I would just like to take a minute to remind all of you that this is a benchmark.
Some of you have suggested that they may in fact be valid optimizations to improve performance on the NV3X. There is one problem with that...this is a benchmark where each card is supposed to take the same path and do the same amount of work. Any time you leave that path (i.e. application specific optimizations) you are making it easier for your card and ruining the benchmarks purpose which is to compare two or more cards running the same path.
And for those of you that say that 3DMark isn't representative of DX9 performance...I think it is...and it has been shown time and time again that the NV3X blows at DX9. The same people who suggest this also suggest using real games to benchmark. It has been shown that not only will NV lower quality globally (as in the case of AF) to thwart people that don't use default benchmark paths, but those that do use the default paths are benching something that is completely inaccurate with regards to in game performance (*cough* UT2003 *cough*). So using a very popular game is only useful when they haven't made negative global optimizations or if you aren't using a set benchmark path.
I am not saying that it isn't useful to have real world game benchmarks as it is useful. I am saying that synthetic benchmarks have their place in the world too.