Total Frustration! - Toms hardware CPU Chart is useless!

Hi Tom! I hope you'r reading! :roll:

My frustration comes to your CPU benchmark on:
3dsmax "Dragon_Character" - It's useless

Its the test found here:

3DsMax uses different renderes (calculataion methods for processing images), the two most common are called "Scanline" and "Mental Ray".

You are testing on a scene, that is rendering in Scanline. That means that the benchmark is ONLY testing a Single cpu or the first Core!!!

The Differences:
Scanline does NOT support multiprocessor or Dual Core or Any fancy CPU features.

Mental Ray does!!

Use a scene that is rendered in mental Ray - A very good scene would be: "MR_LightGallery_Max6.max" and can be found on the CD here: \Samples\Scenes\Mental Ray

My Point:
I just want to help you being the best, I REALLY appreciate your effort, as long as you spend your time on usefull stuf ;-)

Once again, Thanks for all your Good stuff. There is probably more than 35.000 3dsmax users per year that is deciding what processor they will choose, from your Benchmark. Sad to use a benchmark that doesn't support the new CPU technology :wink:

Thanks dude, your cool! Hope you hear my few comments.

Btw. I've used 3dsmax for 10 years - I'm a freelancer.

This post is dedicated to more that 100.000.000 3dsmax users and you ;)
9 answers Last reply
More about total frustration toms hardware chart useless
  1. You have my comprehension and support too. If you look more carefully, you will also find 'small' mistakes like a X2 4200+ that performs better than a X2 4600+, or a 2.8GHz P4 clocked at 3000MHz or an Athlon64 with a Palermo core (Sempron only) and things like these here and there.
    P.S: I am a (less experienced) 3D modeler like you but I use Blender instead :)
  2. I totally agree with your frustration. I sent 2 emails to the author of the CPU Chart back in December. Asking why they had not added the E6300 in. The answer was that shortly they would include it. I think they have a distorted definition of shortly.

    I have pretty much given up any hope that THG is ever going to add the E6300 in or for that matter the E4300.

    My guess is they are waiting until E2xx and the Celeron 4xx series comes out and they will add those but not add the E6300. I'm mean it way passed embarrassing not having the E6300 included in their list.
  3. I totally agree. Their price/performance charts are great, but so outdated. With a site like Tom's Hardware, they should keep those charts up to date on a continual basis. The exclusion of the E6300 and E4300 is utterly ridiculuous.
  4. I accused them of trying to make AMD look better than Intel in the lower lower end by not including the E6300. They responded back with great indignation that they don't know where I got off saying that. That was back in December. You think if I sent another email and accused them of the same thing would they have the same response??? 8O
  5. Quote:
    Toms hardware CPU Chart is useless!

    Thats just not true!!!!

    The charts make very colorful paper airplanes!
  6. Ahh 3dsMax I used to work with it failry often in highschool and bought a copy after I graduated. Fooled around for a while but havent used it in quite a while since there were some things I couldn't figure out just by reading the manuals it was always easier to have someone show me how to do it than read it. But a great program even though Maya has taken I think the popularity crown. Never used it myself though.
  7. All of the CPU chart benchmarks seem fishy to me. I tend to rely on other sites more than Tom's these days.
  8. This sort of problem persists in all their charts.... I think everyone agrees their oblivion bench is screwed up.
  9. Quote:
    This sort of problem persists in all their charts.... I think everyone agrees their oblivion bench is screwed up.

    To some extent, all of them are :roll:
Ask a new question

Read More

CPUs Hardware Benchmark