Saw this at Xtreme 3D Team -section already, but I think this deserves a thread in the News section.http://www.3dmark.comQuote:
Originally Posted by Futuremark
Preview/trailer: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-eY_En9VcwM
Printable View
Saw this at Xtreme 3D Team -section already, but I think this deserves a thread in the News section.http://www.3dmark.comQuote:
Originally Posted by Futuremark
Preview/trailer: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-eY_En9VcwM
great.
for those who probably will not click the link:
includes 4 games (the 2 scenes rendered with 2 settings)
physics test
combined test (seems to be physics in a game)
and a demo (of the 2 videos weve seen), which also scales the settings based on your PC
FREE EDITION INCLUDES:
only the Performance preset
limited saved scores (nothing about limiting score submissions)
ADVANCED (20$, 15 if you have vantage advanced):
no adds
all 3 presets (entry, performance, extreme)
PRO: (alot of $s)
image quality tool (would be nice to know if you can still choose to save a certain frame during a test like 06 let you)
the rest is kinda expected.
double posted
ow darn, even more torture for our GPUs and CPUs :p
very cool cant wait for it to be here
Just in time for the 6900 and 570 reviews. :clap:
My computer already melted.
well if you plan to run it on any of the comp in your sig then there will be no melting of any kind. 3Dmark11 is DX11 only no DX10 support.Quote:
Originally Posted by Power5
looks great, can't wait to try it out!
With how cheap vantage looked I am looking forward to this.
Coming closer and closer to photo realistic graphics. Unbelievable.
Yea Vantage looked really bad compared to the 2 demos we already saw a hint of. I always saw 3DMark more like a tech demo than real representative of beautiful gfx (OK the old Nature demos were quite good) but this time they seemed to have done a better job than 3DMar05 - Vantage.
got the pre order upgrade version :)
damn.. $995 for the pro version, why so expensive ?
cause your a business whos using their product publicly for advertisement of specs. im not sure if a reviewer falls under this category or if its really just the big guys (ie: dell)Quote:
Originally Posted by Loque
im sure their rules of use will go over this.
It comes before the 6900s are released - the extensive use of DX11 features should make the 580's far superior than any card AMD has to offer, including the 5970 :D obviously that is going to (has to) change with the introduction of 6970, but for 13 days GTX 580's will be super kings :D
what about PCMark Vantage? dont they usually release the two (3DM, PCM) close to each other?
dose a physics test mean no physX, im really hoping that it dose.
that depends what tessellation mode they use, if they use a non tessellation dx11 effect or the one that ati is good at they should still keep it for single card.Quote:
Originally Posted by hurrdurr
PCMV came out like a year to a year and half before 3DM and they only change when the base kernel changes, vista and 7 are the same base so i would not expect one until windows8 in 2-3 yearsQuote:
Originally Posted by Computurd
it says hardware supported bullet physics if i read correctlyQuote:
Originally Posted by zanzabar
Physics is OpenCL from my understanding.
i really hope that they make it wont do it on gpu by default thenQuote:
Originally Posted by SKYMTL
Nice can't wait for its release which is sooner than I was expecting.
I need to buy new card that support DX11
Yay.Quote:
Originally Posted by SKYMTL
Why not?Quote:
Originally Posted by zanzabar
I think they should allow you to choose the physics renderer, or run the tests multiple times (once each for each renderer).
the cpu test is for the cpu, when u run it on the gpu its a cheat and not showing what its intended to or atleast that was the rules with the last one. if its a cpu test it should test the cpu though as when u let a gpu go unloaded and do some kind of cuda or OCL to the whole gpu its not a representative test of what it would do while gaming. now for a feature test or not by default thats fine but making it do it by default just makes it so people cheat inadvertently by not knowing better.Quote:
Originally Posted by Solus Corvus
I think they should have tests that relate to things that actually affect game performance. If the industry is moving towards GPU physics then I think this "futuristic" physics test should default to the GPU. To test the CPU they could include an AI test.Quote:
Originally Posted by zanzabar