3Dmark Freaks

[Embattle]

This is for all those who love high 3Dmark scores:

3Dmark 2003 = 24499
3Dmark 2005 = 11446

http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=21902

 

[Jonty]

Wow, that's fast, but I'm surprised that it's not more. The previous records were around 24,000 and 10,000, give or take a thousand or so, and those systems didn't have two GeForce 6800 Ultra (I wonder if they were the 512MB variety?). Still, I wouldn't say no to a system like that

Kind Regards

Jonty

P.S. What should be interesting is when AMD and Intel start shipping their dual-core CPUs later this year and, all things being equal, when nVidia delivers their dual-core graphics card. The records should start falling then

 

[Embattle]

The single vs SLI might not be that different at the settings tested, perhaps higher settings might make a bit more of a gap. It could also be the need for a lot more power for little more gain, SLI is very good but it doesn't always mean great jumps from what I've seen in reviews etc and I reckon it'll take a little time to mature by which time it may well be irrelevant again.

I say young man that is a rather bold prediction about dual cores

 

[Embattle]

BTW a couple of early benchmarks on Hexus for a P4 SLI setup can be found here.

 

[Danya]

http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/showthread.php?t=51594
TBH.

Also, don't think I've seen a single GPU system top 7000 in 3dmark05, so 12k is a pretty large improvement...

 

[Jonty]

I say young man that is a rather bold prediction about dual cores

hehe, I'm not really being that adventurous (if you were being serious? ). Intel have had their dual-core chips publicly roadmapped for a while now, and with each core capable of hyperthreading that'll be four threads per clock on the first batch of chips later this year. Given Intel is hitting the limits with some aspects of their current design, multi-core CPUs at least give them some breathing room. As for AMD, I don't think they've officially announced any equivalent, but I'm sure they've at least considered it. The Athlon 64 is an amazing performer but ever since its introduction there have been doubts about how far they could realistically push the architecture. The Xbox 2/Xbox Next/Xbox 360 and PSP3 will also feature IBM's multi core cell processor which has been around in some form for years now, so developers will certainly be getting used to this kind of technology (which apparently isn't all rosy, especially in games when synchronisation is important).

As for dual-core graphics, nVidia's partners have already had great success with putting two individual cores on the same board, and rumours now suggest that nVidia is planning a full blown dual-core chip. They've certainly been very quite since the GeForce 6, which is now relatively old without so much as a refresh, so that's either a worrying sign or indication that they're planning something adventurous. Part of the problem may be shader model 4 and DirectX 10 in the not so distant future (*sigh* will they ever stop?). As for ATI, again, no word on their future plans (there is an 24 pipeline x900 range predicted, but beyond that who knows?). That said, despite differences between ATI and nVidia, they ted to end up offering similarly capable products in the end.

Anyway, rambling aside, Epic and others have rated multicore design for various reasons. One, for example, is offloading normal CPU overheads such as the apparently inefficient DirectX demands (these guys tend to speak a whole different language half the time, so I don't know the specifics ). Secondly, more advanced physics and other CPU tasks will require ever greater processing power which multi-threading can help with. The physics behind Duke Nukem Forever, for example, supports realistic fabric which bends and stretches as objects are placed in it.

So I'll guess we'll wait and see

Kind Regards

 

[FuzzyLogic]

Jonty, you might like to look at an article the Inquirer ran earlier this month about PPUs (physics processing units) that are reported to be another card that sits alongside the GPU and takes over any physics type mojo so that the GPU and CPU can concentrate their efforts into other things. Sounds like a good idea to me, and a fairly logical step; but that might be because i'm in general terms an idiot

Linky

Edit: Found an apparent white paper about them...aren't white papers supposed to be technical documents and not 6 page "This rocks!" articles? 0o

http://www.ageia.com/pdf/wp_2005_3_physics_gameplay.pdf

 

[Big G]

3Dmark scores are ePenis comparisons

 

[Embattle]

The physics behind Duke Nukem Forever, for example, supports realistic fabric which bends and stretches as objects are placed in it.

So I'll guess we'll wait and see

That's a funny set of paragraphs when you think about just how long DNF has taken so far

AMD Dual Core - http://bit-tech.net/feature/82 & http://www.pcper.com/article.php?aid=122
Slower Games - http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=21930

On the last link its worth noting that both multi processor computers and P4 HT gain little if any thing at all on games.

The idea of dual core graphics cards isn't that hard to imagine since its already done to a certain degree, the recent Gigabyte 3D1 GeForce 6600GT SLI (HardOCP Review) is a fairly good example of where two separate cores are located on one PCB.

 

[Danya]

Is there any news of shader model 4 yet? I heard some details of DX 10 at GDC, but not heard anything about a proposed SM4 yet.

 

[Jonty]

Thanks FuzzyLogic and Embattle, proof I'll never be able to read everything about any one subject, hehe Thanks for the links.

As for Shader Model 4, Danya, don't worry, our GeForce 6s are safe for now As far as I know, and this is little more than rumour, Shader Model 4 support will likely arrive around the end of 2005 or more likely 2006 when Longhorn debuts, alongside DirectX 10 under its rumoured new moniker Windows Graphics Foundation.

What Shader Model 4 offers I don't know, it may well be efficiency improvements like Shader Model 3. As for support, though, ATI's next generation card will introduce Sjder Model 3 so we'll have to wait for the generation beyond that most likely. And as for nVidia, who knows? They've been particularly tight-lipped for months now about what they're developing for the desktop graphics market (apart from an apparent GeForce 6 integrated chip for motherboards).

Kind Regards

 

[Embattle]

I personally view dual cores, on both gfx and cpus, as a technical copout or to put it a little better as a technical bypass to the future limitations of single core processors as they stand today.

I don't think we have to worry too much about SM4 atm since, as Jonty points out, SM3 isn't even in ATI cards yet