3DMark11 added to HWBOT?

[Christian Ney]

That's not a bad idea to make Overclocker(or HWBot)'s version for FM benchmarks

[Massman]

Note that a special overclocker's edition has also been suggested when Vantage was released

[[GF]Duke]

I have to say that this bench really sucks. Only way to change your score is to raise the speeds of hardware. I could not find one tweak that affects it. Its probably good for the nooob benchers since all ya have to do is CRANK IT UP!!!

After playing with it for an hour last night i've changed my mind and concluded that this benchmark is not worthy of HWBot.

[jmke]

Or this

 

3DMark11 Basic - free

3DMark11 Overclock - $5

3DMark11 Advanced - $20 - shows subtests score for easy screenshot

3DMark11 Professional - $999

 

what's the point of the $5 version in your setup?

[Maxi]

Duke;83421']I have to say that this bench really sucks. Only way to change your score is to raise the speeds of hardware. I could not find one tweak that affects it. Its probably good for the nooob benchers since all ya have to do is CRANK IT UP!!!

After playing with it for an hour last night i've changed my mind and concluded that this benchmark is not worthy of HWBot.

 

That's actually normal for a new, bring the hardware to its knee's benchmark. Tweaks just can't do anything until the hardware starts landing a few punches.

[stummerwinter]

I have to say:

 

no offline subtests => NO GO

 

20 $ are affortable compared to all the money I spend for hardware...

Edited December 8, 2010 by stummerwinter

[pro]

i am not sure if anyone mentioned this,

 

but the security on this benchmark is the worst i have seen, there might as well be no security,

 

one can choose their score and submit whatever they please..

 

as a benchmark to use as a community, this is not something that i think should be scored on HWBOT until valid security is in place...

[zoro]

i am starting to regret that i had preordered it!

And sadly enough i have to agree with Quake and Duke!

I will never preorder anything from FM in the future, i was expecting to see the better version of Vantage! but NO!!!!

[Q56_Monster]

I vote no right now. I can care less about the $20, but I do want off-line submission from a non-DX11 system. I can live without subscores if an orb link is required. That might make it harder for hwbot to monitor and more expensive for users to have unlimited submissions, but that's not my concern, hwbot will have to decide that one. If it's too hard to monitor, then so be it, no 3dm11 boints until sub-scores show on results screen.

 

The biggest concern, which was unknown at the start of this thread, is security.....this is a dead issue until security is resolved.

 

Oh, and I forgot to add, result look wacky across platforms. Some lightly overclocked systems seem to come really close to heavily overclocked systems under extreme cooling.

Edited December 8, 2010 by Q56_Monster

[uncle fester]

thats a big NO from me wayyy too many issues on this benchmark.

[Guest RedBaron]

I think YES.

[Massman]

Security leak found and reported to Futuremark. This leak is a simple dealbreaker and has to be fixed before adding.

[S_A_V]

Result can be saved to validation file. Validation file have information about subtest.

Let users attach validation file to score when submitting.

Add new fields for subtest to result page.

Add some server-side script that reads subtest details from validation file uploaded by user and put info about subtest to result page.

Same method can be used with other futuremark banchmarks.

[knopflerbruce]

If that works it would give some quite interesting data for massman to play with:D

 

maybe it's possible to do this with other 3dmarks as well?

[Massman]

Yes, this is possible and was 'kind of' planned. This has no significance in terms of verification, though ...

[MaJ0r]

If FM will fix main bug(as Massman said) I would vote add to Hwbot. But now this test requires some iprovements.

[chispy]

I would like to hear the people of FM and what they have to say , can we get a Real FM Staff member here to answer some questions ? I would like some feedback from them , i hope they are reading this tread and reply at least so that we know they are listening to their customers and care.

[xxbassplayerxx]

I don't think they want to address the issue. I posted a topic about it on their site and 70 views later still had nothing to say about it...

 

http://futuremark.yougamers.com/forum/showthread.php?t=138910

[Bobnova]

I'm against it, personally.

There are plenty of futuremark tests already, it currently kills vantage, can't see subscores, free version is nearly useless, blegh.

[pro]

i think its fair enough that we as a community pay futuremark if the bench in question meets the requirements we need it to meet,

 

some of the key to me being,

 

* flexing up to date hardware, dx11 - TICK

* heavy on GPU when it first comes out - TICK

* good level of security built in - this bench is a step backwards from 03,05,06,vantage which is a step backwards again from 3d01

* subtests visually available - we really need to see some GT and CPU/combined FPS without going into the results.xml and digging them out..

 

I think futuremark have delivered the hard parts of the deal, but left a couple of the minor parts out..

 

Unfortunately in my personal opinion the security of this bench is a deal breaker, as far as i can see any score the user wants can be punched in and submitted to ORB with a ease unlike any other bench...

[jmke]

posted at FM:

 

demi

Futuremark Staff

Location: Espoo/FI

Default Re: View Detailed Score (RE: viewing subtests score OFFLINE without submitting to ORB)

This is a feature that has been fairly widely requested, and it's definitely being considered for the first patch.

Just as a note, this would naturally only affect the Advanced (and Pro) version, as in the Basic version you need the ORB to even see the overall score.

[zcei]

Considered doesn't mean that it will be included

 

I think we should wait for that patch and look what it will bring to us!

 

But I don't really understand your last quoted sentence!? With the basic version you'll see the sub-points, but not the overall score!?!?

[Massman]

The patch will indeed include subtest scores, which will be visible for advanced and professional users. Basic usage will still only have online validation.

 

Also got a positive response to the security leaks and got notified they'll be addressed as soon as possible.

[zcei]

Ah ok!

 

But they should add the subscore result in the online validation

Then basic user could make their screenshots there...

but this requires a good working validation, otherwise it shouldn't be added!

[NCspecV81]

Duke;83421']I have to say that this bench really sucks. Only way to change your score is to raise the speeds of hardware. I could not find one tweak that affects it. Its probably good for the nooob benchers since all ya have to do is CRANK IT UP!!!

After playing with it for an hour last night i've changed my mind and concluded that this benchmark is not worthy of HWBot.

 

 

I found one for gulftown that allows for a few hundred points in the physics test at the same clocks.

 

Physics Score 12373 with GT @ 4.6 even.