Do I have a problem?

[MGDMN]

Ok so I bought a new card last week. I upgraded from an ATI 512mb 4870 to a 1gb 4890. Both are HIS brand, which I assume is insignificant since its gonna be the same card no matter who's brand name is on it. My main question is this; although I definitely notice an improvement in every game that I have played, with being to max the AA and AF, why is there such a small increase in my 3dmark06 score? I know, I know, 3dmark is all bullshit and doesnt replicate real game play, but I still would have thought I would see much more of a difference in the score. With the 512mb 4870 I received about 15000 3dmarks and with the 4890 I I got 16200. Not much of a difference. What im really asking is do I have a problem since im scoring so low, or should I not worry? I keeo everything at stock speeds so im sure that has a major impact on my score, but I still expected to see higher. Thanks all for looking.

 

[risqu3]

simple answer: because 3dmark is useless.
advanced answer: because 3dmark sucks.

 

[RADEoN]

Futuremark products suck in general.

At 4,200 mhz, my PC will reboot in when opening Vantage, I can run Prime95 for 10-12 hours without a single hitch...

 

[evilsofa]

With the 512mb 4870 I received about 15000 3dmarks and with the 4890 I I got 162000. Not much of a difference.

Wow, an improvement over 10 times isn't enough for you? I kid, I know that's just a typo.

The real answer is that the default setting for 3dmark06 is at 1280x1024 with no AA. This overemphasizes CPU performance, and likely bears no resemblance whatsoever to the settings you game at. Video cards behave completely differently at 1280x1024 with no AA than they do at, for example, 1920x1200 with 4xAA.

 

[Jalidi]

Upgrading from a 3850 to a 4890 yielded me an increase from 10.7K to 12.3K. So I'd say your results are pretty normal considering the low resolution of 3dmark06.

 

[FoxhoundOp]

although I definitely notice an improvement in every game that I have played, with being to max the AA and AF.

Stopped reading here.

THIS IS ALL THAT MATTERS

 

[Brent_Justice]

3DMark takes your CPU into account for performance, you'll actually find graphics don't affect the score as much as you would think. 3DMark is more of a system benchmark, than of a graphics one. To test video card performance, use games.

 

[sirmonkey1985]

3DMark takes your CPU into account for performance, you'll actually find graphics don't affect the score as much as you would think. 3DMark is more of a system benchmark, than of a graphics one. To test video card performance, use games.

yup.. exactly... when i went from using my amd x2 be-2350@ 3.0ghz to my 940 @ 3.5ghz.. my 3dmark score jumped 14k points.. with my 8800GT going from 600/1500/900 to 760/1890/1025 my score jumped a whole 100 points (the difference with the gpu was the same with the be-2350 and the 940 so i was never cpu limited during either tests).. the overclock alone changed the avg frame rate from 30 to 60.. so you would expect a much much higher score, right?

just gives you an idea of how little 3dmark06 even accounts for your gfx card in the scoring with the default settings..

 

[MGDMN]

Ok, I expected alot of sarcastic answers and I did get alot of them but you guys also answered my question, 3dmark is pretty useless. Thanks.

 

[Jalidi]

Ok, I expected alot of sarcastic answers and I did get alot of them but you guys also answered my question, 3dmark is pretty useless. Thanks.

No, I have to disagree. 3DMark06 is very useful for me, but for my own testing purposes only. The rest of my system being identical, it allows me to roughly estimate the computational power of one upgrade over another, and also to identify problems if one score is drastically changed from the next. Plus when I'm running stability tests, I always benchmark that to check for graphical anomalies especially when I'm overclocking. It's useful. But it's how you use it and imho it's a good diagnostic tool for troubleshooting.