Post your 3DMark06 Benchmarks Here

Sledgehammer70Sledgehammer70 California Icrontian
edited May 2010 in Hardware
Well the new FutureMark 3DMark06 is out so lets see those scores!

Download: 3DMark®06 Basic Edition (Build 1.0.2) (580MB)
«1345

Comments

  • csimoncsimon Acadiana Icrontian
    edited January 2006
    pilotwings119 wrote:
    Hey I'm first! And a terrible score I'm sure :p

    untitled9wi.th.jpg
    Actually I've seen quite a number today under 1k pts. I also saw a dual gtx sli with less that 8k.
  • TheSmJTheSmJ
    edited January 2006
    2497 Marks on the system in my sig.

    Can't wait to compare it with my 64-bit system coming on Friday!
  • sfleurietsfleuriet Texas New
    edited January 2006
    Hey I'm first! And a terrible score I'm sure :p

    untitled9wi.th.jpg
  • Sledgehammer70Sledgehammer70 California Icrontian
    edited January 2006
    I have a few scores! I'll tell you my prelims as I am starting to OC a few things now!

    Stock - FX57 with Dual 7800GTX 512's = 7,546
    Stock - 4800 X2 7800GTX 256 = 6,480
    Stock - 4400 X2 7800GT 256 = 4,787
    Stock - FX55 7800GT's 256's = 5,385
    Stock - A64 3700+ 7800GT = 3,145
    Stock - A64 4000+ 6800GT = 2,810
    Stock - A64 3000+ 6800Ultra = 2,720
  • paroxymparoxym Toronto, Canada
    edited January 2006
    Here's my hat into the ring:

    3DMARK Score: 4645
    SM2.0: 1933
    HDR/SM3.0: 1890
    CPU: 1603

    4400X2 @ 2.4Ghz
    7800GTX 256 @ 485/1340
    1GB OCZ EB

    Rest in sig...
  • madmatmadmat
    edited January 2006
    Here's my less than steller results... http://service.futuremark.com/compare?3dm06=15387

    A whopping 1902 but on the upside, i'm in the top 16 for 6800nu's with a P4...w00t
  • RWBRWB Icrontian
    edited January 2006
    Mine was 1548, I just ran the test though without changing anything so I didn't change my driver settings or anything which may have AA and AF set to a high number becuase that's how I like to run my games.

    X2 3800+ @ 2.4GHz with a stock 6600GT 128MB
  • sfleurietsfleuriet Texas New
    edited January 2006
    why in the world is mine such a bad score?? :scratch:
  • Sledgehammer70Sledgehammer70 California Icrontian
    edited January 2006
    you know my furst score my 7800GTX 256 system post was like a 1300... I was like what the hell! But I realized it only calc'ed 1 test in the final score. I ran it again and I got the score above :)
  • RWBRWB Icrontian
    edited January 2006
    Got 1817 just now with new drivers and OC'd my card with Coolbits autodetect for OC.

    It's funny that others with similar systems and drivers are getting such strange scores, some people with faster processors and GFX cards in both slow and faster speed are above and below me in ways that just don't make much sence.
  • LeonardoLeonardo Wake up and smell the glaciers Eagle River, Alaska Icrontian
    edited January 2006
    Let's see, should I try it first with an ATI 9700 or my PCI 8MB wonder? Hmm? :scratch:


    ;D
  • Omega65Omega65 Philadelphia, Pa
    edited January 2006
    3DMark06 1974 :wtf:

    Opty165@2.5ghz
    2GB@227mhz
    X850XTPE@540mhz
    attachment.php?attachmentid=18874&d=1137710165
  • sfleurietsfleuriet Texas New
    edited January 2006
    Yeah.. I'm not liking these scores. ESPECIALLY mine :p
  • hypermoodhypermood Smyrna, GA New
    edited January 2006
    2556 - A64@2500MHz + 6800GT AGP
    Could be worse, I suppose.
  • KwitkoKwitko Sheriff of Banning (Retired) By the thing near the stuff Icrontian
    edited January 2006
    3427:
    eVGA 7800GT stock
    A64 3000+ stock (1.8GHz)
  • lemonlimelemonlime Canada Member
    edited January 2006
    3DMark06 is the Chuck Norris of benchmarks..

    Opteron 148 @ 3.3GHz
    BH-5 @ 238MHz 2-2-2-5 (couldn't really find a sweet spot with this stuff)
    X850XT @ 575/600

    http://service.futuremark.com/compare?3dm06=28357

    7th best X850XT on the orb, not too shabby, but only 2438 points.. I especially loved the 0FPS CPU test :D
  • sfleurietsfleuriet Texas New
    edited January 2006
    Kwitko wrote:
    3427:
    eVGA 7800GT stock
    A64 3000+ stock (1.8GHz)
    These scores are really baffling me. There seems to be no rhyme or reason to why some are higher than others.

    EDIT: Well I just looked on the project scores, and I have the 3rd highest score for people with an AMD 64bit 2000-2100mhz processor and an x800pro video card. I guess my video card is just not that good?
  • SpywareShooterSpywareShooter 127.0.0.1
    edited January 2006
    haha. This pwns all of yours. I couldn't even run 3dMark06.
    lol.JPG 21.7K
  • KwitkoKwitko Sheriff of Banning (Retired) By the thing near the stuff Icrontian
    edited January 2006
    pilotwings119 wrote:
    These scores are really baffling me. There seems to be no rhyme or reason to why some are higher than others.

    EDIT: Well I just looked on the project scores, and I have the 3rd highest score for people with an AMD 64bit 2000-2100mhz processor and an x800pro video card. I guess my video card is just not that good?

    16 pipelines versus 20? Yeah, you're gonna come up short.
  • sfleurietsfleuriet Texas New
    edited January 2006
    Kwitko wrote:
    16 pipelines versus 20? Yeah, you're gonna come up short.
    I knew you would take it personally and try to defend your video card.
  • lemonlimelemonlime Canada Member
    edited January 2006
    pilotwings119 wrote:
    These scores are really baffling me. There seems to be no rhyme or reason to why some are higher than others.

    EDIT: Well I just looked on the project scores, and I have the 3rd highest score for people with an AMD 64bit 2000-2100mhz processor and an x800pro video card. I guess my video card is just not that good?

    The ATI cards seem to be doing rather poorly in 06' compared to nvidia cards.. hypermood smoked my score, even though my CPU is 800MHz higher clocked. I'm not sure if it is just a driver thing, or what, because it's pretty much across the board with all ATI cards, including the x1800s.
  • KwitkoKwitko Sheriff of Banning (Retired) By the thing near the stuff Icrontian
    edited January 2006
    pilotwings119 wrote:
    I knew you would take it personally and try to defend your video card.

    Uh, no. All else being equal, a slower card with fewer pipelines is going to score lower. Facts. Go figure.
  • ThraxThrax 🐌 Austin, TX Icrontian
    edited January 2006
    pilotwings119 wrote:
    I knew you would take it personally and try to defend your video card.


    What the hell does it have to do with defence? Your video card suffers from two things:
    1) It was the loser of its generation
    2) It's a generation older than Kwitko's.

    How does simple mathematics mean he's "[Defending] [his] video card?" Really.
  • RWBRWB Icrontian
    edited January 2006
    It sounded like a joke to me guys ;)
  • ThraxThrax 🐌 Austin, TX Icrontian
    edited January 2006
    Text. Sarcasm.. Does not compute. Try one of these: ;D
  • roland_dmproland_dmp Oklahoma New
    edited January 2006
    1962 3dmarks here.

    AXP 2600+@2.31GHz
    512MB@209MHz
    128MB 6800@407/860MHz
  • Omega65Omega65 Philadelphia, Pa
    edited January 2006
    It's not about pipelines.....When 3DMark06 was being formulated, ATI didn't have it's nexgen hardware available. You need SM3.0 and HDR (High Dynamic Range lighting) hardware to excel in 3dMark06.

    Some info from TechReport
    TechReport wrote:
    he day before 3DMark06's release proved to be an interesting one in Damage Labs. As I huddled here in seclusion testing all of the latest graphics cards on this new benchmark, a little green bird fluttered in and landed on my shoulder. It sang the praises of 3DMark06, saying that this new version should do a better job of tracking with real-world game performance than past editions, noting that 3DMark05 wasn't horrible, but was simply too vertex bound, as the example of the Radeon X1600 demonstrated. (The X1600 overachieved in 3DMark05, running relatively faster than in nearly any game.) 3DMark06, it cooed, should right that wrong and better achieve its stated goals.

    ....than a redbird perched on the top of my monitor, singing a very different song. This creature, too, noted that 3DMark05 was excessively vertex-bound, but its take on the future was considerably grimmer.

    The Redbird then sang several verses of lament over specific issues with 3DMark06. The depth stencil format, explained the first sad stanza, requires a painful pixel-shader-based workaround on some hardware but not on others.

    The third stanza told the tragic tale of Shader Model 3.0 flow control, an incredibly important feature used only sparingly in 3DMark06, by the sound of it. Alas. Stanza four turned back to Shader Model 2.0, mournfully noting that the additional pixel shader load in these tests had a curiously green tint about it

    The fifth verse was most melancholy of them all, acknowledging that things might have been different had the R520 not been late to market and unavailable during 3DMark06's incubation.

    Pics from PCper Article
    Note how well the X1600XT & 6800GS score in the test (compared to the X850 XT)
    FX-55 CPU (2.4ghz 1MB)
    attachment.php?attachmentid=18885&d=1137766701attachment.php?attachmentid=18886&d=1137766701
  • lemonlimelemonlime Canada Member
    edited January 2006
    Omega65 wrote:
    It's not about pipelines.....When 3DMark06 was being formulated, ATI didn't have it's nexgen hardware available. You need SM3.0 and HDR (High Dynamic Range lighting) hardware to excel in 3dMark06.

    Some info from TechReport


    Pics from PCper Article
    Note how well the X1600XT & 6800GS score in the test (compared to the X850 XT)
    FX-55 CPU (2.4ghz 1MB)

    Interesting info Omega65.. Looks like ATI is paying for it's tardiness now. Many people seem to base their buying decisions on futuremark benchmarks, so they may feel the pain for quite some time..

    My X850 does terribly compared to 6800 series cards. Near stock 6800GS models with stock a64s are scoring several hundred points higher, even when my x850 is clocked to it's max and a CPU clock of 3.3GHz.
  • scottscott Medina, Ohio Icrontian
    edited January 2006
    4303 3DMarks

    This is from my htpc
    3500+ Clawhammer @ 2600mhz DFI NF4 Ultra D ( modded for SLI ) ( I need another 7800 )
    1gig OCZ platinum EL
    BFG 7800GTX OC @ 490 1350

    Scott
  • GrayFoxGrayFox /dev/urandom Member
    edited January 2006
    Pilot you need Sm 3 to get a decent score in this (Doesn't make any noticeable diffrence in the real world yet... but it will in about another year or two).
Sign In or Register to comment.