Benchmark Descriptions


There are four tests that comprise the main 3DMark benchmark, all of which are brand-new. The first graphics test is called "Jane Nash" and shows a woman escaping a "mad scientist lair". Water effects abound, as do not-so-subtle advertisements for Sapphire. Jane also appears to be a hologram, since she glows in a completely unnatural way - but we would assume that the glowing serves as a good way to stress your GPU. The water effects also look nice, but the bad guys with their "orange camouflage" are even worse than Glow-bug Jane… and they subscribe to the Storm Trooper school of battle tactics, clearly incapable of hitting the broad side of a barn. They were probably too busy checking out Jane's assets….

The second graphics test is "New Calico" and it involves spaceships, asteroids, and an impressive looking planetary bombardment sequence. Perhaps it's intended as a follow-up to the "Proxycon" benchmarks from earlier 3DMark releases; that doesn't matter too much, though, as most users are simply interested in the final performance score. While it doesn't appear to be as stressful as the Jane Nash demo, we actually think the graphics and effects are better in this benchmark.



The two CPU benchmarks use similar looking scenes of differing complexity, showing a bunch of small stunt airplanes flying around a scene. One focuses on AI performance and the other looks at physics processing capabilities. PhysX hardware should improve performance on the latter, although without an appropriate system we were not yet able to verify this. Not that it matters much; improving a benchmark score is one thing, whereas improving gaming performance is a different matter. To date, only a few titles (including Unreal Tournament 3) support PhysX, and nothing we've played actually requires it. Besides the four major benchmarks, Futuremark includes six other "Feature Tests" that look at things like texturing performance, particle simulations, cloth rendering, and ray tracing among other things. These feature tests do not influence the final score, similar to what we've seen with previous 3DMark test suites.

Update #3: For those interested in viewing the first benchmark without going to the trouble of downloading and installing 3DMark Vantage, we've captured the content for a video. The frame rates are a bit choppy from the capturing process, but you can at least get some idea of what the benchmark looks like in action.


3DMark Vantage: Jane Nash from Rajinder Gill on Vimeo.
Everything Changes I can't drive 55
Comments Locked

19 Comments

View All Comments

  • piroroadkill - Tuesday, April 29, 2008 - link

    oh and 3DMark2001 is still my favourite of the lot
  • Griswold - Wednesday, April 30, 2008 - link

    I bet, it blends perfectly into the picture of "yesterdays world".
  • KHysiek - Tuesday, April 29, 2008 - link

    that comes with Vantage. Now yout get hardly anything above nothing for free.
  • skinflickBOB - Tuesday, April 29, 2008 - link

    I happen to run a business too. When I started out 11 years ago, I made one vow - to make profit - sl long as my means remained honest.

    Yeah, who'd want to earn money for a living eh?

    I suppose you go out and work for free too do you?

    Or lets all open up a business and not concentrate on charging for our services...

    It's a simple concept really - we don't have to buy it do we?

    Bob
  • michal1980 - Tuesday, April 29, 2008 - link

    yes business provides a service. However 3dmark provides nearly nothing to an end user. It was only remotly popular for stability testing, and o.c. fanbois.

    You dont play 3dmark, no games are based off of it. And the only reason it was popular at all, is because its free. Now the limited version costs 7 bucks. For a bench mark progarm. phhff sorry, vantage is an epic fail.
  • BigLan - Tuesday, April 29, 2008 - link

    Yeah, I saw it was released yesterday and was interested, but wanting $7 just to upload to the ORB?
  • Kyanzes - Friday, May 2, 2008 - link

    It's a major suckage that you have to pay for providing statistical data. I certainly won't pay for this "service", lol. 450MB download for a run-once benchmark? Stick it up to where it belongs.
  • JarredWalton - Tuesday, April 29, 2008 - link

    Article updated (page 2). Honestly, I never even realized the new registration system until I saw this comment. Ouch. Okay, so $20 is not that big of an expense - especially if you're already spending thousands of dollars to try and top the ORB charts - but with the included advertising it seems the Basic mode at least should have remained free.
  • AssBall - Tuesday, April 29, 2008 - link

    You missed the point totally while you were preaching your personal business ideals. He said they changed it so you get nothing with the free version anymore.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now