Please report all spam threads, posts and suspicious members. We receive spam notifications and will take immediate action!
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 11

Thread: Bug in 3DMark 2003, cheating is imminent?




  1. #1
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    Taipei, Taiwan
    Posts
    4,308

    Default

    While I was fooling around with the latest and greatest from FutureMark, I stumbled upon a bug which can really open the gates of cheating if it isn't fixed pronto. Here's the steps to reproduce it :

    1) Set your 3D card at default clock with your favourite overclocking utility
    2) Open 3D Mark 2003
    3) Start benchmarking, then press Escape so that benchmarking can't finish.
    4) Now open your favourite 3D card overclocker again and overclock it like there's no tomorrow
    5) Benchmark again, but this time let the benchmark finish
    6) Publish your score to the Online Browser for the world to see

    If you look carefully, you will see that the 3D Card clock that is being reported is the one you had when you started 3D Mark, and not the actual overclocked values that you used. So it seems that 3D Mark checks for the clock when it starts and NOT when it benchmarks! As you can easily realize, unless this flaw is patched, there is no way you can tell whether the scores you see are coming from overclocked cards or not. I guess FutureMark should move swiftly now and patch this version ASAP.


    http://www.neowin.net/comments.php?i...&category=main
    Cameron "Mr.Tweak" Wilmot
    Managing Director
    Tweak Town Pty Ltd

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    New England Highlands, Australia
    Posts
    21,907

    Default

    It seems that none of the "good" sites around will be usin' this as a benchmark as such as there seems to be quite a few nuisances with it that make it very questionable in it's results. :?:
    <center>:cheers:</center>

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    Taipei, Taiwan
    Posts
    4,308

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Wiggo
    It seems that none of the "good" sites around will be usin' this as a benchmark as such as there seems to be quite a few nuisances with it that make it very questionable in it's results. :?:
    <center>:cheers:</center>
    We will likely use it for the sack of thoroughness but won't depend on it totally.
    Cameron "Mr.Tweak" Wilmot
    Managing Director
    Tweak Town Pty Ltd

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Posts
    75

    Default

    Wow!!! You guys just saved me $40.00. I was all set to buy it until I read this thread. If 3Dmark03 isn't the benchmark of choice, I wonder what will take it's place?

    I'm looking to you sage guys for an answer.

    Al :confused:

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Location
    Canberra, Australia
    Posts
    1,158

    Default

    Good find, and one that needs to be patched ASAP.

    Looks like Futuremark really dropped the ball with 3DMark2003 IMHO.

    You can read about the reasons on all the various hardware sites, but the bottom line is 3DMark2003 should be used along with a whole range of other benchmarks and never in isolation.

    Even comparisons between similar machines can be pointless because the CPU test for example actually varies depending on which graphics card you're using - something which makes no sense at all!

    It's a great looking demo, and I personally think it has a lot of use as a stress test (shame the looping function needs purchase), and also to benchmark the same PC before and after tweaking, but not for comparative purposes.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    New England Highlands, Australia
    Posts
    21,907

    Default

    Until something relies on DX9 then 3DMark2001SE will have to do till 3Dmark03SE comes along. :D
    <center>:cheers:</center>

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Posts
    90

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Wiggo
    Until something relies on DX9 then 3DMark2001SE will have to do till 3Dmark03SE comes along. :D
    <center>:cheers:</center>

    Agreed. We are just now starting to get games that really use Dx8.1 to the fullest like Unreal 2.
    Also, I wonder which will run Doom3 better, high power 8.1 card or mediacore Dx9.0 card like Radeon 9500.

    I will wait the next patch of Dx9.0 cards before I make my purchase.



    Andy

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Location
    Isle of man
    Posts
    1,332

    Default

    Thats not the only bug in the new benchmark for futuremark. I downloaded it hopeing to get at least one benchmark from my direct x 7 card but it crashes when i benchmark. And i don't even get the demo. Its currently a useless app on my desktop
    What the fcuk happened to my sig?

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    New England Highlands, Australia
    Posts
    21,907

    Default

    Ya not the only one with that prob by all reports. :(


  10. #10
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Posts
    193

    Default

    I personally don't see it as a major threat to the integrity of 3DMark03 as a benchmark. I mean, it still lists your vid card - that's unchangeable. All it means is when reading reviews/articles we learn to disregard the speed settings of the vid card, and conservatively assume it's set at its highest stable setting.
    Onyx

    TweakTown
    OCAU - Overclockers Australia
    CPF - CandlePower Forums

    Antec 1080AMG with 430W TruePower

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

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
  •