Synthetic Graphics Benchmarks
Synthetic benchmarks tend to exercise graphics functionality at a level that is unlikely to be seen in a typical game. Consequently, they're often regarded as worst-case scenarios, and should thus be part of any benchmark suite to provide a baseline, ideally uninfluenced by IHV interference. Apart from the obligatory 3DMark 11, we also added Unigine Heaven 2.5 and Unigine Sanctuary, which we first used in 2011.
Synthetic: 3DMark 11
3DMark is one of the oldest, most widely-used synthetics, and it has been subject to its own controversies and abuses over time. Its current iteration is 3DMark 11, which provides some of the most rigorous performance testing available today. Consequently, it's the only benchmark where we loosen our resolution requirements, as there is no graphics card on the market that can tackle more than 1080p in 3DMark 11. Since our goal is to only assess graphics speed, we don't both with the CPU scores in our final result, only tallying graphics tests one through four.
|Entry||1024x600||Advanced-Mode: Entry Preset|
|Performance||1280x720||Advanced-Mode: Performance Preset|
|Extreme||1920x1080||Advanced-Mode: Extreme Preset|
Unigine Heaven 2.5
This benchmark is a classic for assessing tessellation, and it is also excellent for assessing shader performance. It's well-suited to illustrate architectural changes and other technological advancements.
|Entry||1280x720||DirectX 11Shaders: LowTessellation: ModerateAnisotropy: x8Anti-aliasing: Off|
|Performance||1920x1080||DirectX 11Shaders: MediumTessellation: NormalAnisotropy: x16Anti-aliasing: x4|
|Extreme||2560x1440||DirectX 11Shaders: HighTessellation: ExtremeAnisotropy: x16Anti-aliasing: x8|
Unigine Sanctuary 2.3
Unigine Sanctuary is good for evaluating dynamic lighting, HDR rendering, parallax occlusion mapping, ambient occlusion mapping, translucence, volumetric light and fog, particle systems, and post-processing. Consequently, it can stand in for older DirectX 10 games, which we're now dropping from the charts in order to keep our game selection current.
|Entry||1280x720||DirectX 11Shaders: LowAmbient occlusion: OffAnisotropy: x8Anti-aliasing: Off|
|Performance||1920x1080||DirectX 11Shaders: MediumAmbient occlusion: OnAnisotropy: x16Anti-aliasing: x4|
|Extreme||2560x1440||DirectX 11Shaders: HighAmbient occlusion: OnAnisotropy: x16Anti-aliasing: x8|
I agree. I know Tom's spends a lot of time benchmarking, but Folding@home is something that is a bit more common. I would love to see F@H in some articles.
BTW, I appreciate all the work you guys do.
The 5760x1080 resolution will also push the GPU's harder than a 2560x1440/1600 could so why limit the resolution there?
So what would YOU like to see used then? If they were trying to push Nvidia wouldn't Hawx 2 be in the suite?