Interview et informations sur 3DMark 2004 (Full DX9)
Notre confrère anglophone spécialisé cartes graphiques Beyond3D vient de ...
Notre confrère anglophone spécialisé cartes graphiques Beyond3D vient de publier une interview de Nicklas Renqvist, Patric Ojala, et Tero Sarkkinen, des membres de Futuremark, les créateurs du tant contesté 3DMark. Les questions portent exclusivement sur la future version 2004 de 3DMark et une fois n'est pas coutume, les réponses ne font pas trois lignes.
On y apprend notamment comme vous pouvez le lire ci-dessous que 3DMark04 demandera pour tous les tests une carte vidéo capable de gérer les Pixel Shaders 2.0, ce qui peut sembler normal 2 ans après les sorties du R300. Contrairement à 3DMark 2003, les détenteurs de GF3 et 4 et Radeon 8500 ne pourront donc plus en partie tester leur carte.
3DMark03 was also advertised as a DirectX9 benchmark, and yet only one of the four game tests required DirectX9, with two using DirectX8.1 and one DirectX7 features. Will 3DMark04 remove the legacy tests and target DirectX9 only? If it is DirectX9 only will you be requiring Shader Model 3.0 in any of the game tests, given the previous sentiment has been that you'll require the newer features when at least two vendors are supporting it, or have signalled intent to within close proximity of release?
Nick : The next 3DMark will require a fully PS2.0 capable graphics card for all game tests. None of the game tests will use shaders below version 2.0, and the benchmark is really mainly targeted at the second generation of DX9 compliant cards. Of course users with older/first generation DX9 hardware can run the benchmark and get reliable results, but the tests loads aren’t really designed for that generation. I want to remind all readers that 3DMark is a benchmark, and is NOT optimized in the same fashion as games are. There are no lighter code paths for value and legacy hardware, all systems produce the same rendering. Also, 15 fps for example is a too low frame rate for enjoyable game play, but it is quite enough for producing comparable 3D performance results. 3DMark thereby measures quite well also below playable frame rates. When game developers are developing a game, their main focus (performance-wise) is to offer enjoyable game play for all gamers. Our focus is to stress the hardware, and not to make the benchmark user necessarily experience a smooth run. Also a point to remember is that I doubt any game so far released, or to be released this year, uses similar shaders & amount of lights & shadows to the same extent as the next 3DMark does. The amount of polygons on screen and use of dynamic lights & shadows is on a totally different level than what gamers have seen so far.
None of the tests in the next 3DMark will actually require SM3.0, but if the user has a graphics card capable of doing SM3.0, it will be used by default. There is actually a new option in the settings, from where the user can choose which shader model will be used (2_0, 2_a, 2_b or 3_0). I think that widens the use of the next 3DMark even more as you can for example compare your graphics cards SM2.0 and SM3.0 performance.
We cannot reveal any features of upcoming hardware since that information is all under NDA.
Accéder à l'interview complète
On y apprend notamment comme vous pouvez le lire ci-dessous que 3DMark04 demandera pour tous les tests une carte vidéo capable de gérer les Pixel Shaders 2.0, ce qui peut sembler normal 2 ans après les sorties du R300. Contrairement à 3DMark 2003, les détenteurs de GF3 et 4 et Radeon 8500 ne pourront donc plus en partie tester leur carte.
3DMark03 was also advertised as a DirectX9 benchmark, and yet only one of the four game tests required DirectX9, with two using DirectX8.1 and one DirectX7 features. Will 3DMark04 remove the legacy tests and target DirectX9 only? If it is DirectX9 only will you be requiring Shader Model 3.0 in any of the game tests, given the previous sentiment has been that you'll require the newer features when at least two vendors are supporting it, or have signalled intent to within close proximity of release?
Nick : The next 3DMark will require a fully PS2.0 capable graphics card for all game tests. None of the game tests will use shaders below version 2.0, and the benchmark is really mainly targeted at the second generation of DX9 compliant cards. Of course users with older/first generation DX9 hardware can run the benchmark and get reliable results, but the tests loads aren’t really designed for that generation. I want to remind all readers that 3DMark is a benchmark, and is NOT optimized in the same fashion as games are. There are no lighter code paths for value and legacy hardware, all systems produce the same rendering. Also, 15 fps for example is a too low frame rate for enjoyable game play, but it is quite enough for producing comparable 3D performance results. 3DMark thereby measures quite well also below playable frame rates. When game developers are developing a game, their main focus (performance-wise) is to offer enjoyable game play for all gamers. Our focus is to stress the hardware, and not to make the benchmark user necessarily experience a smooth run. Also a point to remember is that I doubt any game so far released, or to be released this year, uses similar shaders & amount of lights & shadows to the same extent as the next 3DMark does. The amount of polygons on screen and use of dynamic lights & shadows is on a totally different level than what gamers have seen so far.
None of the tests in the next 3DMark will actually require SM3.0, but if the user has a graphics card capable of doing SM3.0, it will be used by default. There is actually a new option in the settings, from where the user can choose which shader model will be used (2_0, 2_a, 2_b or 3_0). I think that widens the use of the next 3DMark even more as you can for example compare your graphics cards SM2.0 and SM3.0 performance.
We cannot reveal any features of upcoming hardware since that information is all under NDA.
Nil Sanyas
le 28 juillet 2004 à 11:09
(5 815
lectures)
Actualités et brèves relatives
- 26 / 07 / 2004 : ATI répond sur ses mauvaises perfs avec DooM 3
- 22 / 07 / 2004 : Doom3 : Benchmarks des 6800, X800, 5950 et 9800XT
- 19 / 07 / 2004 : Le jeu du "qui a la plus grosse ?" : CrystalMark 2004
- 12 / 07 / 2004 : Benchmarks intéractifs chez TweakPC
- 09 / 07 / 2004 : MAJ de RubyBench (1.1) : bench pour NV4x et R4xx
- 08 / 07 / 2004 : Le guide du benchmark de la mort qui tue !
- 08 / 07 / 2004 : SPMark04 : benchmark pour téléphones portables
- 06 / 07 / 2004 : Benchmarks Half-Life 2 avec les derniers GPU / VPU
- 28 / 06 / 2004 : FarCry : Faut-il craquer pour 1Go de RAM ?
