AMD takes the record in 3dmark!

[mage_x]

=[
http://service.futuremark.com/compare?2k1=5403373

(sorry its not real, its fake)

[SemiCycle]

It is pretty easy to see how this score was reached and FAKED!!!!

424.9 FPS in nature my A$$

[inspectorhammer]

while i do doubt this a little, a oced 9700 and xp2700+ are little more believable than a duron and gf4mx. :)

anyone with similar specs here? what are your scores?

[EluSiOn]

no way that nature test can have 424.9 fsp.... that bench is faked

[mage_x]

jcviggen only gets 148fps in nature, i dont see how the other guy got 400 unless by some extreme stroke of luck. i didnt notice it before you said though

[SemiCycle]

Originally posted by mage_x
jcviggen only gets 148fps in nature, i dont see how the other guy got 400 unless by some extreme stroke of luck. i didnt notice it before you said though

We won't flame ya :)

I always check each individual part of the total benchmark to see what pushed the score the highest. There are many examples of cheating in 3dMark. I don't get it though.

It isn't like a real game, it is just a benchmark. This kinda reminds me of the people in school that would spend hours planning a way to cheat on a test instead of just spending the same amount of time studying.

[DaveSauce]

um, yea, there is NO way to get nature as the highest framerate. That is ALWAYS my lowest framerate test. That is an obvious fake and/or glitch....how the hell can nature be higher than the other games....

I just ran Car Chase and Nature, and here's what I got:
Game 1 - Car Chase - Low Detail: 98.9 fps
Game 1 - Car Chase - High Detail: 36.4 fps
Game 4 - Nature: 42.8 fps

So I ask again, HOW did someone get nature higher than any other score?

[EluSiOn]

i have a gf4... and my nature is like 74fps... and running amd 2400... given that he is using 9700... lets say double performance of my gf4 (just being generous).... and better cpu... so lets say triple my performance... his nature should be only around 210fps... but not 400+ fps.... that is all lie... its all lie....

[DaveSauce]

I think he must have modified the program and changed the nature demo or something.....something low res, but the program scored it as though it were the same nature demo, so it gave uber high marks.

but, that's just my theory.

[walldow]

i agree with dave

i get 84 fps at default (1024x768)in nature. but run at (640 x 480) just playing around and got 150fps. mabe he found a way to run at low res and got the score to read high res?

default 1024x768 13412 http://service.futuremark.com/compare?2k1=5400709

low res 640x480 16107 http://service.futuremark.com/compare?2k1=5400928

[SemiCycle]

Doubt it, I think he just found a way to cheat....

His settings list as this :

Program Version - 3DMark2001 SE
Resolution - 1024x768 32bit
Texture Format - Compressed
FSAA - Disabled
Z-Buffer Depth - 24bit
Frame Buffer - Double
Rendering Pipeline - D3D Pure Hardware T&L

[Bon3thugz43v3r]

Originally posted by EluSiOn
i have a gf4... and my nature is like 74fps... and running amd 2400... given that he is using 9700... lets say double performance of my gf4 (just being generous).... and better cpu... so lets say triple my performance... his nature should be only around 210fps... but not 400+ fps.... that is all lie... its all lie....

LOL, I like your ending, Its all Lie!! Lie!!! LIEZZ!!!!!

[maxima88]

Some pathetic person looking for some attention.
Did he really think ppl would believe him?:eek:

[Bon3thugz43v3r]

Originally posted by maxima88
Some pathetic person looking for some attention.
Did he really think ppl would believe him?:eek:
Apparently:rolleyes:

[OC-Master]

Thats about the score I'm expecting a GeForceFX 5800 Ultra paired with a Pentium4 3.4GHz Prescott or Athlon64 4200+ . That score is definately fake.


OC-Master

[XyKo]

if they can get 470fps, only tomhardware do that. i saw the video with 400+fps, and it was funny with LN.

[inspectorhammer]

Well the project no longer exists anyways. Futuremark may be a little slow in finding this stuff but they get it eventually.