Go Back   Hardware Canucks > HARDWARE > Video Cards

    
View Poll Results: To Include Vantage or Not??
Yes. We FINALLY have a new 3DMark!! 15 48.39%
Not yet. Wait for the drivers to mature. 8 25.81%
No. Replace it with another game test. 4 12.90%
No. Definately not. Never. 4 12.90%
Voters: 31. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
  #21 (permalink)  
Old April 30, 2008, 09:14 PM
MpG's Avatar
MpG MpG is offline
Hall Of Fame
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Kitchener, ON
Posts: 3,144
Default

Considering how much a lot of hardware costs, I'm not sure how far you can complain about having to pay for a benchmark. IMO, they should start offering free copies with new hardware purchases. I believe Asus was doing that with their RoG mobos at one point.

I quite agree, those two resolutions are close enough that they can be compared. But I mentioned it because the 3DMark06 tests in this site's reviews are only done at default settings. Granted, it's the only settings most people have access to, but even 3DMark06 scores start to drop pretty quickly once you start adding eye candy. And virtually any bench will start to depend more on the CPU as the eye candy starts to disappear, whether it's synthetic or game-based.
__________________
i7 2600K | ASUS Maximus IV GENE-Z | 580GTX | Corsair DDR3-2133
Reply With Quote
  #22 (permalink)  
Old April 30, 2008, 09:44 PM
sswilson's Avatar
Moderator
F@H
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Moncton NB
Posts: 14,639

My System Specs

Default

I voted yes, not because I'll be running Vista any time soon in order to be able to compare, but because many folks are going to be looking for it now that it's available.

Folks surfing reviews need as many "similar" results as they can get between the different sites to give them the ability to separate the wheat from the chaff.
__________________
MSI Z87I Gaming AC / i7 4770K / 2X 4G Gskill 1866 DDR3 / XFX XTR 750 / EVGA GTX 680 SC+ 2GB / Intel DC S3700 200G / random 160G Sata HDD
Inwin 904 / Swiftech MCP655-b / Alphacool NexXxos XT45 120 Rad / 2X Scythe GT AP-15 / EK Supreme HF / Dell UltraSharp U2412M

Asrock AM1H-ITX / AM1 Athlon 5350 / 2X4G Gskill PC3-14900 / Intel 6235 Wi-Fi / 90W Targus Power Brick / 320G Seagate Momentus / Mini-Box M350 / 1X 22" Dell IPS / 1X 22" HP
Reply With Quote
  #23 (permalink)  
Old May 1, 2008, 12:31 AM
burebista's Avatar
Allstar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Romania
Posts: 599

My System Specs

Default

No. Definately not. Never.
I really hate 3dmark tests.They are pretty useless. 3dMark06 is heavily dependent on CPU. I saw a Quad at 4GHz and one 8800GT and the score still grow, but in games I hardly seen any difference with CPU at 3.2 and 4GHz.

I'd say to test the video cards in games. Many games. That's all that matter, because most of us are buying video card for gaming not for benching.

My 2 cents.
Reply With Quote
  #24 (permalink)  
Old May 1, 2008, 03:52 AM
ipaine's Avatar
Hall Of Fame
F@H
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Edmonton, AB
Posts: 2,076

My System Specs

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SKYMTL View Post
The Pro version with an ATI HD3870X2 shows between 7700 to about 9000 points from one test to another on the Performance setting.
Wow, I had not heard of that happening at all. For now I can only hope that it is all just driver issues, but at this point it would be hard to say. Although I have seen people get way better scores with the brand new drivers.


Quote:
Originally Posted by SKYMTL View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by jdrom17 View Post
To be honest, I think it should be boycotted until it there's a free version that can be run continuously and be able to post on ORB. I believe HWBot is going this way and trying not to support it.
Let's start this with the above quote. I think this is the major issue MANY people will have with this since you will have to pony up the money for the right to run this benchmark more than once. Personally, I land in both camps since there are plenty of benchmarks that we have access to that are not available for free and are very good at comparing one product to another. At the same time I have a bit of an issue with having someone having to "pay to compare".
That is one thing that really bugs me as well. I mean I just don't see it becoming as widespread as 3DMark06 was without a true free version. I don't know that many people that are willing to "pay to compare" as SKYMTL said.

That said I would still like to see it included into the reviews but really hope that those discrepancies in the scores can be worked out.
__________________
"Nothing sucks more than that moment during an argument when you realize you're wrong."


Reply With Quote
  #25 (permalink)  
Old May 1, 2008, 07:21 AM
SKYMTL's Avatar
HardwareCanuck Review Editor
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Montreal
Posts: 11,711
Default

I am glad this is becoming a good discussion on the subject since this is becoming quite hotly debated.

While I know that 3DMark06 is CPU limited, you have to admit that it STILL shows the differences between graphics cards quite well even at default resolutions. Just look at any of the reviews we have done on the site: performance differences between single GPUs still stay pretty consistent. What will happen with the next round of uber cards is anyone's guess but I am guessing we will still not see the full effect of CPU bottlenecking. Many of you don't like 3dMark06 but I happen to like it to a certain extent since its scores are pretty consistent from one card to another.

I know many people come down into two camps; those of you who like the consistency of canned benchmarks and those who SWEAR by the true in-game benchmarking. That is why we do a little of both here. This is what I might do with the GPU reviews:

- Expand the 3DMark06 test by not including the Shader Mark scores and adding benchmarks at 1600x1200 and 2560x1600

- Add 3DMark Vantage test with the Performance & Entry tests for sub-$400 cards and Performance and High tests for over $400 cards

- Possibly add one more synthetic benchmark like Lightsmark or then OpenGL Fur rendering benchmark

- Add another in-game benchmark. I am not sure which one yet but I don't want one where I will have to go running around benching with FRAPS. I want repeatable tests so that means timedemo benching. Any ideas are welcome.

I think that may have a little bit for everyone.
Reply With Quote
  #26 (permalink)  
Old May 1, 2008, 08:08 AM
Digitaldemon's Avatar
MVP
F@H
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: 2 miles south of heaven.. east of eden
Posts: 308
Default

my recommendation crysis...

[QUOTE] Before we get into the testing procedure, we should quickly describe the whole "DX9 vs. DX10" controversy surrounding the game. Here's the gist of it: If you run the game in DX9 mode, you can only select "High" in each of the graphics configuration options. The "Very High" setting—the maximum for the game—is greyed out. If you run the game in DX10, you can go all the way to Very High. This produces more post-processing effects like motion blur and depth-of-field, better normal mapping and appearance of relief on the ground and objects, and more three-dimensional water.[/quote]


the game has very high demands on either os.. vista for dx10 or xp... has some nice eye candy and more realistic tests

extreme tech
__________________


Reply With Quote
  #27 (permalink)  
Old May 1, 2008, 08:14 AM
SKYMTL's Avatar
HardwareCanuck Review Editor
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Montreal
Posts: 11,711
Default

We already bench Crysis in the reviews with a custom timedemo.
Reply With Quote
  #28 (permalink)  
Old May 1, 2008, 08:18 AM
Digitaldemon's Avatar
MVP
F@H
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: 2 miles south of heaven.. east of eden
Posts: 308
Default

great i am half awake and forgot.. how about enemy territory? or go here and shop around

__________________


Reply With Quote
  #29 (permalink)  
Old May 1, 2008, 08:20 AM
Eldonko's Avatar
Hardware Canucks Reviewer
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Calgary, AB
Posts: 5,445
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SKYMTL View Post
Add another in-game benchmark. I am not sure which one yet but I don't want one where I will have to go running around benching with FRAPS. I want repeatable tests so that means timedemo benching. Any ideas are welcome.
How about WIC? It has a great built-in benchmark program.

3DMark Vantage just came out, give it some time, Im sure hotfixes will come soon. Futuremark is #1 for 3D benchers, period. This is the same discussion as when 06 came out.
__________________
Donkeys kill more people annually than plane crashes or shark attacks.
Reply With Quote
  #30 (permalink)  
Old May 1, 2008, 09:07 AM
SKYMTL's Avatar
HardwareCanuck Review Editor
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Montreal
Posts: 11,711
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Eldonko View Post
How about WIC? It has a great built-in benchmark program.

3DMark Vantage just came out, give it some time, Im sure hotfixes will come soon. Futuremark is #1 for 3D benchers, period. This is the same discussion as when 06 came out.
Since when don't we use WiC?
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes