View Single Post
Old 04-28-08, 07:13 PM   #6
CaptNKILL
CUBE
 
CaptNKILL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: PA, USA
Posts: 18,844
Default Re: Futuremark lays an egg.

Completely agree.

3dMark 2001 was amazing back then. 3dMark 2003 was pretty cool... 2005 was decent... 2006 was bloated (lots of effects pasted on to make things run like crap without really improving visual quality)... and now "Vantage" is even worse, AND you have to pay to use it more than once.

Before 2005 I would have said Futuremark was one of the few companies that could successfully make use of our graphics technology, but anymore it seems like they're just using gimmicks to make people buy more hardware from their sponsors.

I mean, the program actually uses Physx acceleration now...

How convenient now that the technology is owned by billionaire nvidia...
__________________
---- Primary Rig ---- CoolerMaster 690 II Advance - Gigabyte GA-EP45-UD3P - Intel Core 2 Quad Q9550 @ 4.0Ghz + Thermalright Ultra 120 Extreme
6GB DDR2 @ 942Mhz 5-5-5-20 1.9v (2x1Gb Wintec AMPX PC2-8500 & 2x2Gb G.Skill PC2-6400) - EVGA Geforce GTX 470 @ 750/1500/1850 (1.050v)
Sparkle Geforce GTS 250 1Gb Low-Profile (Physx) - Crucial RealSSD C300 64Gb SSD - Seagate 7200.12 500Gb SATA - Seagate 7200.10 320Gb SATA
ASUS VW266H 25.5" LCD - OCZ GameXStream 700W PSU - ASUS Xonar DX - Logitech Z-5500 5.1 Surround - Windows 7 Professional x64
---- HTPC ---- Asus M3A78-EM 780G - AMD Athlon X2 5050e 45W @ 2.6Ghz - 2x2GB Kingston PC2-6400 DDR2 - Sparkle 350W PSU
Seagate 7200.10 320Gb SATA - Seagate 7200.10 250Gb SATA - Athenatech A100BB.350 MicroATX Desktop - Creative X-Fi XtremeMusic
CaptNKILL is offline   Reply With Quote