Post Your 3DMark Vantage Score!

I am hopping that they put this product in with every video card and mobo I buy, kind of like 3dmark 06 does with all my high end asus boards.
 
2449507457_732f8264dc.jpg


theses were taken with fraps which only takes .bmp, so converted to jpg. even so, they are around 3mb each so i just put links. i will post my results in a little while with gx2 and then quad sli.




click on each shot for full size.

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3182/2449505799_784889a496_o.jpg

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2078/2450331098_016133e911_o.jpg

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2163/2450331424_1432a2f99e_o.jpg

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3172/2449506257_865513ac32_o.jpg

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3259/2449506403_9fa89e0153_o.jpg

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2164/2449506527_33b768747d_o.jpg

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2094/2449506659_cafc76b602_o.jpg

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2201/2450332072_acc2e50fb9_o.jpg

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3106/2449506943_283fc2ab62_o.jpg

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3168/2450332320_7484c0c893_o.jpg

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3237/2450332570_422afcff46_o.jpg

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3024/2449507457_bcea15150f_o.jpg

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3265/2450332858_28911bffd9_o.jpg

cpu test1
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3011/2450333050_f76cf88de8_o.jpg

cpu test2 physics
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2398/2449507931_05180407fc_o.jpg

features test shaders
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3012/2449508231_da257f051c_o.jpg
 
P5158 3DMarks
System Score 9269
CPU SCORE 8639
GRAPHICS SCORE 4547


what score do we go buy the system score or the one P5158 score?


my specs, could do better if i overclock

Q6600 GO @ stock 2.4ghz
8800GTX @ stock
ABIT IP35 PRO
4GB RAM
VISTA64 SP1
2X WD 150GB RAPTOR RAID 0
 
vanilla_guerilla said:
theses were taken with fraps which only takes .bmp, so converted to jpg. even so, they are around 3mb each so i just put links. i will post my results in a little while with gx2 and then quad sli.
Click to expand...

FRAPS will save in JPG, PNG, bitmap (BMP), and Targa (TGA) formats.

fraps_screenshotspanel.png
 
Looks like shite, runs like shite. Massive disappointment. I'll link my scores in a bit after the last set runs through, but honestly, if I could make them give me my $20 back I would, no question. 2 tests when every previous version has had 4+... and both tests look no better (hell, the first looks /horrible/ and runs worse than the second) than the previous versions. The ragtroll test in 03 looked better than either of the current CPU tests. Plus I can't see scores locally, not to mention there are advertisements at the bottom of the main window even though I paid for the app. I'm never making this mistake again. Futuremark totally blew it with this -- they got absolutely nothing right..
 
vanilla_guerilla said:
only if you pay $37 for it.
Click to expand...

Oh, well I did... probably one of the best pieces of software I can say I legally own. :)



Anyway I agree with short-circuit and several others here. Vantage appears to be not only slow and crappily coded, but also fails miserably to deliver on the eye candy. I like eye candy. GPU stressing and eye candy is one of the only things 3DMark has remained useful for over the past few years and looks like they just took a big ole shit on it.

And you've got to be kidding me with this 'you can only benchmark once' bullshit....


If you go to Futuremark's headquarters today you can hear screams of pain coming from all over.... know what that's from? It's because they all just shot themselves in their collective foot! Sheesh!
 
silent-circuit said:
Looks like shite, runs like shite. Massive disappointment. I'll link my scores in a bit after the last set runs through, but honestly, if I could make them give me my $20 back I would, no question. 2 tests when every previous version has had 4+... and both tests look no better (hell, the first looks /horrible/ and runs worse than the second) than the previous versions. The ragtroll test in 03 looked better than either of the current CPU tests. Plus I can't see scores locally, not to mention there are advertisements at the bottom of the main window even though I paid for the app. I'm never making this mistake again. Futuremark totally blew it with this -- they got absolutely nothing right..
Click to expand...

I agree and ask them for a refund!
 
So what happens after your "one time use" is up? Like seriously I normally have all of the 3DMark tools on my system just to run them periodically out of boredom, however if its "run it once and then uninstall it" that is pretty frigging retarded. 3DMark in its various versions has always been a decent way to check to make sure that new driver is installed correctly and everything too. I even paid $20 for the 05 version for some reason too.

They are missing the ENTIRE point of their benchmark if they take away the ability for people to like, I dunno, run banchmarks and compare results... :( If people can not even compare their own system results of various tweaks, who the hell is going to use it to compare with other people online? I can't wait to be like "Yeah this was my old score before I OCed my CPU and added SLI to the system. Too bad I can not run it again..." Since the free version sucks, it give people less of a reason to pay for the higher end versions.

Also those CPU Test screenshots look like ass. Wow... And look how bad this whole scene looks:

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2163/2450331424_1432a2f99e_o.jpg

That is straight out of 2004...
 
ocellaris said:
So what happens after your "one time use" is up? Like seriously I normally have all of the 3DMark tools on my system just to run them periodically out of boredom, however if its "run it once and then uninstall it" that is pretty frigging retarded. 3DMark in its various versions has always been a decent way to check to make sure that new driver is installed correctly and everything too. I even paid $20 for the 05 version for some reason too.

They are missing the ENTIRE point of their benchmark if they take away the ability for people to like, I dunno, run banchmarks and compare results... :( If people can not even compare their own system results of various tweaks, who the hell is going to use it to compare with other people online? I can't wait to be like "Yeah this was my old score before I OCed my CPU and added SLI to the system. Too bad I can not run it again..." Since the free version sucks, it give people less of a reason to pay for the higher end versions.

Also those CPU Test screenshots look like ass. Wow... And look how bad this whole scene looks:

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2163/2450331424_1432a2f99e_o.jpg

That is straight out of 2004...
Click to expand...

OMG! That was aweful! Fuck, HL2 looks better than that.

What were they thinking?!?! (AVGN style) :D
 
X3220 quad core @3.6Ghz (450Mhz FSB, 8x multi -- 9x is default so 3Dmark assumes 4.05Ghz. Good job Futuremark!)
2x 8800 GTX @ stock in SLI with stock cooling, Force AFR 2
XFX 780i SLI motherboard
4GB Patriot Extreme Performance DDR2-800 4-4-4-12 2T 2.1vdimm
Forceware 175.12 BETA
Windows Vista Ultimate 64bit

E24413 http://service.futuremark.com/compare?3dmv=15748
P10173 http://service.futuremark.com/compare?3dmv=14379
H6759 http://service.futuremark.com/compare?3dmv=14998
X4221 http://service.futuremark.com/compare?3dmv=16429

Disappointment across the board.
 
DX10? That first graphics test looked worse than when I played HL2 in DX7 mode. Im sorry but I really dont get this as a modern benchmark because the graphics are hideous.
 
3DMarks P10254
CPU 13346
Graphics 9519

I don't know why everybody is bitching... I paid $20 for the last "advanced" version of 06.
Seven bucks really isn't that big a deal for software that a lot of us run to check our cards and performance... (I know its not a REAL game, I DO check and test with those as well)

If you don't like 3DMark... don't buy it. They give you a free single use... run it and if it sucks... don't buy it.

Is it the greatest thing ever... no. However, I thought the space battle in the asteroids looked really cool... I wanted to see what happen's next.

Just my thoughts.
 
RangerSVT said:
Why is it a waste of download? You ran their benchmarks, enjoyed the visuals, got your score, not uninstall it and stop bitching. It was free, wasn't it? :confused::rolleyes:
Click to expand...
Maybe he was disappointed in the shitty benchmark and you gotta love those fine DX10 visuals...lol. Whether its free or not has nothing to do with it being a waste of time.
 
cannondale06 said:
Maybe he was disappointed in the shitty benchmark and you gotta love those fine DX10 visuals...lol. Whether its free or not has nothing to do with it being a waste of time.
Click to expand...

This is true. Ad-Aware is free, but it's a waste of time. :p

This program seems to be a Crysis wanna-be, only worse due to the adds and one-time use. At least with Crysis the only real problem was the programming.

Damn, only one use though. Also, the DX10 was aweful. If that's what true DX10 games are going to look like, I'd say it's time to go back to DX8.1, even that looks (and runs) better.

As said on the last page, those graphics look like they're from 2004, and it's the truth. Doom 3's visuals are waaay better and that game is ancient (DX9.0b and OpenGL) in comparison.

Also as said before, complete utter waste of everyone's time. For those who spent the money: get a refund!
 
3DMark Score: P5037
CPU Score: 4794
Graphics Score: 5124

Running with the new FW 175.12 betas on nVidia's site. Vista 64 with sp1.

Not a very pretty demo in my opinion. Definitely runs like a hog on my machine, but then again, I suppose that's what it's suppose to do.
 
the screenshots that i posted earlier were only from the performance benchmark, which is 12x10, no aa/af. also, they were dumbed down during the conversion. the benchmark in the extreme version is very beautiful.

21673 in entry
http://service.futuremark.com/compare?3dmv=18113

9537 in performance
http://service.futuremark.com/compare?3dmv=14496

my marks are kind of low. actually my cpu marks are higher than comparable machines, but my vid marks are way lower thatn other 9800gx2's. i must be doing something wrong. i will do a clean install later, which i havent done since i got the second gx2 anyway, then bench quad sli. quad sli results from 3dmark05 and 06 are actually lower than 1 gx2, i hope that glitch has been fixed with this release. there is already an ati "hotfix" to give better marks to ati cards.
 
LMAO, free one time use or pay 6.95, and just to think they get to pwn the 3dmark data you create for them and resell it for even more money to whoever wants to buy it.

No thanks, I will pass again, and even stay very far away from it...
 
So the benchmarks are ugly and boring.. the 2006 version had much more stimulating visuals. And they also essentially put a purchase requirement on it. Did Futuremark jump the shark?
 
3DMark Score P6276 3DMarks
CPU Score 8202
Graphics Score 5820

Vista 64
E3110 @ 4.1
8800GTX
 
Zardoz said:
LMAO, free one time use or pay 6.95, and just to think they get to pwn the 3dmark data you create for them and resell it for even more money to whoever wants to buy it.

No thanks, I will pass again, and even stay very far away from it...
Click to expand...

Agreed, they got so much money for all that data they got on 3dmark06...

ferr said:
So the benchmarks are ugly and boring.. the 2006 version had much more stimulating visuals. And they also essentially put a purchase requirement on it. Did Futuremark jump the shark?
Click to expand...

Yeah, i feel that this new one really doesnt deliver like 3dmark06 did ESPECIALLY with the Canyon flight, its almost unbeatable. I just dont think that Vantage was a success as they put it out to be.

Anyways, heres my crummy score because i dont have 4GPUs or TRiSLi... not like they're really getting 5X the performance in game that i am based on these scores. :rolleyes:

http://service.futuremark.com/home.action?resultId=20050&resultType=19
 
RangerSVT said:
Yeah right, I believe 0.01% of that.:D
Click to expand...

I swear! :)





And I fully admit to not paying for a lot of software, but FRAPS is so damned useful to me it was worth every penny. I use it constantly for recording real time full resolution video of my gaming sessions, works awesome on a dual core or quad core machine.

Heh... It's kind of ironic to post about a REAL useful benchmarking tool for REAL games in a 3DMark thread. :D
 
3DMark Score
P4178
CPU Score
3633
Graphics Score
4397

Ok. I guess?
 
XpediencY said:
what are those E, P, X, H?
Click to expand...

E = Entry level (really low res, many options disabled, for weaker hardware)
P = Performance level (medium-low res, medium quality, no disabled options)
H = High level (medium-high res, high quality, no disabled options, 2x AA, AF)
X = Extreme level (high res, high quality, no disabled options, 4x AA, more AF)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top