3Dmark2004 Preview!

[saaya]

http://www.xtremesystems.org/module...e=article&sid=718&mode=thread&order=0&thold=0

cool eh?
looks really really nice , but the extremely low fps even with a 3.6ghz prescott and 6800gt are scary

 

[joemama]

Yeah, should be fun to play around with. Remember when 3DMark03 first came out? The high end cards at the time also choked..

 

[jon_k]

Yeah, should be fun to play around with. Remember when 3DMark03 first came out? The high end cards at the time also choked..

It is only a beta though, but wow those graphics look sweet.

 

[Mincemeat]

It will create simply more controversy. Good for seeing what your card is capable of, but otherwise useless for real world analysis. Stick to benching games you will bePLAYING like Doom 3 and HL2 and Far Cry. Good news, but nothing exciting.

 

[NoGodForMe]

I always like seeing the eye candy.
Yes, many review sites are moving towards real game benchmarks, but having one bechmark at 1024x768x32 still matters to people. Plus it's simple to install, versus an entire game.

Reading game benchmarks can be confusing and hard to remember. They are done in many resolutions with different AA/AF settings. There needs to be a set standard for game benchmarks. I'd vote for 1280x1024x32 in pure mode at high detail (holy Sheit mode).

Fans will still run 3dMark03 and 3dMark04 because everyone can identify with the default run. Game benchmarks need to have a "default" standard set so everyone can identify with them. UT2K4 has one, with "holy Sheit" when you put everything up on high. D3 would be default high, but now the res needs to be agreed upon.

It's almost as if games need a default benchmark setting so everyone can be on the same playing field and relate to each other.