Quote Originally Posted by Calmatory View Post
Why to include DX?

DX with few cubes, textures, simple shaders and some primitive lighting techniques is about the same for the GPU as the 1+1 is for the CPU - VERY poor idea. Either you need to stress, stress alot, and even more, or not stress at all.

Besides, unless you really are going to STRESS the GPU, it will be CPU-bound, and then the DirectX implementation is just waste of time. You can get graphics with CPU aswell. Every 3DMark, including 3DMark06 are CPU bound, are you aiming alone higher than Futuremark went with full team of professionals?

So, make one good, instead of two poor benches, I am fairly certain that 1+1 = 2 isn't good in this case.

And no, I am not trying to put you down or anything, just saying what I think.

(Well, tbh, I believe SuperPI is being #1 because it has HWBot etc. support. It's de facto. If you ask me, NucRus MultiCore benchmark, or wPrime would be better benches than SuperPI, but SPI is a legend, and nothing is going to take it away, no matter how good it is/what it stresses. Sad but true. I'd personally be more interested in wPrime/NucRus etc. Or 3D Software renderer.)
I guess I must have said something wrong in my first post.

I am not trying to replace 3DMark.
I am not trying to replace SuperPi.
I am not trying to replace wPrime.
I am not trying to "replace" existing benchmarks.

I was just going to see if I could "program" a very stressing CPU benchmark, and then try and mutli-thread it.

I know 1+1 is not stressing.
I know drawing individual pixels is not stressing.

I will attempt to make something difficult, stressing, and worth while.

All I can do is try.