3DMark 05 Released

new scores.

AMD 3200xp
1gb ram 3200
6800 ultra OC to 550 mhz (66.70 drivers)

5436 score.

1097 with P4 2.4c@3.0, 1gb XMS LL, GF 5900XT @ 450/800 :(

More screens. "6800 Ultra: 1600x1024/4AA/16AF"

http://www.rage3d.com/board/showthread.php?t=33783916

this software is worst shit ever. unbiased - full of alienware ads etc..

awesome....well it crashes after cpu test1 telling me "|direct3ddevice9::drawindexedprimitive failed: out of video memory (d3derr_outofvideomemory)"

well i have a radeon 9800pro with 128mb
but people with a radeon 9700 are posting their results here, what am i doing wrong?

wtf...after the first scene with the blimp, just when you think it's going to load the next test the blimp scene starts over at a really, really low resolution running at like 1fps.

i have a 6800 GT btw.

OK so... I installed 3D Mark 2005 and.... well... The whole screen froze on the first test where the chaingun guy owns everyone.
My second try was a little funny. Before it even reached the chaingun guy, my screen turns black and my montior kindly asked me to "please check signal cable". What the hell is this benchmark doing to my video card?

A64 3000+
X800 Pro (Stock clocks) Cat 4.9
Directx 9c
Windows 2k (all updated)

How can it give you a final score if it doesn't run all the tests in the non-registered version? I take it all the scores people are reporting here are invalid or unofficial since they're not running the complete benchmark.

OMG that dude totally found the Lost Ark!!!

There's something I've noticed on certain games when my system is stressed, including this bookmark.

Even though the fps is under 5 or so, the benchmark "lurches".. like it's being pulled and stopped. I've seen what 5 fps looks like before, and it's consistent...

With the benchmark, it looks like I'm getting 5 fps, but the graphics pull and tear on the screen, sometimes pausing, making it look like it's lower than 5 and not updating smoothly at 5 fps.

Anyone else getting this? When I crank the details up on Joint Ops and run at 1600x1200, the same exact thing happens.

Is this how all graphic cards are behaving now when they get stressed out, or is it possible there's something in my config which is causing it to be worse than it should? I have fast write on with sideband addressing, and I even upped the agp aperature to 256 (I have 786 megs of ddr).

Ages ago, I remember playing Quake 1 on a 486 and I got around 5-6 fps, but it seemed consistent... it didn't lurch and tug like my system now does whenever it's really tacked out. It seems also that this only happens with Direct3D... OpenGL doesn't exhibit the same behavior when the framerate is super-low.

P4 2.4 @ 2.7
Geil Pc3200 DDR
Abit BG7
Geforce FX 5900
sblive

Seeing this makes me realize even more how much Doom3 wasn't the visual shock many people expected it to be when it came out.. Should it have been released last year the story would have been different; but now we've seen the Unreal3 demos, the nVidia/Ati/Whatever tech demos, even 3DMark04, and we've just been spoiled.. Though none of that is an actual game yet sitting on our shelves yet, that kinda diminished the effect.
In the end what I found the most impressive in D3 were the designs and assets, but the renderer itself isn't anymore the 'double click doom3.exe to have an attack' kind of thing that is was at E3 2002.
(It still is IMHO the best game renderer available, and will be for still a while.)

Here's the official list of what cards should be able to run 3DMark05:

http://discuss.futuremark.com/forum/showflat.pl?Cat=&Board=monext3dmark&Number=4426993&page=0&view=collapsed&sb=5&o=0&fpart=1

oh yeah,

LOVE the graphics in that first shoot scene, almost first time i've had a game give off that "oh shi that looks real" effect with so much oomph.

But for fs, why are those cpu tests in there. they make the whole thing run thrice as long and are practically useless.

Not sure what's going on here, but after the first sea monster test, it tries to run it (followed by the sci-fi test) again, but has difficulties making it through the "Please Wait" screen and showing some sort of distortion before running the test very very slowly. Like 1fps slowly.

P4 2.8
GF 6800GT
1GB RAM

What's going on?

Score: 219

P4 Prescott 3.0 @ 3.6 GHz
Integraded Intel 81915G Chipset

;)

So, I am confused. The benchmark runs marginally well for me at 1024, but at 640 it bags completely.

Is this game not coded well/ optimized or something? Doom3 looks almost as good if not just as good yet it runs fine on most people's PC's (the marines in that demo). Reason im blaming the 3dmark for running badly (rather than my computer) is that on my old comp ut2003 runs faster than half life.

it's not running all the tests!!!

I'm using cat 9.4, and got x800 XT PE

help!?!?

haha, out of video memory on the second test.

Guess I'm going to have to raise my apperature size

Anyone got a link for the newest ATI beta drivers?

So if you've got a Ge Force, are you supposed to turn all the sliders to "High Performance", and then also disable AA, AF, and Vsync? That would tend to give better performance in games. Just wondering if thats whats considered the norm, or if its kind of cheating

On my amd 2600+, 1.5gb of ram, 9800 pro, i get 1657.
On my amd 3500+, 1gb of ram, x800 pro, i get 3957.

Something is wrong :(

Hmmmm, I have an x800Pro clocked at 500 core, and 550 mem, athlon xp 2500+ clocked at 3200+, with 1gig pc3200 generic RAM, cat version 4.9.

After running the test, it crashes at the same point each time (after the troops get inside and one lines up by a corner by a red light), I get the following error:

"IDirect3DDevice9: :Present failed: Device lost (D3DERR_DEVICELOST)"

Anyone else getting the same thing?

It turned my computer off in the middle of the Serpent test. WTF?

Has anyone that has an ATI card tried with omega and then non omega? Im curious to see how they work as ive never installed them,

3dmark score: 4324

AXP 2500+ @ 2.4GHz
1GB PC4000 DDR500
X800 XT @ 500/500 (4.9 cats)
FSB @ 400mhz (200mhz)

http://www.personal.psu.edu/users/d/j/djp211/images/nosse.gif

Oh, burned!

I hope some 3d coder hacks the shaders down so I can actually watch this... I know it's a benchmark, I'm just curious to see what it looks like at >5 fps

4584 3DMarks

P4 2.4 @ 3ghz HT enabled
6800 GT @ 400/1100 (66.70 drivers)
WinXP SP2

4226 with a p4 2.8, 1gb ddr, bfg 6800 gt oc

how's the graphics? i saw a pic of a guy or something with a rocket launcher and it seemed to be very detailed.

nforce 2 mobo
3200 Athlon XP
1gb 3200 ram
geforce 6800 ultra

score = 4075

Should I even bother with my GF 3 ti200 and XP1800+ ?

Does this even run on a geforce4?

e-penis:

4292

3400+ A64
x800pro @525/515

Not surprised to see ATI up top in a battle of shaders. Here's hoping Nvidia rewrites from scratch for the next family of GPUs, again

3dmark score: 2480

XP 2400 @ 2600+ (2.2ghz roughly)
1gb PC400
Radeon 9800 Pro 128 (4.9)
FSB @ 380mhz (190mhz)

Pretty cool benchmark. A real machine breaker.