graphics either lol.
Play by the rules or go home, thats all i've got to say.
Lardarse - Can we get a 1600x1200 run? Or Default with 2x FSAA?
Just a screenshot of the results to compare against an X800/XT at same settings would be good :D
nice work lardarse et all. like STEvil said i'd like to see some results at 1600x1200, i think this is the area where 3dmark01 is becoming the most outdated, nobody plays their games at 1024x768 with no FSAA. they should make a new build that runs games at higher res and better IQ
u can do runs at 1600x1200 if u want to... making iq better wouldnt do squat to the nvidia cards cuz of lodbias... not every1 runs games better than 1024 no aa, just people with decent video cards.
yeah hey for nvidia and super congrats lordarse!
Heh I will leave that to the indepth review articles/peeps, Visionary did a nice 6800 review hereQuote:
Originally posted by STEvil
Play by the rules or go home, thats all i've got to say.
Lardarse - Can we get a 1600x1200 run? Or Default with 2x FSAA?
Just a screenshot of the results to compare against an X800/XT at same settings would be good :D
http://www.vr-zone.com/index.cgi?i=812&s=1
, but we have not laid hands on any x800 XTs yet to compare it to. My rig is not exactly a reviewer's rig ATM. Kunaak, AQM in a bit, I'm switching back to 61.11 since no drivers are approved. And I'm still waiting to see Coolaler's score up, comparing some results from the aircooled GPUs and plotting it upwards, my nature seems fine.
Hey LardArse, hows the condensation on the 6800u. Any better than the X800pro?
After the x800 phobia, I decided to be mad on the seal string treatment. You can say seal string galore. One side gets pretty cold but the PWM and heatsink area to the right gets slightly warm after benching so I put a fan there to blow.
From the temp monitor, GPU temp is about 20C higher than evap temp. It will only show to 0C. So -98C evap means -78C GPU I guess?
I know what you mean about X800 phobia. I nearly get panic attacks everytime I run it. Kinda takes the fun out of benching
Aquamark, P4EE 14 x 321 -> 4.5Ghz 6800U 599/1240:
96930
http://arc.aquamark3.com/arc/arc_sea...nID=1084418132
Awesome score, LA. :toast:
Ditto...
Aquamark loves that rig for sure. Any chance of breaking 100k or do you think that's about it?
Very good job indeed!
100K should be quite possible and quite soon.