Futuremark's Latest Attempt: 3DMark06 Tested
by Josh Venning on January 18, 2006 11:00 AM EST- Posted in
- GPUs
Introduction
Here at Anandtech, performance testing is an important aspect in how we review our hardware. When we are looking at graphics cards, game benchmarks give us a good idea of a card's performance capabilities. We are always interested in new ways to test graphics hardware, and while we often use game benchmarks, there are other tools out there that can be useful for testing computer hardware. One of these programs is 3DMark, a popular benchmarking tool developed by Futuremark, and today marks the release of their latest version of this program, 3DMark06.
There is a kind of interconnectivity between hardware and software wherein each tends to affect and be affected by the other, specifically regarding gaming technology advancements. There are times where certain games or software come about, which test the limits or surpass the capabilities of the graphics hardware at that time. Currently though, we are seeing the opposite situation, where incredibly powerful graphics cards and gaming setups (i.e. SLI, Crossfire) surpass the system requirements of even the most demanding games with the highest settings enabled.
While perhaps frustrating for some people, scenarios like these are are generally good news for the end user, as it creates opportunities for major advancements to occur in the technology of games or game hardware. Right now, the hardware that is available is prompting advancements in game development, and we can't easily predict what types of games we might see in the near or semi-near future. Tools like 3DMark are useful because they give us the ability to test hardware in very different and precise ways that current games cannot.
That being said, 3DMark is essentially a benchmarking tool, and there are limits to its usefulness. We'll talk more about this and run some benchmarks across several graphics boards to give us an idea of how this program stresses our cards. We'll also be talking about some new features in this edition of 3DMark, which look impressive, particularly the High Dynamic Range and Shader Model 3.0 additions.
Here at Anandtech, performance testing is an important aspect in how we review our hardware. When we are looking at graphics cards, game benchmarks give us a good idea of a card's performance capabilities. We are always interested in new ways to test graphics hardware, and while we often use game benchmarks, there are other tools out there that can be useful for testing computer hardware. One of these programs is 3DMark, a popular benchmarking tool developed by Futuremark, and today marks the release of their latest version of this program, 3DMark06.
There is a kind of interconnectivity between hardware and software wherein each tends to affect and be affected by the other, specifically regarding gaming technology advancements. There are times where certain games or software come about, which test the limits or surpass the capabilities of the graphics hardware at that time. Currently though, we are seeing the opposite situation, where incredibly powerful graphics cards and gaming setups (i.e. SLI, Crossfire) surpass the system requirements of even the most demanding games with the highest settings enabled.
While perhaps frustrating for some people, scenarios like these are are generally good news for the end user, as it creates opportunities for major advancements to occur in the technology of games or game hardware. Right now, the hardware that is available is prompting advancements in game development, and we can't easily predict what types of games we might see in the near or semi-near future. Tools like 3DMark are useful because they give us the ability to test hardware in very different and precise ways that current games cannot.
That being said, 3DMark is essentially a benchmarking tool, and there are limits to its usefulness. We'll talk more about this and run some benchmarks across several graphics boards to give us an idea of how this program stresses our cards. We'll also be talking about some new features in this edition of 3DMark, which look impressive, particularly the High Dynamic Range and Shader Model 3.0 additions.
45 Comments
View All Comments
MrKaz - Wednesday, January 18, 2006 - link
That means that R580 will boom GTX512 like X1800XT gets boomed by it now.4 X1600 cores (R580) will give some 6855 total score, not bad…
defter - Saturday, January 21, 2006 - link
"That means that R580 will boom GTX512 like X1800XT gets boomed by it now."Here are some X1900XT benchmarks: http://www.overclockers.ru/images/news/2006/01/21/...">http://www.overclockers.ru/images/news/2006/01/21/...
They used a faster CPU, but if we ignore the CPU tests results should be comparable with Anand's results:
PS2.0 score:
X1900XT (625/1450) with FX-60: 2081
7800GTX 512 with FX-55: 2167
X1800XT with FX-55: 1611
PS3.0 score:
X1900XT (625/1450) with FX-60: 2279
7800GTX 512 with FX-55: 2204
X1800XT with FX-55: 1697
X1900XT seems to be a little slower than 7800GTX 512 while X1900XTX should be a little faster. In any case the difference is only 2-3%.
defter - Thursday, January 19, 2006 - link
"4 X1600 cores (R580) will give some 6855 total score, not bad"Will R580 have 4x memory bandwidth? X1600XT has 22GB/s of memory bandwidth.
I wouldn't call X1600XT scores very impressive. X1600XT is running at 590MHz core/590MHz memory and with 12 pipelines is 34% faster than 500MHz core/500MHz memory 8 pipeline 6600 GT (which is 1.5 years old chip).
Boushh - Tuesday, June 19, 2012 - link
I came across this old 3DMark06 and thought: why not test it with my current setup and see how it does against the fastest cards of early 2006 ?The result is actualy shocking:
Total: 14301
SM2.0: 6180
SM3.0: 7886
CPU: 2780
It's not that I have any kind of super game machine. It's just a WindowsXP machine with an Intel E-7600 and a Nvidia 560 Ti. Not overclocked or anything.
That is roughly tripple the score. And not even tested on an high-end system B-)
Thanks for letting my add a comment to this old post Anandtech, many sites do not allow that.
If any one else reads this, please take the time to test your setup as well. If not, I may be back in a few years and test again :-)
Boushh - Tuesday, August 11, 2015 - link
And I'm back again !!Now the test was done with the same system, but with a GeForce GTX760. Oddly enough, the scores are lower ?
Total: 12295
SM2.0: 5342
SM3.0: 6031
CPU: 2785
I had at least expected double the score or something like that B-(
l, let's see how it goes when I have a new card....