For all your guys out there wishing to get the best performance out of your PC's and to see how good they really are humming along, Future Mark have released 3DMark05, the latest incarnation of their benchmarking series of applications.
New Features of 3DMark05 include:
- Full support for Microsoft DirectX 9.0c.
- Supporting the latest pixel- and vertex shader models (2.0, 2.a, 2.b and 3.0).
- Three new game tests, all requiring hardware for DirectX 9.0 with support for pixel shader 2.0 or higher.
- Two CPU tests, the other one presenting a multithreaded AI implementation, especially suitable for virtual or physical multiprocessor systems.
- New feature and batch size tests.
- New and improved image, filtering and anti-aliasing quality tools.
- New graph tool for in-depth performance analysis.
- The ultimate showcase of Windows-based real-time 3D graphics: Dazzling demo with original soundtrack.
tried this one out as i had my fingers already on previous versions of this benchmark but this one was just... arg... soooo crap.
the scene quality is kinda poor. not due to the models or objects used in the scene (particle effects are nice) but there is just like overbrighted chromatic texturing everywhere. it looks more like a n00b fiddled around with chromatic maps than an artist using it wisely.
the nature scene is also rather poor and boring. i especially asked myself where they drained the FPS rated in this one as there has been nothing special in that scene that could not be done with todays technic cheaper.
and the final canyon sequence was also pained by a complete overbright. i donno if somebody wanted to simulate fog or such but the result is that you can't see **** in the scene... it's nearly all white.
facit: for sure one of the poorer 3dmarks i've seen so far due to artistical lack and overusage of chromatic and brightening. paired with an insane demand on the CPU/GPU that seems to to be justified by what you see on the screen.
Screenshots are at: Futuremark.com
Are those somewhat like what you saw? If not, maybe it doesn't like your card...
Just wondering, since those screenies don't look too bad to me!
When I look at them screenies its like "OMGZ IM AT TEH MOVIES!"
The system requirements are O_O whoa, like I can't even meet the minimums! lol
Erm, dragonlord, are you looking at a different benchmark? Cause what I saw was amazing. Especially the monster in the airship one :D
It would be nice to have a fps higher than 1 while watching it though :/
The scenes are the same but on the other hand not. I only had three scenes in this demo I got my hands on, the Battle Scene, the Nature Scene and the Canyon Scene.
In my version the Mini-Gun Bot has merly a gray-white skin with completly over-stressed chromatic effect. But this can be due to screenshots beeing still images and in motion certain effects don't really show I guess. I would like to see a screenshot of the defending guys as they've looked the most crappy.
The Nature Scene looks more like what I had but the moonlite fakeing has not been that stressed.
Also show a screenshot of the water creature as in my version it was more or less only a texture applied which is not a 'whoa' effect. but the annoying mist/fog is not in those screenshots. maybe the screens are from a bought copy? It can be that in my demo version something misses but that an annoying fos/mist is in that should be missing on those screens is really strange as a demo version usually misses stuff, not the retail one.
anyways. i've got a Radeon 9800 and 256MB of RAM on the board so I don't think that I should get killed in that test easily. I had around 5FPS so more than others with (probably) better graphics, which I would consider strange.
There is something wrong with your version :/
Img.photobucket.com