Originally posted by ZoinKs!
You're right. Higher cpu speed has little impact on 3dmark03. And that's a good thing.
Q: Was 3dmark created to test the performance of the cpu? Or to test the performance of the vidcard?
A: It is meant to test the performance of the vidcard.
These two statements are true:
1. Changing cpu has low impact on 3dmark03 results.
2. Changing vidcards has dramatic effect on 3dmark03 results.
Conclusions: 3dmark03 is an excellent method of measuring vidcards. It is a poor way of measuring cpu's. Therefore, 3dmark succeeds as a vidcard benchmark.
If you want to measure overall system performance, then you need to use a different benchmark. If you want to measure how well a vidcard performs with dx 9 pixel and vertex shaders, 3dmark03 is an excellent tool.
btw, nv40: PS 1.4 is directX 9 spec...if the FX can't handle dx 9 specifications, whose fault is that?
I do not believe AT ALL that 3dmark03 was intended to be a vidcard benchmark.
Why the Audio tests? Why the CPU tests?
Why in the Orbb results viewer does it list entire system specs? It is a benchmark which tests the 3d performance of your entire system.
And for that it's a terrible benchmark.