AMD press release said Radeon HD 3000 or superior with DX10.1 or DX11 support on Windows 7 for Direct2D.Originally Posted by informal
My old Intel GMA with DX9 only support doesn't run with Direct2D hardware acceleration... 22 points (CPU only).
AMD press release said Radeon HD 3000 or superior with DX10.1 or DX11 support on Windows 7 for Direct2D.
My old Intel GMA with DX9 only support doesn't run with Direct2D hardware acceleration... 22 points (CPU only).
We don't know.The other users' i3 with intel GMA has higher scores than my Radeon 4850 with QC Agena @ 2.6Ghz,which is fishy to say the least. He didn't run any other test(amazon or new CoH) so we can't say what's going on.
I will try and find what is MS saying on the IE9 requirements for hw accel.
edit: can't find anything regarding hw requirements on MS website :S.
Is there anyone with i3 or i5 with builtin GPU who can try and run these tests?Also,someone with the Radeon 4xxx or 5xxx could run and post their results.
Last edited by informal; 09-14-2010 at 10:09 AM.
I tried it on this Pentium work machine and only got 11...when I get home, if you still need it, I'll try it with a 5850.
Ok thanks ryboto,it would be nice to see what kind of numbers 5850 pulls in these tests(try the psycho test and amazon book reading test).
... "never gonna give you up"
Ryzen 9 3900X w/ NH-U14s on MSI X570 Unify
32 GB Patriot Viper Steel 3733 CL14 (1.51v)
RX 5700 XT w/ 2x 120mm fan mod (2 GHz)
Tons of NVMe & SATA SSDs
LG 27GL850 + Asus MG279Q
Meshify C white
Where can i get the HTML5 benchmark?
Edit: Figured it out...
Last edited by eXa; 09-14-2010 at 10:52 AM.
X2 555 @ B55 @ 4050 1.4v, NB @ 2700 1.35v Fuzion V1
Gigabyte 890gpa-ud3h v2.1
HD6950 2GB swiftech MCW60 @ 1000mhz, 1.168v 1515mhz memory
Corsair Vengeance 2x4GB 1866 cas 9 @ 1800 8.9.8.27.41 1T 110ns 1.605v
C300 64GB, 2X Seagate barracuda green LP 2TB, Essence STX, Zalman ZM750-HP
DDC 3.2/petras, PA120.3 ek-res400, Stackers STC-01,
Dell U2412m, G110, G9x, Razer Scarab
5850:
~1280x680:
About the same result.
dumb question
its not OpenCL related is it?
No. Direct2D only.
So Core i3 IGP is better than Radeon HD 5000 over Direct2D???
Last edited by ethomaz; 09-14-2010 at 11:15 AM.
Ran it with chrome and got 119.
Also Amazon benchmark:
Chrome has no Direct2D hardware acceleration... just IE9 and Firefox 4.0 bet has support.
kl0012, can you try hallucinogenic mode?
Already did it. See previous page.
nm I see it now
The benchmark has quite a jitter, my HD5870 ranges between 1800-1900 in normal mode and 600-660 hallu mode. (on vista 64 with an install that is 2 years old..)
Last edited by Hornet331; 09-14-2010 at 11:41 AM.
I hate raining on everyone's parade, but that isn't the standard City of Heroes. That looks like City of Heroes: Going Rogue which is a game AMD has HIGHLY optimized code for and one that Intel's current GPU drivers don't even properly support.
Perhaps the i3's IGP exceeds the 2D capability of the 5000 series? 2D performance is kind of static among all members except Matrox after all, and it wouldn't be terribly shocking.
Overall GPU load never exceeded 22% and CPU never exceeded more than a few percent during these runs. That i3 is faster at Direct2D I guess. I ran it at a resolution within a few pixels of the i3's run.
Last edited by Particle; 09-14-2010 at 11:49 AM.
Particle's First Rule of Online Technical Discussion:
As a thread about any computer related subject has its length approach infinity, the likelihood and inevitability of a poorly constructed AMD vs. Intel fight also exponentially increases.
Likewise, the frequency of a car pseudoanalogy to explain a technical concept increases with thread length. This will make many people chuckle, as computer people are rarely knowledgeable about vehicular mechanics.
Rule 2:
When confronted with a post that is contrary to what a poster likes, believes, or most often wants to be correct, the poster will pick out only minor details that are largely irrelevant in an attempt to shut out the conflicting idea. The core of the post will be left alone since it isn't easy to contradict what the person is actually saying.
Rule 2A:
When a poster cannot properly refute a post they do not like (as described above), the poster will most likely invent fictitious counter-points and/or begin to attack the other's credibility in feeble ways that are dramatic but irrelevant. Do not underestimate this tactic, as in the online world this will sway many observers. Do not forget: Correctness is decided only by what is said last, the most loudly, or with greatest repetition.
Rule 3:
When it comes to computer news, 70% of Internet rumors are outright fabricated, 20% are inaccurate enough to simply be discarded, and about 10% are based in reality. Grains of salt--become familiar with them.
Remember: When debating online, everyone else is ALWAYS wrong if they do not agree with you!
Random Tip o' the Whatever
You just can't win. If your product offers feature A instead of B, people will moan how A is stupid and it didn't offer B. If your product offers B instead of A, they'll likewise complain and rant about how anyone's retarded cousin could figure out A is what the market wants.
he is using ie9...i dont think amd used ie?
[MOBO] Asus CrossHair Formula 5 AM3+
[GPU] ATI 6970 x2 Crossfire 2Gb
[RAM] G.SKILL Ripjaws X Series 16GB (4 x 4GB) 240-Pin DDR3 1600
[CPU] AMD FX-8120 @ 4.8 ghz
[COOLER] XSPC Rasa 750 RS360 WaterCooling
[OS] Windows 8 x64 Enterprise
[HDD] OCZ Vertex 3 120GB SSD
[AUDIO] Logitech S-220 17 Watts 2.1
yes they are.. there are only 2 browsers that support D2D. IE and Firefox, with Firefox only released its D2D capable beta 6 days ago.
Plus, look at the screens -> IE logo.
They did use IE9. I'm willing to postulate that it's possible the big and small score were Zacate's scores on both modes of this benchmark, not a comparison between i3 and Zacate. That would be such an interpretation fail by Anand if so.
As a thread about any computer related subject has its length approach infinity, the likelihood and inevitability of a poorly constructed AMD vs. Intel fight also exponentially increases.
Likewise, the frequency of a car pseudoanalogy to explain a technical concept increases with thread length. This will make many people chuckle, as computer people are rarely knowledgeable about vehicular mechanics.
When confronted with a post that is contrary to what a poster likes, believes, or most often wants to be correct, the poster will pick out only minor details that are largely irrelevant in an attempt to shut out the conflicting idea. The core of the post will be left alone since it isn't easy to contradict what the person is actually saying.
When a poster cannot properly refute a post they do not like (as described above), the poster will most likely invent fictitious counter-points and/or begin to attack the other's credibility in feeble ways that are dramatic but irrelevant. Do not underestimate this tactic, as in the online world this will sway many observers. Do not forget: Correctness is decided only by what is said last, the most loudly, or with greatest repetition.
When it comes to computer news, 70% of Internet rumors are outright fabricated, 20% are inaccurate enough to simply be discarded, and about 10% are based in reality. Grains of salt--become familiar with them.
Remember: When debating online, everyone else is ALWAYS wrong if they do not agree with you!
Random Tip o' the Whatever
You just can't win. If your product offers feature A instead of B, people will moan how A is stupid and it didn't offer B. If your product offers B instead of A, they'll likewise complain and rant about how anyone's retarded cousin could figure out A is what the market wants.
Dell 11z with SU4100 1.3GHz + Intel GMA 4500MHD:
Eh I think it's a resolution limitation or something.
That's what I believe.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pw14MgRHYJE
That shows the demo running on both right at the end.
Clearly so, jimbo. The laptop must have not had the power saving GPU setting set to performance as someone else speculated.
As a thread about any computer related subject has its length approach infinity, the likelihood and inevitability of a poorly constructed AMD vs. Intel fight also exponentially increases.
Likewise, the frequency of a car pseudoanalogy to explain a technical concept increases with thread length. This will make many people chuckle, as computer people are rarely knowledgeable about vehicular mechanics.
When confronted with a post that is contrary to what a poster likes, believes, or most often wants to be correct, the poster will pick out only minor details that are largely irrelevant in an attempt to shut out the conflicting idea. The core of the post will be left alone since it isn't easy to contradict what the person is actually saying.
When a poster cannot properly refute a post they do not like (as described above), the poster will most likely invent fictitious counter-points and/or begin to attack the other's credibility in feeble ways that are dramatic but irrelevant. Do not underestimate this tactic, as in the online world this will sway many observers. Do not forget: Correctness is decided only by what is said last, the most loudly, or with greatest repetition.
When it comes to computer news, 70% of Internet rumors are outright fabricated, 20% are inaccurate enough to simply be discarded, and about 10% are based in reality. Grains of salt--become familiar with them.
Remember: When debating online, everyone else is ALWAYS wrong if they do not agree with you!
Random Tip o' the Whatever
You just can't win. If your product offers feature A instead of B, people will moan how A is stupid and it didn't offer B. If your product offers B instead of A, they'll likewise complain and rant about how anyone's retarded cousin could figure out A is what the market wants.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks