Gosh I hope Futuremark will read this thread! Maybe they'll get their "stuff" together for 3Dmark10?:shrug:
Printable View
Gosh I hope Futuremark will read this thread! Maybe they'll get their "stuff" together for 3Dmark10?:shrug:
Anyone else getting some SERIOUS issues with this and the ATI HD3870X2 on the 8.4 driver?
Common issue.Quote:
Originally Posted by SKYMTL
Use the latest "3D Mark Vantage HotFix" drivers from AMD's site.
try the hotfix...
http://support.ati.com/ics/support/K...estionID=33840
i had to reboot twice after 8.4 uninstall in order to get hotfix to install, FYI.
Even with the Hotfix....which isn't a hotfix but rather a beta driver. I have it running fine on a non-engineering sample X2 now....
It really makes me wonder if I should include this test in future reviews. IMO, it is even FURTHER from reality than 06 was. :(
And one thing that wasn't mentioned: What the heck happens around that corner from the 06 Proxycon test? I want Proxycon back!!! ;)
Have you never ran the demo? That goes way further then that point.Quote:
Originally Posted by SKYMTL
If you are talking about this LINK then yes I have. But I still wanted to see it rendered in DX10. :DQuote:
Originally Posted by Tim
Problem is powerplay..you'll get better scores using an editied profile or bioses(like visontek's) that set 3d speeds 24/7. Even then, stutter is so bad...in every app now tho, not just the few that had issues before...
still yet, i've yet to ahve two identical runs in s row...3d scores varying by 2500 points +/-
Quote:
Originally Posted by cadaveca
I am seeing this too. With a stock X2 paired up with a Q6600 @ 3.5Ghz I get between 7700 - 9000 points overall. And here I was thinking the 100-200 point difference in 06 was huge...:shakes:
AFter reading this thread it look slike alot of Haters ....
I am happy .....as i didnt bother and now will not bother ever.
I only get 5886, mind you that is with everything at stock.
In my opinion this is perhaps the worst 3dmark of the series because the other 3dmark's seemed to have the jaw to the floor effect when they were first released,
I mean 3dmark03 looked pretty good back in 2003, likewise 06 doesn't look bad does it?
Yet for me, visually Vantage doesn't look that much more impressive than 06 (although from a technical point of view it is probably more advanced).
Does anyone else get "artifacts" in the CPU AI test?
(the first test with the planes)
I'm not even sure if they are artifacts, but I get weird random white squares on the water in the background.
No games exhibit any artifcating (Crysis and Bioshock and F.E.A.R) are all fine.
Is it a driver glitch or a problem with the benchmark or is some hardware component in my system failing?
Thanks
John
Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnZS
Exactly my thoughts,
3Dmark06 was just a mere simple 3Dmark05 refresh, so not much to say about it. They had included some tests as Deep Freeze which I really loved it and those 2 bored CPU tests, apart from that they also added a heavy pixel consistency that made the image sharper than it was on the previous version.
Edit: This thread served its purpose.
Metroid.
Huh? I do not see anything in PCMark Vantage (I refuse to call it 3DMark)--except for the two runs of firefly forest, identical to the one from 3dMark06 and just one more firefly than 3DMark05 but this time in windowed mode. The second run is probably higher detail (I guess DX10 lighting), but I do not see the other gaming tests that are supposed to be running! For example, it says "Now Running: Gaming 3" and my cpu usage is at 100%, but it does not show anything on the screen. The firefly forest is the only thing that shows up (2 out of 4 tests total).
That was just the 64-bit version. Now, I'll try the 32-bit and see..
EDIT: OMG!!!!!! There is actually 3DMark Vantage, not just PCMark. I was confused for a while from one poster who said that we'll never see a 3Dmark vantage.
wow i cant believe how bad this looks.... whats with the animation on the first test.... she looks like she's holding a poo between her legs and trying to run at the same time...lolol
That isn't true at all. SuperPI utilizes 100% for single core machines. Then see temps after 32M run. Yeah, 60... Then try S&M and let it run for 2 hours and see temps, yeah, 85.Quote:
Originally Posted by CraptacularOne
Both programs utilize the CPU by 100%, another one utilizes the parts of the CPU which make heat the most (FPU unit). Same goes for the GPUs.
As I understand it 100% usage means it's going as fast as it can for that application. Different apps require different kinds of calculations which means different areas of you card or processor are being utilized. Some areas at full utilization will get hotter.
I guess you could come to the conclusion that if the app isn't making your video card as hot as most games make it, then the app isn't doing a good job at simulating game performance as it isn't utilizing the same type of processing that the games do. Then you could say it's crap.