• Competitor rules

    Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.

GeForce 9 series projected 3DMark Vantage performance

helmutcheese

helmutcheese

helmutcheese

Permabanned
Joined
19 Jun 2007
Posts
10,717
Location
InURmama
QUOTED :


" Sure, The Boomtown Rats' I Don't Like Mondays is one of our favorite songs but this coming Monday, April 28 is too special to not like as Futuremark will be releasing 3DMark Vantage. The new testing tool is set to lots of nice new obstacle courses for our systems to fail miserably in so one point of interest at this point would be how well some 'new' generations cards will perform in it. To help out Nvidia apparently made a quick preview of the single, SLI, tri-SLI and Quad-SLI performance of its 9 series GeForce cards in 3dMark Vantage.

Although the bench system is unknown, the numbers below, which depict the cards' scores with both the Performance (1280x1024) and Extreme (1920x1200) presents, should be a reasonably-accurate preview of how the GeForce 9600 GT, 9800 GTX and 9800 GX2 handle Futuremark's new benchmark. As you can see, the 9800 GX2 comes very close to breaking the 10K mark with the Performance preset while the Quad-SLI setup is almost at 14.500 points. We'll find out if that's good or bad on Monday when we'll surely see a lot of reviews go online with scores of these and other cards. For now, try to enjoy the weekend. "







SLI seems to Scale better than before (I think).


http://www.tcmagazine.info/comments.php?shownews=19466&catid=2
 
Last edited:
At least that makes it look like it's going to be a proper graphics benchmark, rather than a system benchmark like 3dmark06.
 
Yip and the Extreme setting should stop the Kiddies crying like in many threads about the default RES in 2006.

Means double the tests/time for most of us though lol.

Hmm, I hope the results are real or did they estimate/simulate them ? (going by embargo comment I would hope they are real).
 
Last edited:
I welcome that res as standard testing fare, but once again its not at all representative of real game scenarios.
I mean since when have you seen a review that showed quad SLI doing much more in games than a pricey paperweight, yet that shows different on the new Vantage.

Sure its fine for bench junkies, but for most of us a benchmark that reflects real world performance would be a better idea, just my tuppence worth ;)
 
Interesting. I was expecting it to crucify current hardware instead it looks to have gone OK on most of it.

Be interesting but I doubt I can be ****ed to put Vista on for it.
 
Jokester said:
At least that makes it look like it's going to be a proper graphics benchmark, rather than a system benchmark like 3dmark06.
Click to expand...

TBH all 3dmarks are a good gameplay/graphics benchmark at launch, its when they get ~>1 year old then they become cpu limited and the test loses credability as a gameplay benchmark
 
straxusii said:
TBH all 3dmarks are a good gameplay/graphics benchmark at launch, its when they get ~>1 year old then they become cpu limited and the test loses credability as a gameplay benchmark
Click to expand...
3dmark06 has always been a system benchmark, a pure CPU score is even added to the overall score.
 
psychas said:
back to low scores again i guess looking forward to this tbh native rez 1680x1050 :confused: as nobody using 19" screens anyway :)
Click to expand...

You'd be surprised. Although I agree that I'd like to see a higher resolution getting used on all benchmarks you can't forget the people that don't desire a big screen for PC use. So on that account I would have liked to have seen sections of benchmarks ranging in 6 or 7 groups. 1024x768, 1280x1024, 1440x900, 1680x1050, 1920x1440, 2048x1535 and 2560x1600. I know it sounds a bit complicated now but if it was set this way from the start then we'd have a much broader set of benchmarks that would show us performances not affected by CPU speed as well as seeing where the limitation starts to ease up at certain resolutions on certain titles. It would have been pretty useful I think.
 
Last edited:
GPU-CPU weights:

3dmarkVantagebig-4.jpg


Also, remember the free trial and $7(+tax) basic version of 3dmark vantage will only allow you to test under performance preset. The $20(+tax) advanced version unlocks everything.

Therefore, quads will still outperform duals by quite a bit even if theres no gaming improvement.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom