Skip to main content

Futuremark Rolls Out 3DMark Update With VRMark Preview And New UI

Futurmark released an update to its 3DMark benchmark suite, adding a new VR experience, a new user interface, and the capability to choose the specific benchmarks you want to install.

The new VR experience is exclusive to 3DMark Advanced and Professional editions and is intended for use with the Oculus Rift and HTC Vive. This interactive preview of VRMark lets users freely explore two of the test scenes from Futuremark’s upcoming virtual reality benchmark. The first scene is designed for the Rift’s minimum hardware specification, and the second scene requires more powerful hardware. This sneak peek of VRMark does not produce a benchmark score, but for early adopters of VR that cannot wait to get their hands on any content they can, the preview does provide a taste of things to come.

3DMark also received an updated user interface for 2016. The new home screen automatically detects the hardware in your system and recommends the appropriate benchmark test for your rig’s horsepower. You can still access the other tests from the Benchmark menu.

Futuremark also made 3DMark more flexible with smaller updates and faster downloads. Using Steam, 3DMark users can install and update individual benchmark tests independently, which makes the initial download much smaller. You can also choose to only install the tests you need. The standalone 3DMark Advanced edition also offers this space-and-time-saving feature.

Although Futuremark’s anticipated Time Spy test, which was slated for an early 2016 release, is not a part of this update, the company hasn’t forgotten about the DX12 benchmark and said it’s coming soon.

Derek Forrest is an Associate Contributing Writer for Tom’s Hardware and Tom’s IT Pro. Follow Derek Forrest on Twitter. Follow us on Facebook, Google+, RSS, Twitter and YouTube.

  • wifiburger
    ah yes, Futuremark benchmarks, pointless demo techs that do not make it in real world games,
    Reply
  • Time_flys_
    Been running since 3dmark99 those were the days
    Reply
  • Herr_Koos
    ah yes, Futuremark benchmarks, pointless demo techs that do not make it in real world games,

    You're missing the point. All that benchmark suites are designed to do is provide a consistent basis for comparison. I find 3DMark very useful.
    Reply
  • ohim
    ah yes, Futuremark benchmarks, pointless demo techs that do not make it in real world games,

    You're missing the point. All that benchmark suites are designed to do is provide a consistent basis for comparison. I find 3DMark very useful.
    The consistent part is the bogus part. If you compare the GPUs in 3d mark and then compare them in the real games that you`ll actually be playing you`ll find that the 3D Mark scores have very little saying.

    Also, like it has been subject in the past companies try to optimise drivers for the benchmarks , this even happens in the phone industry where the phones OC themselves to get better results, even though that will not be the typical performance.
    Reply
  • xapoc
    nothing but bragging rights, who flexes more of what
    Reply
  • hellwig
    ah yes, Futuremark benchmarks, pointless demo techs that do not make it in real world games,

    You're missing the point. All that benchmark suites are designed to do is provide a consistent basis for comparison. I find 3DMark very useful.
    The consistent part is the bogus part. If you compare the GPUs in 3d mark and then compare them in the real games that you`ll actually be playing you`ll find that the 3D Mark scores have very little saying.

    Also, like it has been subject in the past companies try to optimise drivers for the benchmarks , this even happens in the phone industry where the phones OC themselves to get better results, even though that will not be the typical performance.

    And lets not forget other cases where benchmarks (not necessarily futuremark that I know of) optimize for certain hardware. There was a popular CPU benchmark tool that would identify non-Intel processors and report poorer results by simply not running "more intensive" tests on them. Researchers changed the CPUID of a VIA C7 and it magically scored better in the benchmark.
    Reply