Does anyone have any recommendations as to which of the common published benchmarks is the most accurate predictor of openGL performance in general and Celestia performance in particular?
As far as I know, many 3D benchmarks focus more on Direct-X performance for gaming, but may or may not give a good indication of expected openGL performance.
The ones I am aware of are 3DMark01, 3DMark03, 3DMark05, 3DMark06, and Passmark
Any experts care to chime in with an opinion?
Any other benchmarks that I might not be aware of???
Cheers
CC
Most appropriate Benchmark?
-
Topic authorChuft-Captain - Posts: 1779
- Joined: 18.12.2005
- With us: 18 years 11 months
Most appropriate Benchmark?
"Is a planetary surface the right place for an expanding technological civilization?"
-- Gerard K. O'Neill (1969)
CATALOG SYNTAX HIGHLIGHTING TOOLS LAGRANGE POINTS
-- Gerard K. O'Neill (1969)
CATALOG SYNTAX HIGHLIGHTING TOOLS LAGRANGE POINTS
-
Boux
- Posts: 435
- Joined: 25.08.2004
- With us: 20 years 3 months
- Location: Brittany, close to the Ocean
Re: Most appropriate Benchmark?
Hi, Chuft-Captain
Furmark, the ultimate OpenGl stress benchmark.
It will kill your system
Grab it there:
http://www.ozone3d.net/benchmarks/fur/index.php?lang=1
Your graphic card will feel the heat!
From the same dev, GPU Caps viewer gives interesting information about the capabilities of the graphics subsystem.
Furmark, the ultimate OpenGl stress benchmark.
It will kill your system
Grab it there:
http://www.ozone3d.net/benchmarks/fur/index.php?lang=1
Your graphic card will feel the heat!
From the same dev, GPU Caps viewer gives interesting information about the capabilities of the graphics subsystem.
Intel core i7 3770 Ivy Bridge @ 4.4 GHz -16 GB ram - 128 GB SSD cache - AMD Radeon 7970 3 GB o'clocked - Windows 7 64 Ultimate / Linux Kubuntu