3DMark Vantage brief test !!!

The hardware website CHIPHELL has done a brief 3DMARK Vantage test. The test uses Build 23 version and Radeon HD 3850 512MB Crossfire. From pictures below, we can see that 3 DMARK Vantage Build 23 full installations require 665.25 MB disk space. Now 3 DMARK Vantage Build 23 includes Game Test1 Test, the name is Jane Nash, Game Test 2, the name is New Calico, and CPU Test1, the name is AI, and CPU Test2, the name is Physics, these two test CPU’s AI and physics acceleration performance.

http://i230.photobucket.com/albums/e...arkVantage.jpg

http://i230.photobucket.com/albums/e...rkVantage2.jpg

From the fps and the quality shown in the pictures , we can say 3 DMARK Vantage is still in the beta stage, screen quality is not perfect, the picture is rather vague, at the same time, under the 1280 x1024 resolution, Radeon HD 3850 512MB Crossfire didn’t run very well.

http://i230.photobucket.com/albums/e...rkVantage3.jpg

http://i230.photobucket.com/albums/e...rkVantage4.jpg

http://i230.photobucket.com/albums/e...rkVantage5.jpg

http://i230.photobucket.com/albums/e...rkVantage6.jpg

http://i230.photobucket.com/albums/e...rkVantage7.jpg

http://i230.photobucket.com/albums/e...rkVantage8.jpg

Heard from other testers, that GeForce 8800GTX cannot run Game Test 2, compared with the fact that Radeon HD 3850 512MB Crossfire can run Game Test 2, it suggests that Game Test 2 -New Calico tests the DX10.1 capability of graphics cards. What a pitty for NVIDIA, when 3 DMARK Vantage comes out at next February, NVIDIA can only get GeForce 9600 GT out for 3 DMARK Vantage if D9E cannot support DX10.1.

Source : http://r800.blogspot.com/search/labe...20VANTAGE%203D

The majority of those screenshots are very unimpressive. 3dmark06 has better looking screens then that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bakalu

http://i230.photobucket.com/albums/e...rkVantage3.jpg

http://i230.photobucket.com/albums/e...rkVantage6.jpg

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GripS

The majority of those screenshots are very unimpressive. 3dmark06 has better looking screens then that.

---

I only find these to be very good.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bakalu

http://i230.photobucket.com/albums/e...rkVantage5.jpg

---

Horray b00bs!

bad joke ?

3850 CF (!!!) only gets that low fps, when it looks like crap ?

HL2 looks even better then the last pic while getting 20times the performance :rolleyes:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by realsmasher

bad joke ?

3850 CF (!!!) only gets that low fps, when it looks like crap ?

HL2 looks even better then the last pic while getting 20times the performance :rolleyes:

---

game engines are optimised differently from benches.

Crysis looks better then that. ;)

Those shaders are terrible

As much as i'd like to believe anything on that blog, I just can't bring myself to believe anything posted on a blog called "Radeon X" as being neutral & unbiased. If it can't run the 2nd test then until a reputable source comes forward i'm gonna classify it as a bug.

looks like 3dmark03 to me :ROTF:

Anyone notice the new addition to the benching options?

Quote:

---

Physics_test_settings:

Use Defaults

enable_PPU

---

I guess there will be finally be a reason for people to buy Physx cards.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Syn.

Anyone notice the new addition to the benching options?



I guess there will be finally be a reason for people to buy Physx cards.

---

Nah, not really, if multi core optimized for physics, multi core cpus will do just as good. If not now, sooner than later.

Plus for a hardcare 3D marker, I would say why destroy the room that SLI or Crossfire needs for a physics card

These screens look terrible when comparing to the ones posted earlyer.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by .devastatioN

These screens look terrible when comparing to the ones posted earlyer.

---

those were already proven fake though, these probably will be today.

sorry, but what is 3dmark vantage? 3dmark08 or what?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Decami

Nah, not really, if multi core optimized for physics, multi core cpus will do just as good. If not now, sooner than later.

Plus for a hardcare 3D marker, I would say why destroy the room that SLI or Crossfire needs for a physics card

---

there are bords out there that will let you have an SLI/Corssfire setup and Physx card.

P.S nice sig :D

why do i get the feeling i'm playing hl1 if i look at those screenshots ??

seriously looks awfull. If this is the new 3dmark08 than i'm not gonna run that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LyP0

why do i get the feeling i'm playing hl1 if i look at those screenshots ??

seriously looks awfull. If this is the new 3dmark08 than i'm not gonna run that.

---

http://i230.photobucket.com/albums/e...rkVantage4.jpg

I highly doubt these screenshot are really 3DMark08, Look at the boat. Thats the same Company that makes ATi Video cards. I don't think futuremark is that biased.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Syn.

there are bords out there that will let you have an SLI/Corssfire setup and Physx card.

P.S nice sig :D

---

Thnx

There are boards out there, but after you add the aftermarket coolers to those monster cards. It leaves little room. But, you can still fit it with some. Just would be pointless really if within 4-6 months cpu's will very easily surpass agiea. Not to mention, the program has to be written to be able to use ageia also, any word on that anyone?

Im betting physics cards will only be a memory within the year. CryEngine2 put a wooden stake in their heart. Its only a matter of time. About the only thing now a see that ageia does better now is cloth physics, but thats really only shined in cell factor as far as I have seen.

Im calling fakes.

The grafisch are between HL1 and HL2 :D

Those scenes could really need some AA.

The pictures with those two orange men looks like a cross between TF2 and HL2. :fact:

Unfortunately, these are real...

really, why the hell is there a sapphire logo on the boat? theres no way this is the new 3dmark, the textures look awful, theres no hdr lighting, water looks pasted on, this looks like it belongs in 2002...

let me say again... 3DM08 is on a path to sux really hard. Downfall has started with re-inventing 3DM05 with 3DM06, and now it looking at these screens seams like things are going from bad to worst!

i can't believe those screens are real. just look at the graphics quality of previous 3dmarks. 3dmark05/06 looks a hundred times better than THIS...

They should just license out the crysis engine to make 3dmark 08 and save all the development money. Then it would run faster and look 1000x better and would scale with next generation cards well. plus we would get some great optomizations out of nvidia and amd for that engine if it was a 3dmark haha.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by brandinb

They should just license out the crysis engine to make 3dmark 08 and save all the development money. Then it would run faster and look 1000x better and would scale with next generation cards well. plus we would get some great optomizations out of nvidia and amd for that engine if it was a 3dmark haha.

---

In that case crysis internal benchmark is all you need, and have.

Is this for mobiles or something?...

supaugly...

More screens 3DMark Vantage

Setup :
http://i230.photobucket.com/albums/e...gpu/Setup1.jpg

http://i230.photobucket.com/albums/e...gpu/Setup2.jpg

http://i230.photobucket.com/albums/e...gpu/Setup3.jpg

http://i230.photobucket.com/albums/e...gpu/Setup4.jpg

http://i230.photobucket.com/albums/e...gpu/Setup5.jpg

http://i230.photobucket.com/albums/e...gpu/Setup6.jpg

http://i230.photobucket.com/albums/e...gpu/Setup7.jpg

http://i230.photobucket.com/albums/e...gpu/Setup8.jpg

http://i230.photobucket.com/albums/e...gpu/Setup9.jpg

http://i230.photobucket.com/albums/e...pu/Setup10.jpg

http://i230.photobucket.com/albums/e...pu/Setup11.jpg

Game Test 1 : Jane Nash
http://i230.photobucket.com/albums/e.../gametest1.jpg

Game Test 2 : New Calico
http://i230.photobucket.com/albums/e...ametest2-1.jpg

http://i230.photobucket.com/albums/e...ametest2-2.jpg

http://i230.photobucket.com/albums/e...ametest2-3.jpg

http://i230.photobucket.com/albums/e.../NewCalico.jpg

http://i230.photobucket.com/albums/e...NewCalico2.jpg

http://i230.photobucket.com/albums/e...NewCalico3.jpg

http://i230.photobucket.com/albums/e...NewCalico4.jpg

Source : http://en.hardspell.com/doc/showcont...43&pageid=2231

New Calico looks great, Jane Nash on the other hand needs to be pulled from 3Dmark08

I agree with Warboy. Anyone else reminded of No-One Lives Forever by this Jane Nash test?

that look so cheap ! 3DMark98 or what? :rolleyes:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by [XC]Atomicpineapple

I agree with Warboy. Anyone else reminded of No-One Lives Forever by this Jane Nash test?

---

Somewhat. But I think NOLF2 looked alot better then these :ROTF:

That water and boat look straight out horrid. And four tests? Wow they have really sold out on this one. Especially if now you need DX10.1 and not the first gen of DX10 cards just to run all the tests. What a ghastly benchmark.

This must be the 3DMark 08 GeForce 2 MX Edition everyone was talking about...

hmm its fake!

Thank you!

i wouldnt worry im sure futuremark will release something ace