3DMark06Available 18/01/06

Duke · 18 Jan 2006 at 07:50

Probably be this afternoon for us.

http://www.futuremark.com/download/?3dmark06.shtml - page is there but awaiting content

lordedmond · 18 Jan 2006 at 09:04

Duke said:
Probably be this afternoon for us.

http://www.futuremark.com/download/?3dmark06.shtml - page is there but awaiting content

bet the download will be as slow as the benchmark will run

lemonkettaz · 18 Jan 2006 at 09:08

do you buy it? to fully register it?

ive always had the demo... just wondering if its worth getting the full features

Dutch Guy · 18 Jan 2006 at 09:10

lemonkettaz said:
do you buy it? to fully register it?

ive always had the demo... just wondering if its worth getting the full features

With the full version you can select what tests to run and I think there is a playable part in the registered version.

And I think in a past version it was possible to do a batch run with different resolutions and/or settings.

lordedmond · 18 Jan 2006 at 09:10

lemonkettaz said:
do you buy it? to fully register it?

ive always had the demo... just wondering if its worth getting the full features

if you pay you get more control over what runs , well you do in 05
eg you can turn off the cpu tests and still get a bench no.

lemonkettaz · 18 Jan 2006 at 09:15

so it would be a good idea to pay for this?

Dutch Guy · 18 Jan 2006 at 09:18

lemonkettaz said:
so it would be a good idea to pay for this?

You decide if you think it's worth it, that depends on what a full version costs?

lemonkettaz · 18 Jan 2006 at 09:21

$39 or something like that.

just rumour has it "registration" keys that arent acquired legally dont offer the full features, i.e. unable to use the online features that the software has to offer.

FirebarUK · 18 Jan 2006 at 09:26

To be honest I dont know why anyone would pay for a benchmark program such as this. I personally wouldnt recommend you buy it.

Dutch Guy · 18 Jan 2006 at 09:40

FirebarUK said:
To be honest I dont know why anyone would pay for a benchmark program such as this. I personally wouldnt recommend you buy it.

I think you have to buy it to be able to upload results :confused:

lordedmond · 18 Jan 2006 at 09:50

Dutch Guy said:
I think you have to buy it to be able to upload results

well we will know later today as to what and why or whatever

then i will make my choice

Mundu · 18 Jan 2006 at 09:52

Dutch Guy said:
I think you have to buy it to be able to upload results

You don't for 01,03 and 05 but maybe they've changed it?

edger · 18 Jan 2006 at 10:18

I bought 05, it was pretty cheap ($20) and I found the ability to use multiple project slots beneficial, its nice to keep a legacy of all your old machines scores. In addition, its a pretty good stress tester with the loop ability.

lordedmond · 18 Jan 2006 at 10:29

review Here

ken1307 · 18 Jan 2006 at 10:40

~4K for single 7800GTX :| and only 1 new test, the other 3 are re-do...bah...I wanna see something new,damit !!! :mad:

Logsi · 18 Jan 2006 at 10:41

Hmmm looking forward to that just under 3000, thats what the GS got near to so im aiming there maybe lower in fact. Two SLI'ed 512mb GTX's got 6000 lol.

http://www.pcper.com/article.php?aid=199&type=expert&pid=6

Logsi · 18 Jan 2006 at 10:44

ken1307 said:
~4K for single 7800GTX :| and only 1 new test, the other 3 are re-do...bah...I wanna see something new,damit !!!

More detail in the original tests though! And standard res is 1280x1024 it says. I think.

Vogon · 18 Jan 2006 at 10:45

Someone mentioned that the highest scoring card was whoever paid FM devs the most ... looks like Nvidia got the bungs in then

dale1uk · 18 Jan 2006 at 10:53

wouldn't surprise me 1 bit, people will spend silly money just to brag about having a higher score than you.

Andydewar · 18 Jan 2006 at 11:10

From that review, it looks like this is what 3Dmark05 should have and would have been if ATI had got their SM3 hardware out in time. The difference in canyon flight using SM3 looks incredible.

I wonder if ATI's lack of VS3 vertex texturing and FP blending is what is lowering their SM3 score, because I would have expected the X1800xt to be ahead of the 256mb GTX at least. Guess futuremark decided to avoid heavy use of PS3 dynamic branching, so Nvidia dodged that bullet this time.

Looks like this might actually be much better than 05 for measuring real world gaming performance at least. Would be nice, as no 3d mark has managed that since 01.