bit-tech.net

New 3DMark 11 coming in September

New 3DMark 11 coming in September

3DMark11 will be officially released in September.

We've learned the latest incarnation of popular synthetic benchmark, 3DMark is due for release in September, with an official announcement due very soon.

While 3DMark is still popular with overclockers, hardware enthusiasts and attention seekers, the series has arguably suffered from diminishing returns.

Rumoured to be called 3DMark 11, this new version will concentrate on DirectX11 only and will have both undersea and space benchmarks, but we know little more than that at this time. MadShrimps reports that MSI has signed a marketing deal with Futuremark to be featured in the software, replacing Sapphire, who were featured in Vantage.

We've been told Futuremark will have a webpage launching soon with further details.

Are you eagerly awaiting the next 3DMark for a whirl on your new PC? Let us know your thoughts in the forums.

Updated: Click here to see the first pictures and video of 3DMark 11 in action.

25 Comments

Discuss in the forums Reply
erratum1 21st May 2010, 13:47 Quote
They do need a new one, the unigine 'heaven' benchmark alot of people use for dx11 and tessellation testing.
V3ctor 21st May 2010, 13:49 Quote
I hope they don't charge for it too...
Jack_Pepsi 21st May 2010, 14:16 Quote
It better not be another Vantage, Vantage was a freaking joke.
yakyb 21st May 2010, 15:00 Quote
yeah whilst i appreciate that Vantage used modern technologies the actual graphics looked awful
Flibblebot 21st May 2010, 15:42 Quote
tbh, I didn't think people still used 3DMark; I thought there were better and free-er options out there, or that people preferred real-world benchmarks instead.

I certainly haven't used 3DMark since they were called madonion...
proxess 21st May 2010, 15:46 Quote
I've never used any of these. Cause I've always had crap PCs and was ashamed of the scores I would get after seeing mad scores here on Bit.
mrbens 21st May 2010, 17:32 Quote
I've never had any luck with these 3DMark apps as I always get widely different ratings every time!

The final straw was when I moved my 4870X2 from my old socket939 system into my new i7 build and ran the test again and the same GPU scored a quarter of the score it got in my last system! The overall score wasn't much higher than my last PC even through it was FAR more powerful!
thehippoz 21st May 2010, 17:34 Quote
always liked 06 over vantage.. vantage was kind of a letdown in comparison
The Growler 21st May 2010, 18:01 Quote
In my humble opinion, 3DMark made 2 big mistakes. The first was requiring you to go on-line to view your score and the second was charging for the benchmark. The first I could live with, the second was unforgivable. I think their best benchmark was 03'. It was free. it tested several aspects of your CPU/GPU and even showed you the hit you took from your sound card (unfortunately the sound tests don't work on Vista or 7 OS's).
They need to get back to where they were and let sponsors pay for their work.
AshT 21st May 2010, 19:18 Quote
Good stuff, another Mark product to add to my collection. Will have to upgrade around the same time as well.
wuyanxu 21st May 2010, 19:27 Quote
so they just gave up on naming.

hope they make it so you can do benchmarks for free.
Floyd 21st May 2010, 20:10 Quote
Another way to show off how big your epeen is lol. Benchmarks are not everything. That and you know they are going to make you pay for it...
Spacemadmonkey 21st May 2010, 20:16 Quote
3dMark06 was so last year ... kinda. but im definitely sick to death of seeing the same shooting squad and big ass water dragon so looking forward to some change atleast.
tripwired 21st May 2010, 20:50 Quote
I've never really seen the value in these programs, will be giving this one a miss.
Makaveli 21st May 2010, 21:40 Quote
I pretty much agree with the general with everyone they fell off after the 2003 version.
Star*Dagger 21st May 2010, 23:37 Quote
The people at this company are not only the best benchmarking authors but great game programmers as well, Shattered Horizon!!
Fractal 22nd May 2010, 01:16 Quote
I disagree Star*Dagger, 3D Mark Vantage was Nvidia optimised rubbish. Unigine Heaven was the first DX11 benchmark, looks amazing and is free. Really Heaven should be the standard now.

However I completely agree with you about Shattered Horizon. Not only a technological triumph but something completely original in execution and gameplay. I hope they develop it further!
Nature 22nd May 2010, 22:06 Quote
So this is the unofficial announcement of the soon to be official announcement?
Farting Bob 23rd May 2010, 01:52 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nature
So this is the unofficial announcement of the soon to be official announcement?
Yep, slow news day today!
Bindibadgi 23rd May 2010, 06:43 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nature
So this is the unofficial announcement of the soon to be official announcement?

No, this is, "you heard it here first" breaking news :p
Cepheus 23rd May 2010, 10:15 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by erratum1
They do need a new one, the unigine 'heaven' benchmark alot of people use for dx11 and tessellation testing.

Heaven is rubbish. It gives no representation of real world usage because it exaggerates the benefits of tessellation by tessellating the environment far more than will ever happen in the real world in order to generate a false performance gradient.
erratum1 23rd May 2010, 11:28 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cepheus
Quote:
Originally Posted by erratum1
They do need a new one, the unigine 'heaven' benchmark alot of people use for dx11 and tessellation testing.

Heaven is rubbish. It gives no representation of real world usage because it exaggerates the benefits of tessellation by tessellating the environment far more than will ever happen in the real world in order to generate a false performance gradient.

Well we don't really have any real tessellated games at the moment, a few flags in Dirt 2 don't really count. But in the future we might have games that make use of 'heavy tessellation' and in the benchmark you can guage how your pc will cope with this. Its like physx, its being used a bit but in the future it could be used much more heavily to make games more realistic.

No more characters with stiff clothes and stiff hair, yay.
Cepheus 23rd May 2010, 21:35 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by erratum1

Well we don't really have any real tessellated games at the moment, a few flags in Dirt 2 don't really count. But in the future we might have games that make use of 'heavy tessellation' and in the benchmark you can guage how your pc will cope with this. Its like physx, its being used a bit but in the future it could be used much more heavily to make games more realistic.

No more characters with stiff clothes and stiff hair, yay.

PhysX hardware support has been around since mid-2006. If it was so awesome, why has it taken four years for a game to use it extensively, two with nVidia's blessing and marketing power?

The reason why 'heavy tessellation' is a bit crap is the way that Unigine has implemented it. Look at this image: http://www.hardocp.com/images/articles/12573821526izM8p4LAl_1_14_l.png

Two things are very obvious. Firstly, the original wireframe is crap.The circular cannon has between 12-16 sides. It's like calling this a circle: http://etc.usf.edu/clipart/37300/37388/12-gon_37388_lg.gif

So, any comparisons you see are totally flawed, because the levels aren't even representative of current games, let alone games in the future. This is the stock image. Looking at it, the only thing for me that differentiates it from a game like Quake 3 (or at least CoD2) is the fancy DX11 lighting. http://www.hardocp.com/images/articles/12573821526izM8p4LAl_1_19_l.jpg
Now, of course there's going to be a big difference when you go to tessellated, but in the comparison above you can see that each polygon is about the size of a pinhead! I did a rough estimate of how many polygons there are in that simple cannon, and there are roughly the same number that they put in the cars in racing games. More, in fact. The most detailed user modded cars I've ever seen in racing games (CTDP cars) have roughly 5k polygons in, I reckon there's about 6-8k in the end of that cannon.
As you can see, they've played down their non-tessellated map and made their tessellated map more taxing, specifically to stress systems more than any game actually will.

The point by which that number of polygons is standard will be far beyond the current generations of graphics cards, and buying a card based on it's tessellating capability is somewhat stupid, because no self-respecting level designer would ever make a level with that low a resolution for DX9 and DX10 users, who still form about 50% of the gaming market.

The time when tessellation will be widely used is years ahead of us, and whilst it is with us now, the sorts of games that will require tessellation in the same way that Heaven does won't be released until the ATI 8k series and GeForce 780 are on the market
Arj12 23rd May 2010, 22:13 Quote
This would be a welcome update as some of the old synthetic benchmarks didn't test the graphics cards to their full extent... or so I am told!
Hg 24th May 2010, 22:41 Quote
Z50J7JHms_I

Tech demo of the 'Deep Sea' benchmark from 3dmark 11
Looks very nice....
Log in

You are not logged in, please login with your forum account below. If you don't already have an account please register to start contributing.



Discuss in the forums