Am I the only one...?
Home | Reviews and Features | Special Reports | Forums |

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 18

Thread: Am I the only one...?

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Mar 2000
    Location
    Wichita, KS, USA
    Posts
    448

    Am I the only one...?

    ...that gets sick of benchmarks for QUAKE 3 ONLY?!?!?!?!

    Maybe I'm the only one who doesn't play the game. I play other simulations (racing/flight sim) and have been looking for a good card that is RATED and COMPARED with other cards in these games.... I have a GeForce2 GTS Asus V7700 in the mail, but the only reason I went with it is the performance looked good for TV-out/DVD-playback. I couldn't find anyone rating it on a simulator game.

    To me, all these bar graphs showing FPS, etc in Q3 or any other game mean nothing. Its like reading Car and Driver's reviews of the new cars' performance in the IronMan competition....some of us don't use them for that! Okay, I'm off my soapbox now....just thought I'd get that off my chest.

    ------------------
    ~mir
    P3-733@825 | Duron 700@700
    Fighting for Peace is like Screwing for Virginity
    Fighting for Peace is like Screwing for Virginity
    i souport publik edekashun
    Are you *****fast? - http://www.*****fast.com

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Sep 2000
    Location
    Kalkaska, MI
    Posts
    696
    I totally agree. I also get sick of seeing the same game use for every benchmark comparison. I don't care if that was one of the comparisons, but I would like to see a variety of different types of games compared. That would give you a more all around impression of how good the card is. In any case, at least get a comparison between cards on some racing or flight sim game. I would think most people play either shooters or sims. That way almost everyone would be happy.

    ------------------
    WHASSSSUUUUP???

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Nov 2000
    Location
    Quebec, Canada
    Posts
    81
    The reason why people use Q3 for benchmarking is quite simple. This game is one of the most demanding on a computer. The reason why they don't use other games is that Q3 benchmarks tests more the video card than the processor speed (exept when running Q3 on low details/resolutions). You want a video card benchmark to be reflective of the video card's power and not what's under it.

    Flight Sims or other kind of simulator are more depending on the CPU than Q3 so they wouldn't be as good for benchmarking. But Q3 shouldn't be on top for long with new titles comming out, I hope

    ArGoN

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Sep 2000
    Location
    Kalkaska, MI
    Posts
    696
    But it would still be nice to see how the cards perform in sims. Pick a mhz or two and people can judge their system from there. I didn't say it needed to be anything major, I would just like to have some sort of idea how they handle.

    ------------------
    WHASSSSUUUUP???

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Mar 2000
    Location
    Wichita, KS, USA
    Posts
    448
    yeah....the scores mean nothing if you aren't going to use the card for how its tested....

    *another bad analogy*
    Its like dropping a washing machine off a two story building and rating its performance based on that alone. Its demanding on the machince, so it should have good scores, right? Okay...there are a few holes in that example, but the point remains....

    What if I was the enitre testing source. The one and only. Okay, say I rate four 20gig HDDs and give you the scores on them SOLELY on benchmarks from the Janes' Longbow Apache Flight Sim. Every rating on the new hard drives were from this benchmark on this game. What would you think?? You don't use the HDD for that purpose, do the numbers mean anything now? When the tables are turned, it makes you think...

    ------------------
    ~mir
    P3-733@825 | Duron 700@700
    Fighting for Peace is like Screwing for Virginity
    Fighting for Peace is like Screwing for Virginity
    i souport publik edekashun
    Are you *****fast? - http://www.*****fast.com

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Jul 1999
    Location
    Washington, PA USA
    Posts
    1,930
    I'm neutral on the subject, but in defence of the other side, there are reasons... standardizing. If every card is tested on Q3, it isn't about how well it works in Q3, but rather how well it works relative to other cards. Consider 3dmark... does anyone run 3dmark for fun? It is just for comparison. Sandra doesn't give any real life results, just some numbers that don't mean anything when you sit down to play the game.. you don't think about the megs of bandwidth when you play... To see how your 3d flight sim will play compared to other cards, that is how the Q3 demos work.. Don't try to benchmark every video card for every genera of gaming, thats impossible. Instead, only try to realize the truth... On the Q3 comparisons, you can, for example, see a GeforceII out guns a Geforce I, and so you can safely assume on your flight sim the same will be true.

    ------------------
    A man is offered either infinite wisdom, or infinite money. He chooses the wisdom, thinks for a minute, and realizes he should have taken the money.
    It said "requires Windows 95 or better," so I installed Linux.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Mar 2000
    Location
    Wichita, KS, USA
    Posts
    448
    HEY, I'M POUTING HERE!!

    All I'm saying is, why do I have to assume it? Why can't I have my way? It worked for Gore a few weeks ago...for awhile


    Seriously though, If what ArG said is true, then you cannot assume that. Comparing the two different game generas would be comparing apples and oranges; If its true that both games run different setups, then you can't use the scores from Q3 at all since they are from a game that relies on the card more than the CPU. In that case, it would be pointless to assume that Card X will run great on your setup because Card X runs great on another game that runs differently. In other words, If this card is great by itself will it or will it not run great on a game that requires BOTH the card and the CPU? If I haven't confused you yet...

    ------------------
    ~mir
    P3-733@825 | Duron 700@700
    Fighting for Peace is like Screwing for Virginity
    Fighting for Peace is like Screwing for Virginity
    i souport publik edekashun
    Are you *****fast? - http://www.*****fast.com

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Sep 2000
    Location
    Yokohama, Japan
    Posts
    928
    You make no sense. If the card works great on Quake3 or whatever game they are using then it would work great for a flight sim or a RPG. If it is the fastest with all of the benchmark games then it will be faster with your games as well. That is why they use those games and they test the cards on more than one game. I wouldn't go out and buy a new video card if I only play Civilization2 though because the card will make no difference.

    Of course the CPU is used also but with say a 1Gig T-bird the GeForce2 will be faster running Q3 than a GeForce2MX. It would also be faster running a flight sim. A card with faster ram and/or more ram is faster than one with less and/or slower ram. The CPU isn't going to just decide to perform better with a slower card on your flight sim. The GeForce2 will be faster. It isn't comparing apples and oranges. It would be apples and oranges if they tested one card with a 1G T-bird and another with a 1.1G T-bird. They aren't doing that.

    Whether the game uses the CPU more or not makes no difference because it is still using the video card and a faster video card is going to be faster!! It may not make as much of a difference in a flight sim as in Quake3 or MDK2 but it is still faster and will produce better frame rates. If your flight sim isn't very demanding then you probably wont need the GeForce2 and geting the MX would'nt cause that much of a dropoff in performance. If your game uses mostly the CPU and it is running slowly then get a faster CPU, not a faster video card. Like I said, I wouldn't go out and get a GeForce2 Ultra if all I did was play Sim City 3000 or something because game type are more CPU then Video card. I mean, why do I need 250FPS in The Sims??
    Beauty is in the eye of the beerholder.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Mar 2000
    Location
    Wichita, KS, USA
    Posts
    448
    I dunno....bragging rights?

    Nah, I was just making a statement on how they only rate the cards with one game...it just sounds odd to say "I bought the new Asus V7700 GeForce2 GTS because it had good reviews on another game." I understand that its supposedly the best way to test, but it just seems odd to think that way...I mean, is it going to be worth it to buy a Voodoo card when my games all come with the option to install the extra support for 3DFX cards? Thats what I'm looking for--reviews on cards running games that were designed for certain cards. NFS games have a Voodoo option. My Test Drive ones have a nVida option. I never see reviews on cards running these games...thats what I'm getting at.

    ------------------
    ~mir
    P3-733@825 | Duron 700@700
    Fighting for Peace is like Screwing for Virginity
    Fighting for Peace is like Screwing for Virginity
    i souport publik edekashun
    Are you *****fast? - http://www.*****fast.com

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Jul 1999
    Location
    Washington, PA USA
    Posts
    1,930
    Well perhaps instead of saying your card did well in Q3, brag that your card did well in "3d rendering applications." Comparing to Q3 to a 3d Flight Sim is comparing red apples to green ones. Apples to Oranges is 3d to 2d rendering (G400 v G450)

    ------------------
    A man is offered either infinite wisdom, or infinite money. He chooses the wisdom, thinks for a minute, and realizes he should have taken the money.
    It said "requires Windows 95 or better," so I installed Linux.

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Feb 2000
    Location
    Deutschland
    Posts
    936
    *Bzzzt* Wrong answer. If a card does ok in Quake 3, it only means it does ok in Quake 3, and _maybe_ in the very few games based on the Quake 3 engine. No more, no less.

    There is no such thing as a general score on 3D rendering. Anyone who claims there's such a thing, obviously has no clue about what 3D rendering means, or how it's done. Or he is trying to sell you some crappy benchmark, and you can't blame someone for lying when he's trying to sell crap. (See 3DMark2000.)

    Each game does stuff differently. They use multi-texturing to different extents, which puts a radically different strain on the graphics card's memory bandwidth. They use different amounts of polygons, and different ways to hadle those polygons. (E.g. if you use 2 matrix skeleton animations, you can use the T&L unit of a GTS. If you need 4 matrix animations, the same T&L unit is just useless, and you have to fall back to using the CPU -- though a Radeon's T&L unit could still handle it.) They use different ways to handle the lighting, different ammounts of transparency, etc, etc, etc.

    E.g., even in 3D shooter games, the way rendering is done in Unreal Tournament is fundamentally different from the one done in Quake 3. The rendering in MDK is radically different from both of those. And that in Delta Force Land Warrior is even more different. (And the rendering from 3DMark2000 is fundamentally different from any actual game.)

    And flight sims are even more different. For starters a flight sim tends to spend a lot more time on the physics per frame than your average first person shooter. They also tend to handle the terrain geometry and texturing differently from how a Quake 3 map is handled.

    ------------------
    Moraelin -- the proud member of the Idiots' Guild
    Moraelin -- the proud member of the Idiots' Guild

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Jul 1999
    Location
    Washington, PA USA
    Posts
    1,930
    Ack. I stand corrected

    Of course, benchmarking every single application/game is just not feasible.

    ------------------
    A man is offered either infinite wisdom, or infinite money. He chooses the wisdom, thinks for a minute, and realizes he should have taken the money.

    [This message has been edited by warhorse (edited 12-15-2000).]
    It said "requires Windows 95 or better," so I installed Linux.

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Jun 1999
    Location
    Norfolk
    Posts
    853
    I agree with moraelin.

    For example : my Viper 2 is very fast in Q3 compared to my V2 SLI but in Descent 3 it's SLI all the way. Even D3D on V2SLI is faster than the Viper 2 when playing D3.

    And it's not like EVERY game's gotta be benched, just a demanding example of the genre.

    [This message has been edited by Kane17 (edited 12-15-2000).]

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Sep 2000
    Location
    Yokohama, Japan
    Posts
    928
    Thats why Benchmarks aren't only Q3. I've never read a review of a video card where they only tested the card with Q3. There are several games that they use and they are always changing to keep up. The fact is that with the same processor the faster card in all of the tests will be the faster card in the games you play. Of course things might look crappy on older games that aren't patched but I really don't think that anyone can test everything!!

    It would be nice if there were different games tested though. There is no point reading several different card reviews if they are all testing using the same 3 games. The results will usually be almost the same. But I really don't think that a flight sim is as demanding on a video card as Q3 is but maybe I'm wrong. I don't play them.



    [This message has been edited by mx-6* (edited 12-15-2000).]
    Beauty is in the eye of the beerholder.

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Mar 2000
    Location
    Wichita, KS, USA
    Posts
    448
    hmmm....maybe we should start another site that just rates cards with simulators? Who's with me? I'm just saying the testing market seems saturated with tests for Q3...why is that so, and why hasn't it changed? Maybe a majority of people do play Q3, but the minority is still there. Has anyone seen a site that rates with a simulator? Seems like every site has sold out on testing for the majority. I am buying cards based on games I don't play...I don't mean to whine, but it just doesn't make sense.

    *edit*
    Moraelin sounds like he knows what he's talking about...heh If thats the case, it makes sense.
    ------------------
    ~mir
    P3-733@825 | Duron 700@700
    Fighting for Peace is like Screwing for Virginity

    [This message has been edited by Mirlyn2000 (edited 12-15-2000).]
    Fighting for Peace is like Screwing for Virginity
    i souport publik edekashun
    Are you *****fast? - http://www.*****fast.com

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •