Send News. Want a reply? Read this. More in the FAQ.   News Forum - All Forums - Mobile - PDA - RSS Headlines  RSS Headlines   Twitter  Twitter
Customize
User Settings
Styles:
LAN Parties
Upcoming one-time events:

Regularly scheduled events

Report this Comment
Use this form to report the selected comment to the moderators. Reporting should generally be used only if the comment breaks forum rules.

8. Re: New 3DMark Feb 5, 2013, 18:24 Dev
 
Arithon wrote on Feb 5, 2013, 07:01:
I see little value in recent benchmarks, since most are now "on this weeks cards / hardware"

I want to see how much bang-for-buck I get for my money compared to the 2010 video card I have in my PC right now.

There are some sites that give you "HD5870 vs GTX660Ti" for example, but they are the exception.

The problem with new benchmark software is it removes the ability to compare with previous hardware. i.e. 3Dmark06 (from 2010) gives my card "23611" but 3Dmark11 (from last year) gives the 660 Ti "9027". That's no help to anyone. Both cards will run in my PC, so I want a meaningful comparison.

If 3DMark have a database of comparable test results for hardware going back some time that they share with purchasers of the software, then I'd be interested to know more, otherwise not.

3dmark does have a database of results, but its a different for each 3dmark they release. You'd have to run the older dx9 benchmark versions (I dont recall the latest 3dmark which went only to dx9) to be able to compare to the widest range of hardware/os. You could also compare those numbers to futuremarks online database.
http://www.3dmark.com/search
You can specify what version of 3dmark in the advanced search.


I find the most useful thing for getting a rough estimate of old or strange (like mobile) graphics cards and new ones is tom's hierarchy charts for video cards (it has tiers going back to the nvidia TNT). It also helps makes sense of ATI's horrible model naming schemes (and sometimes nvidia does similar confusing things), and see where they fall. And you can see how far down intel integrated is (although the 4000 is at least not terrible).
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/gaming-graphics-card-review,3107-7.html

So (in a made up example pulling numbers out of thin air) if say I have a tier 7 card, and a tier 1 graphics card costs $700, and a tier 2 graphics card costs $500, tier 3 costs $400, tier 4 costs $350, tier 5 costs $300, tier 6 costs $250, then the minimum to upgrade that tier 7 card would be $250, and to upgrade it significantly I'd have to spend $350 or more.

Also I find it useful when someone asks me what graphics card to get. I ask them to tell me what they want to spend, and show them that chart and say something like: "for $200 you can get a tier X card, and it will cost $300 or more to move up significantly. In the $200 range these are the nvidia and ATI cards that have the same tier of performance, so I suggest looking for a sale on these"

This comment was edited on Feb 5, 2013, 18:35.
 
 
Subject
  
Optional
Message
 
Login Email   Password Remember Me
If you don't already have a Blue's News user account, you can sign up here.
Forgotten your password? Click here.
 




footer

Blue's News logo