Reply 2100 of 2188, by Ozzuneoj
- Rank
- l33t
H3nrik V! wrote on 2024-08-07, 22:15:Modern or retro?
Bought a GTX980Ti for my daily driver (i7 9700) to replace my GTX770. Reason? Getting 100,000 out of 3DMark2001. I was told that it IS highly cpu bound, but seriously?
Well, now I have to ask... what's the trick? Without doing any tweaking or anything I just ran it on my system and "only" got 82414, and that's on a Ryzen 7 5800X3D + GTX 3080. I'm thinking maybe it just massively favors Intel? I found a result someone posted with a score of around 167,000 using a 14900K.
It's funny to think about, but the entire program folder for 3dmark 2001SE would fit in the L3 cache on my CPU... 🤣
EDIT: Holy cow. I was looking at the more detailed results and I see ~1300fps in Nature. I remember the first time I saw that on a Ti 4400 I was blown away at the visual effects and the reasonably smooth frame rates.
Also the measured texel and polygon rates aren't exactly reliable, but it got me comparing the specs of the 3080 to my first 3D accelerator, the Voodoo 3 2000. Not even taking into account the fact that it is an infinitely more efficient architecture overall, the raw numbers (according to the specs) put the 3080 at 465GTexels/sec at boost clocks which is 1625 times the Voodoo 3 2000's texel throughput of 286MTexels/sec. 3dmark also benchmarks the polygon rate, in so in the 1-light test my 3080 managed 3382 M/Triangles/sec. The box for the Voodoo 3 2000 says ... 6... yep, 6 M/Triangles/sec. Roughly 563 times faster. I guess this is a respectable improvement for about 22 years of technological advancements. 😮