Post your 3Dmark Vantage Benchmarks here

[Winga]

Okay so 3DMark Vantage is the latest benchmark for Windows Vista and DirectX 10. It seems you also need Vista Service pack 1 installed before the benchmark will run.

The new key feature of Vantage (the Advanced and Professional versions) is the option to choose 4 different rendering options. These are Entry, Performance, High and Extreme. So anything from mainstream to high performance machines are fair game. Each preset will produce an official score for that option.

I ran my benchmark on Performance. Graphics card is an 8800 GTS, CPU - Core 2 Duo E6550 running on 64 bit with 4 Gigs of RAM. Everything at stock.

Let us know what you scored.

[Winga]

Video card upgrade to ATI 4850 overclocked to 650 core 1035 memory. CPU OC'd to 3Ghz. CPU seems to be a limiting factor. I should be getting better scores with that card.

[MatCauthon]

I'm going to post my benchmark in a moment, but is it me or is the Vista Base index, absolutly NO GOOD!

My Last pc was 7 years old, I ran an *ahem* lite version on it b4 I bought my new one, it game me a bench mark of 3, this was a 700Mhz P3 ladies and Gents, it was a dinosaur, couldnt put more than 1 GHz ram in it, (for which I more than made up for in storage, the best thing on iot was its G Card, which scored a 4.4 (sorry cannot remember what it was...) any way the rest averaged 2.7- 2.9 and the lowest being 2.7 that was my score,


My new score is this: http://conniburrowsurestart.net/post/basescore.jpg

So is microsoft really telling me that because my graphics card is not that up to date ( which suprises me as the specs seem fairly cool) my computer ranks with that of my 7 year old PC?

Damn! I just wasted £700 getting a new PC

Mat

PS will upload my results in a moment!

[Leonardo]

MatCauthon, your computer is only obsolete or inadequate if you think it so. Keep in mind that Any FutureMark benchmarks are only that - benchmarks. Those benchmarks exist mainly so that different computers can be compared.

If you are satisfied with the real world performance of your computer with the applications and programs that you use, then what more is there to say? :)

Benchmarking software can still be fun to run and can serve as tools for evaluating a system. But for us, the bottom line is still whether your computer meets your needs.

[liam]

Q6600 @3GHz:o
Ocz 4 GB 1024 MHz<O:p</O:p
ASUS Maximus 2 Formula
Coolermaster M850 (880W)
4870x2 (8.11) (there is a new performance driver out on the 10th. We will see how much more points that gets soon) :thumbup<O:p</O:p
<O:p</O:p

[TBonZ]

Nice score liam! You would also kick some folding butt with that rig!

No Vista here unfortunately...

[Winga]

Q6600 @3GHz:o
Ocz 4 GB 1024 MHz<o>:p</o>:p
ASUS Maximus 2 Formula
Coolermaster M850 (880W)
4870x2 (8.11) (there is a new performance driver out on the 10th. We will see how much more points that gets soon) :thumbup<o>:p</o>:p
<o>:p</o>:p

I be green :respect::respect::respect:
Damn fine score and a rig to match

[mafiadragon]

hi mine gets 22888 in the cpu test on 3dmark vantage
its a intel core 2 duo e7300 @ 2.66
look at the attachment

[revorocks]

lol, somehow I think 3Dmark must of gone a bit wrong :P

[liam]

just upgraded my Q6600 to a Q9650 and now using 9.2 cat

[DanG]

15,226 on my new system :)

[liam]

Nice score. I will have to try OC'ing to 3.6GHz and try to beat you

[revorocks]

lol, good luck with that. Get a better fan on your thermalright and youde get better temps :)

[liam]

people say that it hit 4GHz easily so i think i could get 3.6GHz with my cooler and fan

[liam]

OC to 3.6Ghz now

[Thrax]

I get 5600 and change, but it's on Windows 7 (roughly comparable to Vista).

[GnomeWizardd]

I get 7500 and change, Got a 4850 coming and I am at 3.6 GHZ not 3.8 as normally. New ram on the way too

[scott]

13643

Q6600 @ 3.6
GTX260 core 216

[liam]

scott why is your CPU score so high? I've got an Q9650 @ 3.6GHz and it is only getting 14430

Also i have a friend with a E7300 @2.9GHz and that is getting over 29k

[scott]

After looking at the other scores I was wondering the same thing.
I have run the benchmark several times with the same results. I ran it at 3.2ghz and got 33k so it is consistent. And in line with your friends score.
I am running Win 7 RC1. Not sure if that makes any difference.


Scott

[liam]

Well my friend is running Vista 64bit (same as me) the first thing I thought is maybe the install had gone wrong so he reinstalled 3D Mark but still got the same scores.

[mirage]

13643

Q6600 @ 3.6
GTX260 core 216

Is your GTX 260 overclocked? If you have Crysis on your computer, could you try GPU test at 1680x1050, high, noAA?

[mirage]

E4500 @ 3GHz Thermaltake BigTyp 120
GF 9600GT @ 750/1050 Accelero S1+120mm fan
RAM: 4GB @ DDR2-545

[scott]

Is your GTX 260 overclocked? If you have Crysis on your computer, could you try GPU test at 1680x1050, high, noAA?

I have not reloaded Crysis yet ( but I will )
Yes it is overclocked.
I will try and get to the benchmark later today.

Scott

[mirage]

E5200 @ 3.5 GHz Thermalright HR01+120mm fan
HD4850 @ 850/1200 Accelero S1 + 2x70mm fan
4GB DDR2-560

[mirage]

I have not reloaded Crysis yet ( but I will )
Yes it is overclocked.
I will try and get to the benchmark later today.

Scott

Thanks! That was quick!

BTW, you can post the Crysis results here (http://icrontic.com/forum/showthread.php?t=83774) if you think this thread is not relevant for that.

[mirage]

Q6600 @ 3.3 GHz TRUE120
6GB DDR2-733
GTX260-216 55nm @ 675/1152

[Serp]

Q9450 @ 3.6 Ghz
GTX 280 @ 675/1350/2376

[David]

file:///C:/Users/David/AppData/Local/Temp/moz-screenshot-2.png

[lordbean]

You guys realize leaving GPU PhysX enabled in the nvidia driver seriously distorts your CPU score, right?

The nvidia driver helps the CPU do its tests since they're both PhysX-based. I get a difference of about 30,000 points in CPU score between GPU PhysX enabled or disabled.

[David]

Ran it again with PhysX disabled and you are right, my CPU score dropped by 26,680. But my overall score only dropped by 3,580. Not too bad and still the highest post on this thread (so far). By the looks of some of the other CPU scores, they need to disable PhysX and re-run theirs as well.

Does screen size/resolution impact score? I'm running a 24 inch monitor (HP LP2475w) at 1920x1200. That screen size/resolution has to impact frame rate/GPU score negatively right?





You guys realize leaving GPU PhysX enabled in the nvidia driver seriously distorts your CPU score, right?

The nvidia driver helps the CPU do its tests since they're both PhysX-based. I get a difference of about 30,000 points in CPU score between GPU PhysX enabled or disabled.

[lordbean]

The score is based on the detail settings, yes. Most people compare their scores by the performance defaults, which use 1280x1024 by default, I think.

Edit - sweet rig, by the way.

[Sledgehammer70]

My first run No OC on the GPU & light OC on the CPU

3DMark Score
P21729 3DMarks
CPU Score
44616
Graphics Score
18556

Slight 7% GPU OC got me upto:

3DMark Score
P23849 3DMarks
CPU Score
46098
Graphics Score
20544

[danball1976]

I didn't bother saving my score image, but I got about 11600 on my computer with my GTX260

[David]

Your CPU score is very high. Looks like you have GPU PhysX enabled in the nvidia driver just like I did. Turn it off and it will drop to 20K or so I bet.

My first run No OC on the GPU & light OC on the CPU

3DMark Score
P21729 3DMarks
CPU Score
44616
Graphics Score
18556

Slight 7% GPU OC got me upto:

3DMark Score
P23849 3DMarks
CPU Score
46098
Graphics Score
20544

[Sledgehammer70]

I ran a fresh run without a GPU OC and got a much better CPU score with my new OC and an improved GPU score for running stock settings.

http://i714.photobucket.com/albums/ww148/sledgehammer70/OC_run1.png

[_k_]

I hate this game. 24/7 clocks
q9450 3.55
Dual 88GT 650/1625/955
27794

[Sledgehammer70]

OKay been playing around... The funny thing is the CPU is running at 3.8GHz and not 4.0GHz and my score sky rocketed. I am using the new Nvidia drivers... wonder if that helped at all here.

http://i714.photobucket.com/albums/ww148/sledgehammer70/3dvant.png

[_k_]

is PhysX off

[Sledgehammer70]

Nope... why on earth would I turn it off? the guys running top scores leave it on :)

[_k_]

You guys realize leaving GPU PhysX enabled in the nvidia driver seriously distorts your CPU score, right?

The nvidia driver helps the CPU do its tests since they're both PhysX-based. I get a difference of about 30,000 points in CPU score between GPU PhysX enabled or disabled.

If it was turned off before when you updated your driver it should turn it back on. Your GPU went up under 3k but your CPU went up just over 6k.

[Sledgehammer70]

Nope never turned it off. My first test tonight was at 22.4k but when I applied a 15% OC to the GPU it jumped to 25.8k

[lordbean]

Then that's why your CPU score jumped. Note in my comment I pointed out the GPU helps the CPU do its test since it's PhysX based, meaning if you overclock your graphics card, your CPU score is going to go up.

[Sledgehammer70]

I see... things I never knew because I never looked. So fail! I really need to dig into the current graphics again & get myself versed in current tech :)

[lordbean]

I see... things I never knew because I never looked. So fail! I really need to dig into the current graphics again & get myself versed in current tech :)

Heh... just for reference, that is why many people (including myself) hold the opinion that nvidia graphics cards "cheat" on the 3DMark Vantage test. My personal opinion is that the Vantage score from an nvidia card where PhysX acceleration is enabled is only valid for PhysX-accelerated games, such as Arkham Asylum. For a true comparison score to AMD's hardware in non-PhysX games, the benchmark has to be run with PhysX acceleration disabled.

[_k_]

Well what do you expect when it was shown with an ID unlocked CPU that there are extra points handed out for certain CPUs.

[Sledgehammer70]

Well the extra points should go to NVIDIA in general for taking the time to make PhysX work on their chip. I see it is an advantage that comes with the ship. Maybe not all games use it, but some do and you will benefit from it.

[lordbean]

NVIDIA may have taken the time to make PhysX work on their cards, but that's because they bought out Ageia and all Ageia's intellectual property, effectively cutting AMD off from it.

[Sledgehammer70]

AMD could have bought them or licensed the product or even developed their own version.

[lordbean]

If AMD had bought out Ageia, NVIDIA cards wouldn't be able to accelerate PhysX, and we'd be in the same situation only reversed. How is that different?

Either way, the arguments are tired, and at the end of the day, very few products explicitly rely on PhysX. Essentially, your Vantage score with PhysX enabled does not give you an accurate idea of how your PC will run most DX10 games.

Edit for typo.

[Sledgehammer70]

Actually many games use PhysX but most do not push it as a top item. The fact still stands that NVIDIA paid for a technology and benefit from it in tests. If Futuremark didn't want the increase they could adjust the test to not utilize PhysX.

Also if you want to push your system for max score (which everyone who runs Vantage does for top scores) they leave PhysX on not off.

[lordbean]

Of course they do, because it makes their processor score artificially higher.

Observe the difference between these two shots:

http://icrontic.com/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=27857&stc=1&d=1258860241
http://icrontic.com/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=27858&stc=1&d=1258860241

Both benchmarks run on the same system one after the other. Notice how the GPU score is practically unaffected, but oops, my CPU somehow got five times as fast...

Here's some clarification of what's going on. The first test (Jane Nash) makes use of PhysX to animate the water and the canopy on the boat. The scene is graphically complicated, so PhysX acceleration and graphics rendering end up in a fight for GPU time. The end result is that the scene really doesn't render any faster than when GPU PhysX acceleration is disabled.

The CPU tests, which are also PhysX based, are supposed to calculate your CPU power as a function of how well your processor handles PhysX calculations. However, since the scene is supposed to be rendered by the CPU, the GPU remains idle, apart from throwing the picture onto the monitor. When PhysX acceleration is disabled, the test runs properly, with the GPU remaining idle while the CPU crunches its numbers.

When PhysX acceleration is enabled, the NVIDIA driver hooks into the scene and does all the PhysX calculations for the CPU using near-100% of the GPU core, since the GPU core is otherwise idle. In my mind, this makes it valid to point out that in a PhysX-based game, the advantage you would see is not as large as 3DMark Vantage would seem to indicate.

Edited in an attempt to reduce wall of text effect.

[Thrax]

Derek is right. The amount of GPU horsepower available for PhysX on Vantage's CPU tests are about 10x the amount available in a regular game, since the GPU is not otherwise working during the Vantage CPU test, but it's at full load during a game.

[Sledgehammer70]

I understand why the score is inflated.. but what I am saying is all final test are ran with it on. But overall the score effect is usually less than 1000 points in the total. When your dealing with 44k scores that isn't a huge difference even as it inflates by 3000+ points.

[lordbean]

Actually, I find the faster your GPU is, the more it skews the final score.

GTX285 Benchies (http://tech.icrontic.com/article/overclocking-the-radeon-hd-5850/5/)

The overall difference is about 3500 points on a C2Q / GTX285. It's probably even larger for your system, with its large amount of additional CPU crunch.