Holy CRAP......NV40's 3dMark03 Score = 12,535!

defiant

Limp Gawd
Joined
Jun 14, 2003
Messages
461
According to the inquirer

http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=15169

"IF PEOPLE - read the ATi fanboyz who bothered to flame us - thought we were overconfident in this article, estimating the huge performance jump Nvidia were going to make when introducing its sixteen pipeline NV40, then they're going to have to think again.
Numerous sources have confirmed that a Futuremark 3DMark 2003 score of12,535 has apparently been demonstrated by Nvidia on its pre-production engineering samples.

To put this in perspective, this story is brought to you by a tweaked AMD Athlon 64 FX system based on a Gigabyte GA-K8NNXP-940 mainboard with 1GB of Corsair XMS DDR, and is equipped with the current king of 3D gaming cards, an ATI Radeon 9800XT. This rock steady, real-world system benches a strong 7382 under 3DMark 2003 Build 340 at default settings, and indeed anything that can deliver a score over 7000 is pretty rapid.

Squatting on top of Futuremark's Top 20 'Hall of Fame'ous willy wavers is a heavily overclocked 4.5GHz P4 – seeming to need freezing to -85ºC to attain this frequency - with a well overclocked ATi Radeon 9800XT. This system, apparently, marks up a score of 10,008.

So, if what we're hearing about Nvidia's NV40 is true, then its sixth generation desktop 3D graphics accelerator is shaping up to be mighty.

Of course we can hear the critics cry "how come the last Futuremark 'Approved Drivers' to be used with Build 340 of 3DMark03 with Nvidia 3D accelerators are the ageing version ForceWare 52.16?"

That's a good question as these were released way back in October 2003, and the current Nvidia Forceware 56.72 was released just last week on April 1st., and the fourth driver release since the 52.16's which Futuremark have not approved for 3DMark03.

And we agree – this does cast some doubts on the validity of any 3DMark03 score achieved with any later Nvidia device driver, but today's news sure is more than interesting.

In back rooms at the CeBIT Messe, we heard talk of 3DMark03 scores of "over 10,000 3DMarks" for both ATI's R420 and Nvidia's NV40 but, for various reasons, we weren't particularly confident in our source. However, in light of today's news, we'll mention that that same source said that the ATI R420 was somewhat slower, though "not by much".

Sources close to ATI have said that a score of 10,000 3DMarks for ATi R420 "would be a dream", indicating that R420 Revision: CeBIT 2K4 wasn't pulling this level of numbers.

Perhaps we should all now be expecting briefings by Nvidia's competitors that 3DMark03 isn't now a valid indicator of 3D graphics performance?"

Even though people are moving away from futuremark thats still a damn impressive number! I know people will point to the fact that it is the inquirer.....but damn I hope that theyre right this time!
 
Perhaps we should all now be expecting briefings by Nvidia's competitors that 3DMark03 isn't now a valid indicator of 3D graphics performance?

That line was classy, though.

Yes, you may rest assured, if nVidia does beat ATI on 3dMark03, they WILL support it as an approved benchmark.
 
God i wish threads like this would die(According to the IQ this card has had just about every combination of pipeline and 3dwank scores nown to man.
Yet there has not been one bit of concrete proof to any of this:rolleyes:
 
I am sure with optimized drivers you gould have a Geforce 3 with that score in 3DMARK 2003?

Who cares?
 
Originally posted by oqvist
I am sure with optimized drivers you gould have a Geforce 3 with that score in 3DMARK 2003?

Who cares?

A GF3 cant reach 12.5k in 3dmark03.
 
Originally posted by oqvist
With optimised drivers I am sure it can ;)

Are you thinking of 3dmark 2001 SE scores or 3dmark03 scores? A GF3 cant hit 12.5k in 3dmark03, but perhaps in 3dmark2001 SE.
 
what he is trying to get at is that with the correct optimizations and tweaking and tailoring a piece of turd could be shown to reach 12.5k in 3dm2k3. Not likely of course...but its the principle that he was trying to illustrate.
 
<speculation>

maybe ATI can write some hack ass drivers that 3dmark wont support and get 20,000 3dmarks!

who gives a shit, their hardware isnt supported by 3dmark, so theyre probably not rending out the entire scenes..

</speculation>
 
This is a dead horse...

3DMark was determined a while back to mean Jack Crap... Plus... it's the Inquirer...

:p :rolleyes:
 
Originally posted by Syphon Filter
what he is trying to get at is that with the correct optimizations and tweaking and tailoring a piece of turd could be shown to reach 12.5k in 3dm2k3. Not likely of course...but its the principle that he was trying to illustrate.

Yup it´s not like nVidia hasn´t done it before... I don´t think the NV40 will be a turd but they sure will try everything to help the numbers.
 
ok mybe it can hit 12k in 3d03 ... its only a test!!

9700 get only 4900 ... and fx5900 gets 5200...

but it not make the fx a better card!! :eek:
 

What a valid comparison, what are you trying to prove here?

And this article is nice, especially when the article talks about

read the ATi fanboyz who bothered to flame us - thought we were overconfident in this article

When the article is the exact definition of overconfidence.

And also keep in mind the 3dmark01 scores all over the internet of >20000 before the release of the NV40
 
all i can say is


"look out ATI" it seems ATI will will or cant no longer hold its place!!
 
Originally posted by SnakEyez187
What a valid comparison, what are you trying to prove here?


Its not a comparison, he claimed that he would rather play farcry and thus implied that he would rather know about the NV40's performance in that particular game. So I posted a quote from Uttar who allegedly knows someone with access to a NV40. All speculation, but speculation is fun :D
 
Originally posted by yoda123
all i can say is


"look out ATI" it seems ATI will will or cant no longer hold its place!!

I hope you're wearing flame proof underwear ;)
 
Look at all the ATI damage control :rolleyes:

News from The Inquirer is usually very accurate if it comes close to the launch of the product in question. Remember how they were one of the first to break the news that the first Prescotts would generally run hotter AND slower than Northwood P4s??? You had the Intel fanboys crying about that one, too, all the way until release.

I'd put down money that the NV40 is going to be the top GPU this round.
 
I currently own a 9800pro but dam if the new Nidia card is that fast I want to buy one!
 
Originally posted by yoda123
all i can say is


"look out ATI" it seems ATI will will or cant no longer hold its place!!

All I can say is:

What the heck is that supposed to mean? That jumbled mess of a sentence makes my head hurt.
 
Originally posted by ThisMonsterLives
Somehow I would rather play Far Cry than 3DMark :p

me too

i can't believe people still care about 3dmark numbers, its been proven time and time again it isn't reliable as a benchmark, and really doesn't say how a card is going to perform in real games
 
3DMark is only good to test the stability of your graphics OC nowadays.

The more I OC the core on my 9600 Pro the more 3dmarks I get, but when in actual games the only thing that helps real performance is memory OCing.
 
I could see it very easily being true. (I'm not saying it is true or not)

Add some 1200Mhz DDR3, and even a conservatively clocked 8x1 core from anyone should get some insane fillrate numbers in DX7&8 (it wont hurt DX9 either)

Fillrate is not everything though... The added latency of DDR2 &3 designs may not end up in being so good for games. High throughput memory with slow latency are great for things like SETI and Folding calcs when its main memory, and DVD/HDTV decoding and demo loops with video memory. But it would normally suck for something that is random like gaming (most calculations are "fresh" and not predicatable, which totally kills the advantage DDR2/3 has which is long unaltered data streams)

For main memory, I think gamers will still prefer 400Mhz DDR cas 2 to 800Mhz DDR2 cas 4... Benchmarks will say the DDR2 is faster, but gamers will eventually find out, only time will tell...

I like the rumour that the NV40 has 24-bit FP finally, which means that it is DX9 compatible. No special software coding path needed.

What I think is going to happen is Nvidia will sell a few choice DDR3 cards. While ATi will continue to use *conservative* memory choices and cooling requirements in the majority of their cards, with one at the top to compete at the peak.
 
Cuz its a long way off until either side makes an announcement on the 14th...

And I need a break in between UT2004 sessions... Oh well, back to the game :)
 
Originally posted by Brent
me too

i can't believe people still care about 3dmark numbers, its been proven time and time again it isn't reliable as a benchmark, and really doesn't say how a card is going to perform in real games

Yes it really shows something when the nVidia advertized Far Cry gets spanked by the Radeons ;)

To bad Far Cry spanked my 9800 PRO so much it died on me :p
 
Originally posted by VIOLENCE FACTOR
...........please............kill...............Inquirer.............God........please........ :(


You arn't the only one with these feelings :mad:
 
Originally posted by yoda123
all i can say is


"look out ATI" it seems ATI will will or cant no longer hold its place!!

Read my sig...Nvidia said that when they were only going against the 9700 pro...the 9800 series wasn't even in the air..mmmm those words are tasty. When Nvidia beats ATI like all you guys claim then I'll shutup , but as of now ATI holds the crown and all this he said she said BS won't sway my dollar to be spend on a future product I know nothing about. Just my .02
 
Originally posted by ZenOps
I like the rumour that the NV40 has 24-bit FP finally, which means that it is DX9 compatible. No special software coding path needed.


NV30 was DX9 compatible, FP24 was the minimum requirenment for DX9 PS/VS 2.0 and NV30 supported FP32 having more than was required for DX9 in that feature.
 
the latencies in gddr3 are higher but it like its ddr2 desktop bretheren sports 4 bit prefetch, so while it can't do as many reads or writes, it does bigger ones.
 
"IF" those numbers are true and "IF" those numbers hold up in games as well relative to R420, then I will definitely be getting a NV40. But if it's all hype and rumours then I will be pretty upset at nVidia and the Inqwell for getting my hopes up.
 
Originally posted by Particleman
"IF" those numbers are true and "IF" those numbers hold up in games as well relative to R420, then I will definitely be getting a NV40. But if it's all hype and rumours then I will be pretty upset at nVidia and the Inqwell for getting my hopes up.

Why not getting a R420 and be sure to get top performance ;)

I have seen the same for both the NV30 or NV35 so it´s no risk for me getting caught by nVidias market team ;) NV40 may be good but I need hard proof before I believe it. After all the NV30 looked great on paper.
 
Back
Top