Nice 3DMark05 Screenshots

[Helevitia]

http://members.home.nl/t.los/Screenies/blaat.htm

[ZokesPro]

Wow, I'm gonna need a better video card if I want such sweet looking gfx.

[Novdid]

There's some mad poly counts in those pics. In other words not like Doom3.

Look at the results:

GT 1: 15.4
GT 2: 5.1
GT 3: 13.3

And that's on a 6800, I wonder how impressive the result will be on my 9700Pro...

[Helevitia]

I read that those screenshots are from an older build and don't represent current frame rates. So your 9700 Pro will probably almost get up to those numbers

[Helevitia]

BTW, I just assumed you all saw the "official" screen shot and didn't post it, but just in case, here it is. Now that is a lot of Polys!

[Elie]

OY!!!!!

What video card is going to run this at over 30fps?????????????

Maybe the next generation 512MB radoen X1600 or Geforce 10, or the Parhelia 2000

Cheers,
Elie

[Maggi]

ROFL

as awesome as those screenies look, it seems that Futuremark is still ignoring to build their environments in a more "real-world-like" fashion, ie. no serious gaming designer would go that brute force way to create these kind of stunning visuals and therefore 3D Mark will always be an artificial benchmarks that is simply not capable of representing real world performance

pretty sad if you'd ask me.

[dbdg]

Futuremark "Lets just add more polys"
Developers "But we are going to be using Normal maps in the future"
Futurmark "No you aren't, we know better"
Developers "You wanna bet, look at D3 and UE3"
Futuremark "Just a fad, you'll resort to polys in the end"

Futuremark "oops!"

[Helevitia]

Originally posted by Maggi
ROFL

as awesome as those screenies look, it seems that Futuremark is still ignoring to build their environments in a more "real-world-like" fashion, ie. no serious gaming designer would go that brute force way to create these kind of stunning visuals and therefore 3D Mark will always be an artificial benchmarks that is simply not capable of representing real world performance

pretty sad if you'd ask me.

Despite its bad reputation, I think 3Dmark is great to use to test your system and compare to others to see if your system is running up to speed. I know that if I am within 5% of the average system, then I probably have everything setup right. If I am 1000 points lower, then there is a good chance something is not quite right.

And last, I thought Beyond3D had a huge say in the development in 3DMark. I would think they would have voiced their opinions many times about non real world tests. I guess we will have to wait and see.

Dave

[Maggi]

Valid points Dave ...

So let's wait'n'see until it gets real.

[mmp121]

Another pic... 1600x1200 so I'll link it instead of imbedding it...

http://www.futuremark.com/news/data/200409/2004092105/3dmark05_ship_big.jpg

[Helevitia]

After looking at al of these SS, I think it basically shows what it will look like in real time....a slide show.

So there you have it, we've already seen 3dmark05 in action

[Novdid]

Originally posted by dbdg
Futuremark "Lets just add more polys"
Developers "But we are going to be using Normal maps in the future"
Futurmark "No you aren't, we know better"
Developers "You wanna bet, look at D3 and UE3"
Futuremark "Just a fad, you'll resort to polys in the end"

Futuremark "oops!"

Normal maps are a way to simulate great poly counts. Sooner or later you have to add polys when the hardware is ready for it.

[az]

I don't usually say this about computer graphics, but WOW! (I am even inclined to add multiple exclamation marks!)

Even from an artistic standpoint they are great - finally something that uses all those polys to create something that also looks good.

I'd love a game containing that flying ship

AZ

[Helevitia]

I agree, this 3DMark looks way better than 03. I was dissapointed with the last one. It gives me hope for future games.