3DMark Vantage score thread

[tet5uo]

Did a quick first run.

P16467 3DMarks
http://service.futuremark.com/compare?3dmv=11059



H11494 3DMarks
http://service.futuremark.com/compare?3dmv=17240



X6518 3DMarks
http://service.futuremark.com/compare?3dmv=17640


Maybe it's buggy quad-sli, but even in scenes where I'm getting 30-40 fps, the movement still seems very stuttery and choppy.

[jas420221]

Stock 8800gts g92, Q9450 @ 3.7GHz... 5318.

[cadaveca]

What did you do to get things working correctly if you don't mind sharing

See this thread, driver issues at first:

http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/...d.php?t=186029

Phys-X makes for a small boost in cpu and 3d scores too.

ppu disabled via Vantage GUI:
http://service.futuremark.com/compare?3dmv=17358

All that said, there are still much driver improvements to be made...cards barely even heat up running the test.

[cadaveca]

400 points in score variations? ran entry level first.

13393

http://service.futuremark.com/compare?3dmv=18119

[cstkl1]

CPU : E8500 @ 500x9 4.5ghz @ 1.44vcore
MOBO : DFI X48 LT T2R
GPU : XFX 9800GX2 756/1890/2200 + BFG Ageia Physx
RAM : Team Xtreem PC2-6400 CL3 4x1gb @ 1000mhz 4-4-4-8 @ 2.2v
OS : Windows Vista Ultimate 64
Driver : 175.12

One thing good about 3dmark vantage.. the gpu scores are consistent... not much improvement with 4ghz vs 4.5ghz
4.5ghz 10888 for GPU
http://service.futuremark.com/home.a...&resultType=19
4.0ghz 10809
http://service.futuremark.com/home.a...&resultType=19

[cstkl1]

oops just realized i wrote the GPUZ reading wrong..
its actually running at 756/1890/2200 at pcie 115

cause everytime i reboot have to enable the lan to connect to the internet so the riva tuner goes back to my default overclock 700/1750/2100
its to stop windows update from interfering.. and windows search services

[beard]

3DMark score P8300
CPU Score 14658
Graphics Score 7252

http://service.futuremark.com/compare?3dmv=16757



3DMark score X1662
CPU Score 14435
Graphics Score 1558

http://service.futuremark.com/compare?3dmv=21217

[***Deimos***]

So, any consensus yet on what naming convention we'll be using, or which scores, folks will be focusing on? Take P___ up to 50K or shoot for 10K in X___? Maybe compromise and race H___ to 20K?

Anybody here with Skulltrail to check exactly extent of multi-threading of 3DMark Vantage

[BenchZowner]

So, any consensus yet on what naming convention we'll be using, or which scores, folks will be focusing on? Take P___ up to 50K or shoot for 10K in X___? Maybe compromise and race H___ to 20K?

Anybody here with Skulltrail to check exactly extent of multi-threading of 3DMark Vantage

Check Fr3ak's thread about Vantage.
K|ngp|n added a bench with the ST.

[jimmyz]

Thread updated with scoreboard in first post.

[CraptacularOne]

new score

P11728
http://service.futuremark.com/compare?3dmv=26136

CPU @ 3.95Ghz
Cards @ 850/1900

There is still much optimization that ATI needs to do here.

[BulldogPO]

My lousy 7074 points:
http://service.futuremark.com/compare?3dmv=20185

[tet5uo]

I ran the feature tests just now, and the first one is mega-glitchy...like the image keeps flickering like it's jumping back a frame a couple times a second...pretty messed up

[cstkl1]

I ran the feature tests just now, and the first one is mega-glitchy...like the image keeps flickering like it's jumping back a frame a couple times a second...pretty messed up

175.12 solved that issue for me..

[Cooper]

First AMD system here

Phenom 9850 @ 3.0GHz
2x1GB @ 1066MHz
4x HD3850 256MB @ stock
Asus M3A-MVP Deliuxe

Vista x86 SP1
Cats 8.4 hotfix

[David_L6]

I ran it with whatever drivers I already had installed and got P5957.
http://service.futuremark.com/compare?3dmv=29276

Next I installed the 175.12 drivers and got P5954.
http://service.futuremark.com/compare?3dmv=30858


System: Vista Ultimate 64, Q6700 @ 3.5, 8800GTX @ stock. No physics card.

[yokomo]

p5600
e8400 @4.0
8800gt @ 768/1803/983
ddr2 @ 445 5-5-5-15
looks like this one is even more cpu biased than 3d06 !

http://service.futuremark.com/home.a...&resultType=19

[tet5uo]

p5600
e8400 @4.0
8800gt @ 768/1803/983
ddr2 @ 445 5-5-5-15
looks like this one is even more cpu biased than 3d06 !

http://service.futuremark.com/home.a...&resultType=19

Not too sure about that..

On EVGA forums there's a guy with the same hardware as me, but his quad is at stock 3.0gHz... he only scores a few hundred points less than I did at 4.0.

[cptkoulis]

best score so far: P13760
8500@9,5x465=4418 using Asus S2E
QuadSLI@stock

[Srecko]

Tomshardware quote:

The bottom line is that there isn’t much that’s really new in this new version of 3DMark, which looks very much like the previous versions, but with additional limitations (no free version and a single overall score, and the addition of the Presets, which will probably make comparisons more difficult). So we don’t see any more reason than we ever had to include it in our graphics-card test series, given its fundamentally artificial nature.

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/...e,1919-11.html

and they are damn right, i bought the advanced version too, but the benchmark sucks, not it just looks awful, the limitations like no score display without inet sucks too. there is also no implementation of dx10.1, i guess nvidia payed alot of money for that.

conslusion, boycott this crap of benchmark, and boycott nvidia for there marketing.

[yokomo]

Not too sure about that..

On EVGA forums there's a guy with the same hardware as me, but his quad is at stock 3.0gHz... he only scores a few hundred points less than I did at 4.0.

well the number i was seeing for tohers scores looked alot higher for they had but maybe thats just the actual cpu score and not much effect on overall.... no idea how they actually balance out the score from the tests.
would be nice if the cpu score was not a major part of it since my e8400 @4.0 will obviously be better for gaming than say a q6600 @3.2 say . go to 3d06 and il get killed !

[yokomo]

hmm maybe they got it right afterall
begrip.................................... 3,700......................QX9650 @4.2ghz 3870 stock

either that or ati drivers stink !( no offence intended to begrip just your cpu is rather nice but your vantge mark has no refelction on that)

[BenchZowner]

conslusion, boycott this crap of benchmark, and boycott nvidia for there marketing.

Make sure you boycott Sapphire too, it's in it.

What the **** with all these boycott this, boycott that opinions lately ?
If you don't want/like to buy/do something, good for you.
But don't tell others to do so because you want/think/say so.

[stocius]

Make sure you boycott Sapphire too, it's in it.

What the **** with all these boycott this, boycott that opinions lately ?
If you don't want/like to buy/do something, good for you.
But don't tell others to do so because you want/think/say so.

I am going to boycott the act of boycotting.

[CraptacularOne]

Make sure you boycott Sapphire too, it's in it.

What the **** with all these boycott this, boycott that opinions lately ?
If you don't want/like to buy/do something, good for you.
But don't tell others to do so because you want/think/say so.

While I'm not going to agree with him that we should boycott everything but some of his points are valid.

And there is no escaping the fact that Jane Nash graphic test looks like complete and utter garbage. (Wave Race 64 anyone?) the textures are horrible, and the animation is just plain sad.

Look: just replace the jet ski out fit with the cheesy orange camo suit of the guards in Jane Nash and we can see where Futuremark got their 3D models from...


And take a look at this video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SebG_R6CI9Y

Wave Race even has better animation than the guards in Jane Nash does and better water physics....

And to top it all off we are still subject to banner ads when we paid for the advanced version? Oh and lets not forget that they are penalizing systems without a physx card! Ageia is dead and yet they still think it should be part of your system!?

Vantage = Trash