What's the point

[ecar016]

I understand the idea of having stand benchmarking schemes to compare vid. cards from different manufacturers. ie Nvidia vs ATI.

But what I dont understand is why the general public scores their systems for comparison on futuremarks web site for example.

My point: I set up my 9800pro and benched it without overclocking at default image settings. I was not happy with the scores I got because I compared them to the top scores at futuremark. I'm not new to the inducstry but I am new to benching and AA/AF settings. So I reduced the imagew settings to the lowest settings and overclocked the hell out of the card. The benches worked but images and artifacts were terrible. I matched some of the top scores at futuremark. The point is......why compare to the top scores when they dont represent real nice image settings. I think that the benches should incorporate image settings. For example, radeons can be set for the premium image settings and scan for artifacts or dropped frames. The top scores at best settings would be far more benifitial.

Otherwise, its useless.
Whats the point ?

EC


<font color=red> Quantum Computers! - very interesting </font color=red>

 

[cleeve]

The point is obvious:

It's a contest. A sport. The numbers are essentially meaningless, but like any sport people will do whatever it takes (Steriods or Detonator drivers) to win.

Simple psychology.

------------------
Radeon 9500 (modded to PRO w/8 pixel pipelines)
AMD AthlonXP 2000+
3dMark03: 3529

 

[coolsquirtle]

it's simple

these people here are crazy, SO RUN FOR IT

Proud Owner the Block Heater
120% nVidia Fanboy
PROUD OWNER OF THE GEFORCE FX 5900ULTRA <-- I wish this was me
I'd get a nVidia GeForce FX 5900Ultra... if THEY WOULD CHANGE THAT #()#@ HSF

 

[TheGreatGrapeApe]

There are 3 things.

First really only artifact free benchmarking counts to me, which is what I practice (BTW alot of time the artifacts will actually be part of lowering scores).

Second, It gives a general idea of the potential. ATI MAX w/ artifacts vs nV max w/ artifacts, gives you a general (pi$$-pooor) idea of the performances in what amounts to a pi44ing contest.

Third, the benchmark is good to see the effect of driver and setup changes.

The posting is really just a way of saying 'look what I can do!'

Aquamark will be the same, I haven't CRANKED the hell out of my card yet (as no FX5600U is anywhere near my score), so I don't know how Aquamark handles artifacts and issues.

We shall see maybe, although I almost don't care.


- You need a licence to buy a gun, but they'll sell anyone a stamp <i>(or internet account)</i> ! <A HREF="http://www.redgreen.com" target="_new"><font color=green>RED</font color=green> <font color=red>GREEN</font color=red></A> GA to SK

 

[speeduk]

I just use the benches to see how my overclocking is affecting real world performance. And also for gfx to test for artifacts and find a stable, yet fast config for my system!

And when I get a sweet score without artifacts or stability problems I love to share it just like anyone else...

<A HREF="http://service.futuremark.com/compare?2k1=7000747" target="_new"> 3D-2001 </A>
<A HREF="http://service.futuremark.com/compare?2k3=1284380" target="_new"> 3D-03 </A>
<font color=red> 120% overclocker </font color=red> (cheapskate)