View Single Post
Old 11-13-03, 05:47 PM   #39
StealthHawk
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by bkswaney
Yes but AM3 is based off a real game. 3DM03 is not.
Or have I been lead a stray and AM3 is a sen?
Is it not based from the Krass engine?
Several things here.

1) The Krass engine is only used in Aquanox AFAIK.

Regardless of how widespread the engine is, the following important questions need to be asked.

a) Is the same build of the engine used in Aquanox2 and Aquamark3?
b) Even if the same build of the engine is used, are the effects in the two programs the same? If they aren't, what useful information does Aquamark3 give you? Massive has told you that a certain range of scores in AM3 corresponds to certain "performance points" in AN2, but is there really any more significance than a generality made about performance in one game? In other words, do the numerical framerate values in each AM3 test somehow translate into realworld performance?
c) If future games use the Krass engine will AM3 have any significance towards them?


For example, let me extend what I'm trying to illustrate to UT2003. You run flybys on different cards to determine an ordering of performance in UT2003. However, the performance seen in a flyby does not directly correlate to the performance seen while actually playing the game. The ordering might, but the level of performance in a flyby is going to be dramatically higher than performance in a real match. UT2003 Flyby performance is utterly useless in telling us how UT2003 the game will play. UT2003 flyby results similarly cannot tell us how Unreal2 will play. Or Quake3. Or Call of Duty. Or any other game. One flyby cannot even tell us what performance to expect from another flyby.

What is the measurement of an UT2003 flyby then? Again, it is a (over)generalization of an ordering we can hope to expect in similar situations that will hopefully hold true. Flyby scores are extrapolated to cover UT2003 performance as a whole. Ideally, the more flybys you run from different levels, the more accurate a picture you can draw.

But wait! This is exactly what a synthetic benchmark like 3dmark03 is trying to do. Create a general ordering of performance between cards. The fact that it doesn't use a real game engine seems very much irrelevant. Because of differences between modifications of the same engine in different games, we already know that one game absolutely cannot predict how another game using the same engine will perform. Quake3, Medal of Honor, Jedi Knight2, and Return to Castle Wolfenstein all have their own unique performance characteristics despite all being based on the Quake3 engine.

The fact that AM3 is based on the Krass engine does not seem to give it any leg up on 3dmark03. 3dmark03 has accurately depicted the performance patterns we seen in Tomb Raider, Halo, the HL2 benchmark, and other DX9 synthetics.

The trap of benchmarking is obviously when you try to say "I have a high score in benchmark/game X, so when I purchase Game Y my performance should be equally high." No. No benchmark in the world is ever going to tell you something like that unless they use the same exact engine and effects.
  Reply With Quote