"3d Mark" Is It a Relevant Test?

[rethcirE]

Although I don't believe this takes into account the Standalone version that runs without Steam. I use it mostly to stress and stability test my gaming laptop. It's a great learning tool, as well as the benchmarking challenge which I also find fun. Some scores in signature

 

[Bill_Bright]

That's the point of the benchmarks. Or any competitions -- this isn't a scientific diagnostic tool for your system, it's a race --

NO!!!! That's the problem - you are totally wrong!

But in your defense, there are others who have that same wrong misunderstanding - so you are not alone!

It is NOT a competition in any way or sense or form. It is NOT a race.

By definition, a benchmark is a "standard", or a "bar" of excellence for which others are measured against or compared with. It is NOT a competition.

When you go to a race they dont control or ask each individual runner the thickness of their socks and how much coffee they drank that morning.

What does that have to do with the price of rice in China in the summertime when it rains? Nothing. Just as it has nothing to do with benchmarking a system to see if it "measures" up to expectations - or, for example, published specs.

But if you want to talk thickness of socks, you are wrong there too. Professional golfers, for example MUST use clubs that are at least a certain length, but no more than another length. Golf balls must comply to a specific standard. Clubs must comply with specific weight standards. Baseballs must comply with standards, as must bats. NASCAR engines must be "short" blocks, a V-8 and use carbs.

You can indeed use a benchmark program to measure how one performs in a competition - but that is not it's purpose. In that scenario, the benchmark is just a simple tape measure, a measuring device to see how far the jumper jumped.

 

[Deleted member 67555]

I love you Bill
It's completely clear now.

 

[R-T-B]

I mean it is what you make it. There are those who make it a race, and those who want to check if their system is performing "as average" for such a config.

If can be good for both, you know.

 

[freeagent]

It is NOT a competition in any way or sense or form. It is NOT a race

Well, that's how it starts. Just as a user checking things out.. to make sure their rig can run it, or to see how badly it runs it.. then to see how it stacks up. If said user decides he wants to try overclocking, he can, and he can run that benchmark again and compare it against other like minded individuals. Once the user approaches the last few MHz he can get, he can take it a step further and tune the OS a bit, eeking out that last little bit. That's what makes it competitive. Not stock hardware. This is not a Dell zone. Nothing against a Dell of course, especially if it has better hardware than mine

Maybe its just me.. but I don't do stock, my fans are loud when they don't need to be, and I am into chasing MHz.. that is more fun than watching a benchmark imo. The score is just a result of my work. I play at 1080p/60 I don't even need to overclock lol.. but I do anyways.

 

[GerKNG]

basically Cinebench for GPUs (mostly)
fantastic benchmarks, comparisons between hardware, world records. but nothing to test stability with.

 

[outpt]

I think it can be looped.not sure where to look though

 

[95Viper]

Alright, let's play nice and stay on topic.

 

[looniam]

I think it can be looped.not sure where to look though

ya gotta pay for that:

Alright, let's play nice and stay on topic.

10-4 you got me before i got to it . . .

 

[Bill_Bright]

Well, that's how it starts. Just as a user checking things out.. to make sure their rig can run it, or to see how badly it runs it.. then to see how it stacks up.

Right! But that is not competing. That is just seeing if your system meets expectations.

If said user decides he wants to try overclocking, he can, and he can run that benchmark again and compare it against other like minded individuals.

Yes. I agree - but unless he has the exact same hardware, it is not really a competition. It is just a comparison.

Seriously, ask yourself what computer hardware is specifically designed to "compete"? I did not say "marketed". I said "designed".

The problem here is people can thoroughly enjoy and being totally entertained with their games. Then they run one of these benchmarks and read some nonsense that someone got better FPS or better that, and now suddenly are not enjoying their game anymore because they "think" their hardware is not up to snuff. Total nonsense!

 

[phill]

I think it depends on which pill you take...

Take the blue one and it's no big deal, but take the red one and its over for your wallet....

I used to bench for a UK team, I was in the top 5 in the UK for a while but when I had realised the money I'd spent and the fact if I killed my CPU I'd just bought at the time (5960X I believe, £1000 that was...) I would have been a very upset little guy....
For those sponsored or have unlimited money, it's no big deal but if your paying for it yourself wow can it suck the money from your life... Not to mention your time too......

That said, I got back into crunching and efficiency for the most part now. The gaming and the benchmarking are largely there when I build a new system and I'd like to see what it can do.. That said, when I had my 3090, I don't think I ever benched it!

 

[Keullo-e]

Personally I use 3dmark for example checking GPU OC stability and when I've upgraded something, to see has the performance got any better. Bought the Advanced license on sale for like 8EUR so I don't need to see the demo rolling every time etc.

Also 3DMark has been the leading 3d benchmark for over 20 years, that's also something. And it's from Finland.

 

[TheoneandonlyMrK]

Thanks, folks .....once again y'all have taught me something and more importantly put it into perspective ...... much appreciated !!!!!


I just snotted Mountain dew .....I'm chocking horribly !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! ROFLMAO

Put your username in and email address , my copy is on steam so it auto sorted.

I know what my pc scores so by testing I know if something is wrong, and due to the amount of testing I've done I now know something Is wrong, it's just not the pc.

 

[looniam]

Right! But that is not competing. That is just seeing if your system meets expectations.

Yes. I agree - but unless he has the exact same hardware, it is not really a competition. It is just a comparison.

Seriously, ask yourself what computer hardware is specifically designed to "compete"? I did not say "marketed". I said "designed".

The problem here is people can thoroughly enjoy and being totally entertained with their games. Then they run one of these benchmarks and read some nonsense that someone got better FPS or better that, and now suddenly are not enjoying their game anymore because they "think" their hardware is not up to snuff. Total nonsense!

the problem is some people don't understand that benchmarks can be used competitively. even U/L (formally futermark) has a HOF for the highest of scores. and having the same hardware configuration is senseless. its by having various hardware configurations is how you find out what works best w/which benchmark in the suite.

your points are illogical; saying benchmarks can be compared but that comparison cannot be competitive or using different hardware wouldn't be competitive sounds like you've never competed.

you should try it. and btw, i would hope that all hardware is designed to compete in some manner with what's already on the market - or why design it?

for posterity:

UNIGINE Benchmarks

Performance benchmarks by Unigine

benchmark.unigine.com

• Compete on the global leaderboard
• VR mode with Oculus and SteamVR HMDs
• Loop stress-test to check hardware stability
• Use the benchmark for commercial purposes
• Automate QA tests in hardware production

 

[RandallFlagg]

It's cheap to race on lower end chips, locked intel like my 10400 was or probably some of the AMD APUs. Not free, mind you, but cheap. Sort of like racing Go-Karts.

Not cheap to race with unlocked chips. Sorta like trying to get into NASCAR.

 

[Bill_Bright]

the problem is some people don't understand that benchmarks can be used competitively

NO! It is comments like that that creates all this confusion!

Can you use a ruler competitively? NO!

That is all a benchmark program is - a ruler to measure how well this hardware performs.

your points are illogical; saying benchmarks can be compared but that comparison cannot be competitive or using different hardware wouldn't be competitive sounds like you've never competed.

It is this statement that is illogical.

And I never said comparisons cannot be competitive - but that is the egos of users competing.

And to my point all along - none of that is a "true" indication of how "entertaining" a game will be.

I have competed in many different activities and contests. It is you who don't get it.

even U/L (formally futermark) has a HOF for the highest of scores.

Right. They got further down the ruler. It is their hardware that was competing. The benchmark program measured how well the hardware did.

its by having various hardware configurations is how you find out what works best w/which benchmark in the suite.

Yeah, so what?

You don't even know what you are arguing about! I said from the very beginning, way back in post #3, these programs are great for comparing the performance of your own machine, "before and after some change/update you make."

Sorry looniam but you are looking through a tunnel here. Can a benchmark program be used to measure performance for a competition? Yes. But is that the primary purpose of benchmarks? No. Can benchmark programs give a false sense of inferiority or superiority? Absolutely! Why? Because they don't reflect real-world play.

You and phanbuey and others seem to think it is all about drag racing at the track. AND THAT IS FINE, if that is your thing. But that's not the real world! Achieving the best times at the track is a competition. But being the top dragster does NOT mean that car can take the family on a vacation, on a ride through a curvy mountain road, or go get a week's worth of groceries. Or take the kids to school. Or brake in time to prevent an accident.

 

[Bones]

Guys, all this doesn't mean much since it boils down to a single thing - Relevance is in the eye of the beholder.
If they want to run it, they will and if not they won't.

I can't put it any simpler than that regardless of all the "Reasons" why, all that being in the "Eye" of the individual as well.

 

[looniam]

NO! It is comments like that that creates all this confusion!

Can you use a ruler competitively? NO!

if i am using it to measure the difference in distance two people throw a ball, YES!

Right. They got further down the ruler. It is their hardware that was competing. The benchmark program measured how well the hardware did.

i though you just said you cannot use a ruler?

you appear to be confused that something can and does have more than one purpose and not all of them need to be written in a book. it's up to the people involved on whether or not their activities are competitive or not. the people talking about benchmark competitions don't seemed confused at all.

edit
i am now done talking about your definition of what is a competition. nice chat.

 

[Bill_Bright]

Relevance is in the eye of the beholder.

And that is very true. But as I have been trying to get across to those not willing to listen is that sadly, these benchmarking programs often cause those people to "perceive" their systems are inadequate simply because someone else's (maybe similar, maybe totally different) system scored better in the benchmark program. But does that mean their computer provides less gameplay or enjoyment now, because all of a sudden a benchmark program gave a lower score? Nope. But do they think or perceive otherwise? In some cases, yes.

if i am using it to measure the difference in distance two people throw a ball, YES!

No! You are just using the ruler to simply "measure" those distances. The ruler did not cause the winning person to throw farther than the other competitors. Just the same as any benchmarking program can not make a computer the fastest computer.

I am not confused. It is you who seem to think, or are at least suggesting these benchmark programs make one computer faster than another, or that they represent real-world performance. They don't. Does more horsepower automatically mean faster times? Nope! Will the fastest sprinter win the marathon? Hurdles? Obstacle course? Will the stop watch make one person faster than the other?

If you want to use this benchmark program to see how your system competes against another, that's fine. But do NOT assume (or kid yourself into thinking) that faster times in your benchmarking program means that computer will provide better gameplay or be more entertaining than the other computers. Or, for that matter, that it will perform better at compiling a database, graphics editing, or any other computer tasks.

 

[freeagent]

these benchmarking programs often cause those people to "perceive" their systems are inadequate simply because someone else's (maybe similar, maybe totally different) system scored better in the benchmark program.

Hey, you gotta have something to blame for your incompetence. I usually blame my motherboard because its convenient. And I contemplate buying the other board "just to see".

But does that mean their computer provides less gameplay or enjoyment now, because all of a sudden a benchmark program gave a lower score?

Maybe a little.. depends on the score

 

[looniam]

I am not confused. It is you who seem to think, or are at least suggesting these benchmark programs make one computer faster than another, or that they represent real-world performance.

i never said anything of the sort:

its fun, everyone should play .

which test? 3dmark is a benchmark suite - there are several; so a firestrike score (being DX11) would not be relevant to a DX12 game.

still, being a synthetic benchmark, its scoring may not always translate to real world results.

as a matter of fact - its the opposite. actually i haven't seen anyone in this thread state anything of the sort. now if you would stop attempting putting words in my mouth, as i said i am done discussion your definitions of a competition.

i assure you any further effort at shoving your opinion down my throat will be a waste of effort.

 

[watzupken]

For one, I don't like to run benchmarks because I think they are unrepresentative of real world performance. I run it perhaps once to make sure that the results are somewhat in line with what I see in reviews, etc. Other than that, I rather test stability and bench by means of running a few games.

One of the thing I don't like about 3D Mark is that the tests are very short, which may not necessarily result in issues surfacing. Even if you loop it many times, each test (2 GPU and 1 CPU tests) is about a minute long at best. GPU then idles for quite awhile in between tests.

 

[Bones]

And that is very true. But as I have been trying to get across to those not willing to listen is that sadly, these benchmarking programs often cause those people to "perceive" their systems are inadequate simply because someone else's (maybe similar, maybe totally different) system scored better in the benchmark program. But does that mean their computer provides less gameplay or enjoyment now, because all of a sudden a benchmark program gave a lower score? Nope. But do they think or perceive otherwise? In some cases, yes.

I believe you touched on something here, I've known for a long time much of it is really nothing more than a marketing tool.

Think about it for a moment, there is a reason why there is a listing of who has the highest scores in said benchmark everyone can see. This appeals to the "Competitive" nature of many as in they aren't doing well enough to be in the top rankings and I mean you don't want to be "The Guy" that got left behind right?
So.... What does one do to get there?
Why buy brandnew hardware that's faster of course!

These benchmarks exists to not only let people know how they are doing with their tweaks and so on but there is a marketing angle as well, it's when you really start comparing results to others is when this effect can take hold.
It can even become an addiction, appealing to the competitive side of a person, like gambling does - And it's not as different as you may think from that.

Both certainly do one thing well and that's to get the money out of your pocket and into the pockets of the guys that makes the hardware, which is partially why at least they even have it setup this way. This is why there is a certain amount of appeal to what's perceived as faster and that in turn gets a person to wanting it, this "Want" is basically just like when the gambler places another bet, trying yet again one more time to get a win because they want it - Have to have it in fact.
And of course to get it, you gotta spend some $$ which is really the goal of it all no matter how you want to say or spin it.

Believe me, you guys already know how it is with faster, sportier cars and compare it to faster, fancier hardware - It's no different because the appeal that helps to drives sales of it is the same.
Take a minute to think about it and you'll see.

 

[Bill_Bright]

Hey, you gotta have something to blame for your incompetence.

LOL

Well, if you can't blame yourself, and you can't blame someone else, and the dog didn't do it, then you have to blame some inanimate object!

i never said anything of the sort:

Please, lets try to keep emotions out of this and work with me here for a second as I try (thus far, poorly) to struggle my way through explaining my point.

I said, you "seem to be suggesting". I was not accusing you of saying anything. But note you said, "benchmarks can be used competitively." And that "suggests" a benchmark program can be "used" to give one user or computer a competitive edge over another.

It "suggests" the user can choose which program to "use" to give them the advantage, in the same manner a professional tennis player may choose Racket A over Racket B because they feel the different string tension, grip or weight of Racket A will give them a competitive edge over his or her opponent. That works for tennis rackets because in professional tennis, the rules don't state all rackets must be the exact same. There are specified ranges, but not exact requirements. Players are allowed some flexibility in those "tools of the trade".

Not so in benchmarking. If a 3.0GHz CPU is pushed to a top speed of 4.216GHz (by the user changing clocks, voltages, etc. on the motherboard) it does not matter which benchmarking program is used to "measure" that speed. Any and all benchmarking programs must report the same top speed of 4.216GHz.

Right?

If a sprinter runs the 100 yard dash in 15.08 seconds, does it matter if the stopwatch is made by Seiko and not Ultrak? Does it matter that the measuring wheel to map out that 100 yards is made by Zosen and not Keson? Does using a Seiko stopwatch and a Zosen measuring wheel give this runner a competitive edge over that runner who uses a different watch and different wheel?

Yes, those tools are used in the competition, but only as tools to ensure a level playing field; not to give one player an advantage over another. Those tools are not "used competitively".

See my point? I am sorry to you and all if have not been clear.

still, being a synthetic benchmark, its scoring may not always translate to real world results.

And we have been in 100% agreement all the way through from the start on that point!

I believe you touched on something here, I've known for a long time much of it is really nothing more than a marketing tool.

Exactly!

Is a super high-tech, electronic jumbotron scoreboard more accurate, or does it give one team a competitive edge over a simple manual flip scoreboard? No. But the pretty display and fancy lights sure is more fun.

 

[looniam]

Please, lets try to keep emotions out of this and work with me here for a second as I try (thus far, poorly) to struggle my way through explaining my point.

my emotions are fine aside from being astounded and flabbergasted with your replies; sorry if my honesty is offensive.

I said, you "seem to be suggesting". I was not accusing you of saying anything. But note you said, "benchmarks can be used competitively." And that "suggests" a benchmark program can be "used" to give one user or computer a competitive edge over another.

It "suggests" the user can choose which program to "use" to give them the advantage, in the same manner a professional tennis player may choose Racket A over Racket B because they feel the different string tension, grip or weight of Racket A will give them a competitive edge over his or her opponent. That works for tennis rackets because in professional tennis, the rules don't state all rackets must be the exact same. There are specified ranges, but not exact requirements. Players are allowed some flexibility in those "tools of the trade".

Not so in benchmarking. If a 3.0GHz CPU is pushed to a top speed of 4.216GHz (by the user changing clocks, voltages, etc. on the motherboard) it does not matter which benchmarking program is used to "measure" that speed. Any and all benchmarking programs must report the same top speed of 4.216GHz.

Right?

If a sprinter runs the 100 yard dash in 15.08 seconds, does it matter if the stopwatch is made by Seiko and not Ultrak? Does it matter that the measuring wheel to map out that 100 yards is made by Zosen and not Keson? Does using a Seiko stopwatch and a Zosen measuring wheel give this runner a competitive edge over that runner who uses a different watch and different wheel?

Yes, those tools are used in the competition, but only as tools to ensure a level playing field; not to give one player an advantage over another. Those tools are not "used competitively".

See my point? I am sorry to you and all if have not been clear.

you do not need to keep trying to explain yourself. i have understood from the beginning and i still will tell you, you have me all wrong. why? you keep referring to "a benchmark"; a noun, whereas i am talking "benchmarking", the activity; a verb. and that will; concluded the semantic argument for today . .

capisce?

to direct that benchmark competitions gives the advantage to the hardware (maybe excuse the paraphrase); i can assure you that if you look at HWBot benchmarking competitions that it's the rules is what makes it a level playing field. that are very smart people that know how to do that.

i do not recall the exact details since i wasn't a participate but as an example, there had been a HWBot cpu benchmark competition of i9-9900Ks. all the hardware was provided; HWBot purchased the cpus with gigabyte and gskill providing the mobos and ram sticks. though the 'first crack" at a specific cpu, mobo and ram kits was through a lottery - to remove "the luck of the draw" of any golden sample - each contestant had a turn using each cpu on each mobo and ram kit. in other words; all the variables were removed and it was a 10 day contest. so yeah, the contestant won, not what tennis racket hardware they had.

another submission in the "cool story bro" file:

an amd/nvidia fanboy gpu benchmarking completion on OCN a few years ago - and to try to properly set the table; maxwell was out but amd was still chugging along w/GCN - don't think polaris was out then - amd was still in hawaii. so there are some big green gun competing against little red pea shooters, yeah? think those big guns would have the advantage right?

didn't turn out like that, nope - being a "fanboy" competition; all the amd fanboys showed up and ankle bit all of us 980ti/titan(m) submissions to win. was it fair? who cares?!? at the end of the day it was a blast to banter and talk smack back and forth while submitting benchmarks scores in the forum for a week. also the results didn't mmake me want to exchange my 980ti for a 7970.

a side note for the side note - one guy and i had close to the ~same hardware setup cpu/gpu/ram but different mobo with his being a SFF build. we kept swapping scores back and forth but he ending up beating me. at no time did i feel compelled to build a SFF because of that; i don't know why anyone in their right mind would.

benchmark?
whatever.

benchmarking?
FUN - maybe you should try it before you judge.