# "3d Mark" Is It a Relevant Test?



## Kurt63 (Nov 9, 2021)

What do you folks think about 3d Mark ? I am new to "bench marking" and wondered if It is a relevant test ?


----------



## freeagent (Nov 9, 2021)

Yes, quite relevant..

It’s the gamers benchmark


----------



## Bill_Bright (Nov 9, 2021)

Well, it assumes you consider any benchmark program "relevant". Many would argue none are because they really do not represent real-world. 

I do not recommend them, except to compare the performance of your own machine, before and after some change/update you make. 

As for comparing two different computers, unless it is a completely fresh install of the OS, there are just too many variables.


----------



## phanbuey (Nov 9, 2021)

The best benchmarks are games. Preferably many games.

3d mark is good to make sure your CPU and GPU are performing as expected and to compare their relative performance to other people with that setup, but isn't a great indication of one configuration vs another in games.

Example: my old 7820X would get over 10K cpu score in 3dmark - beating 5600x, 8700K, 11600K, etc.  all of which soundly destroy it by double digit % in any actual game.


----------



## outpt (Nov 9, 2021)

phanbuey said:


> The best benchmarks are games. Preferably many games.
> 
> 3d mark is good to make sure your CPU and GPU are performing as expected and to compare their relative performance to other people with that setup, but isn't a great indication of one configuration vs another in games.
> 
> Example: my old 7820X would get over 10K cpu score in 3dmark - beating 5600x, 8700K, 11600K, etc.  all of which soundly destroy it by double digit % in any actual game.


QFT.


----------



## looniam (Nov 9, 2021)

Kurt63 said:


> What do you folks think about 3d Mark ?


its fun, everyone should play .


Kurt63 said:


> I am new to "bench marking" and wondered if It is a relevant test ?


which test? 3dmark is a benchmark suite - there are several; so a firestrike score (being DX11) would not be relevant to a DX12 game.

still, being a synthetic benchmark, its scoring may not always translate to real world results.


----------



## oxrufiioxo (Nov 9, 2021)

Yeah, it's good when used as a tool for comparative reason of your own hardware changes.... It can also be helpful when overclocking to make sure you are actually getting an improvement.


----------



## Bill_Bright (Nov 9, 2021)

phanbuey said:


> and to compare their relative performance to other people with that setup


"With that setup" is the problem - and exactly what I meant when I said there are too many variables. How many people have the exact same hardware and hardware configuration? That is, exact same motherboard with exact same bios version, exact same timings and voltages. Exact same RAM, CPU, graphics card and drives? 

Then of those, how many have the exact same security software and other software loaded and running with Windows. 

Just too many variables. 

Of the over 1.5 billion computers out there, essentially each and every one becomes unique within the first few minutes of the very first boot.


----------



## phanbuey (Nov 9, 2021)

Bill_Bright said:


> "With that setup" is the problem - and exactly what I meant when I said there are too many variables. How many people have the exact same hardware and hardware configuration? That is, exact same motherboard with exact same bios version, exact same timings and voltages. Exact same RAM, CPU, graphics card and drives?
> 
> Then of those, how many have the exact same security software and other software loaded and running with Windows.
> 
> ...



That's true of any software bench though. -- at the end of the day it shouldn't matter as you're taking those variables into account as part of the comparison.

Yes an HP with bloatware will get crushed by the same components running a clean/tuned OS with proper cooling... but that's the point isn't it?  To show you how your configuration choices run alongside your hardware.

Edit: @oxrufiioxo that hardware config is definitely something lol.  Seems like it ran better than expected.


----------



## oxrufiioxo (Nov 9, 2021)

Bill_Bright said:


> "With that setup" is the problem - and exactly what I meant when I said there are too many variables. How many people have the exact same hardware and hardware configuration? That is, exact same motherboard with exact same bios version, exact same timings and voltages. Exact same RAM, CPU, graphics card and drives?
> 
> Then of those, how many have the exact same security software and other software loaded and running with Windows.
> 
> ...




I think it can still be useful for this.... This is a really dumb configuration but as you can see it performs within expectations given the really bad hardware combination. Was still fun to mess around with regardless.


----------



## outpt (Nov 9, 2021)

oxrufiioxo said:


> I think it can still be useful for this.... This is a really dumb configuration but as you can see it performs within expectations given the really bad hardware combination. Was still fun to mess around with regardless.
> 
> View attachment 224558


That’s one killer setup.


----------



## oxrufiioxo (Nov 9, 2021)

outpt said:


> That’s one killer setup.



It was something I put together for my Buddies daughter from spare parts..... Minus the 3090....

The actual Hardware she is getting 



I think it will handle Roblox/Minecraft no problem.


----------



## Deleted member 67555 (Nov 9, 2021)

Bill_Bright said:


> Well, it assumes you consider any benchmark program "relevant". Many would argue none are because they really do not represent real-world.
> 
> I do not recommend them, except to compare the performance of your own machine, before and after some change/update you make.
> 
> As for comparing two different computers, unless it is a completely fresh install of the OS, there are just too many variables.


This.
Benchmarks are great for upgrading and making sure your build is "roughly" where it's performance should be.


----------



## Bill_Bright (Nov 9, 2021)

phanbuey said:


> That's true of any software bench though.


Exactly! Which is why I said in my first post that none are really relevant - except in before and after comparisons on the same machine.



> -- at the end of the day it shouldn't matter as you're taking those variables into account as part of the comparison.


That's nonsense! 

How are these people "taking into account" different RAM speeds, brands and models and amounts? How are they taking into account, different page file sizes? Different running software? Different firmware on their motherboards and graphics cards? 


oxrufiioxo said:


> I think it can still be useful for this.... This is a really dumb configuration but as you can see it performs within expectations given the really bad hardware combination. Was still fun to mess around with regardless.


If using it to see if your system is "in the ball park" compared to "similar" systems, then fine. But if you are using it to compare with your gaming buddy to see which machine is better, then all that is going to do is raise blood pressure, recede hairlines, cause animosities, and, as seen in forums like this way too many times, create frustrated users who are  reformatting, reinstalling, dinking with this, tweaking that, and who still are not happy with their perfectly fine machines!


----------



## oxrufiioxo (Nov 9, 2021)

Bill_Bright said:


> If using it to see if your system is "in the ball park" compared to "similar" systems, then fine. But if you are using it to compare with your gaming buddy to see which machine is better, then all that is going to do is raise blood pressure, recede hairlines, cause animosities, and, as seen in forums like this way too many times, create frustrated users who are  reformatting, reinstalling, dinking with this, tweaking that, and who still are not happy with their perfectly fine machines!



100% agree.


----------



## phanbuey (Nov 9, 2021)

Bill_Bright said:


> That's nonsense!
> 
> How are these people "taking into account" different RAM speeds, brands and models and amounts? How are they taking into account, different page file sizes? Different running software? Different firmware on their motherboards and graphics cards?



That's the point of the benchmarks.  Or any competitions -- this isn't a scientific diagnostic tool for your system,  it's a race -- a piece of code that runs and gives a score.  When you go to a race they dont control or ask each individual runner the thickness of their socks and how much coffee they drank that morning.

Each setup of core components (CPUs and GPUs, Storage etc) has an optimal or close to optimal configuration - if you're very far away from that for whatever reason (firmware, software, temperatures, power supply/settings, etc.) Then that is a sign to you that your core hardware components have potential to improve.


----------



## Fouquin (Nov 9, 2021)

Bill_Bright said:


> Well, it assumes you consider any benchmark program "relevant". Many would argue none are because they really do not represent real-world.
> 
> I do not recommend them, except to compare the performance of your own machine, before and after some change/update you make.
> 
> As for comparing two different computers, unless it is a completely fresh install of the OS, there are just too many variables.



This is the correct answer. However, those variables are working for you, not against you. Since every aspect of the system _can _be configured, you can push the boundaries of what should be possible with a set of hardware. You also have error margins, run to run variance, and general hiccups that you have to eliminate from testing. 



Bill_Bright said:


> That's nonsense!
> 
> How are these people "taking into account" different RAM speeds, brands and models and amounts? How are they taking into account, different page file sizes? Different running software? Different firmware on their motherboards and graphics cards?



By running the fastest RAM clock, by using the best brand, by configuring the most efficient DRAM array for their board and IMC. By configuring their page file, core count, turbo locking, ambient temps, SSD, even RAM caches. Firmware is easy to flash and keep consistent, and tests such as 3DMark itself can weed out which is the better performance set of firmware for a given config. Anyone benchmarking at a high level is stripping their OS, using custom firmware, tuning everything down to the VRAM timings, and controlling every element of their environment as they can to get the next point above the competition. Every variable can be controlled, and they control them with as much precision as is possible.

For the home user it's just a fun tool, and maybe you get a little competitive and compare your OC to others for laughs.


----------



## RandallFlagg (Nov 9, 2021)

I have found it to be immensely useful, but It's more useful on locked CPUs than unlocked ones.  Too many OC / Liquid nitrogen types on the unlocked processors that really mess up any comparisons.   

At one point I was like #4 for the fastest CPU score on a 10400 - mostly via memory tweaks.  This old score is #23 now.  This is with fairly cheap motherboard and RAM.   





You can see where you are scoring relative to the bulk of other users too, which is nice.  Being in the top 10% is where you should be if you're an enthusiast IMO, don't want to be at that 50% mark or you might be better off with a Dell


----------



## Kurt63 (Nov 9, 2021)

oxrufiioxo said:


> I think it can still be useful for this.... This is a really dumb configuration but as you can see it performs within expectations given the really bad hardware combination. Was still fun to mess around with regardless.
> 
> View attachment 224558





RandallFlagg said:


> I have found it to be immensely useful, but It's more useful on locked CPUs than unlocked ones.  Too many OC / Liquid nitrogen types on the unlocked processors that really mess up any comparisons.
> 
> At one point I was like #4 for the fastest CPU score on a 10400 - mostly via memory tweaks.  This old score is #23 now.  This is with fairly cheap motherboard and RAM.
> 
> ...


Nice !!!! I am in the 9200-9500 range...... I have to figure out how to post my score ....... back to you folks to learn !!!!!


----------



## TheoneandonlyMrK (Nov 9, 2021)

looniam said:


> its fun, everyone should play .
> 
> which test? 3dmark is a benchmark suite - there are several; so a firestrike score (being DX11) would not be relevant to a DX12 game.
> 
> still, being a synthetic benchmark, its scoring may not always translate to real world results.


I nearly have every achievement,, , Again.


----------



## Kurt63 (Nov 9, 2021)

RandallFlagg said:


> I have found it to be immensely useful, but It's more useful on locked CPUs than unlocked ones.  Too many OC / Liquid nitrogen types on the unlocked processors that really mess up any comparisons.
> 
> At one point I was like #4 for the fastest CPU score on a 10400 - mostly via memory tweaks.  This old score is #23 now.  This is with fairly cheap motherboard and RAM.
> 
> ...


----------



## looniam (Nov 9, 2021)

TheoneandonlyMrK said:


> I nearly have every achievement,, , Again.


my personal favorite:


----------



## TheoneandonlyMrK (Nov 9, 2021)

looniam said:


> my personal favorite:
> View attachment 224580


Indeed , some took genuine effort.

My faves the mystery machine.


----------



## Kurt63 (Nov 9, 2021)

Thanks, folks .....once again y'all have taught me something and more importantly put it into perspective ...... much appreciated !!!!!      



TheoneandonlyMrK said:


> Indeed , some took genuine effort.
> 
> My faves the mystery machine.


I just snotted Mountain dew .....I'm chocking horribly !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!        ROFLMAO


----------



## freeagent (Nov 9, 2021)

Its good competition. You can run it for whatever reason you want, but competitive 3dmark benchmarking has been a thing for decades. Venture over to HWBOT and have a look.


----------



## rethcirE (Nov 9, 2021)

Although I don't believe this takes into account the Standalone version that runs without Steam. I use it mostly to stress and stability test my gaming laptop. It's a great learning tool, as well as the benchmarking challenge which I also find fun. Some scores in signature


----------



## Bill_Bright (Nov 9, 2021)

phanbuey said:


> That's the point of the benchmarks. Or any competitions  -- this isn't a scientific diagnostic tool for your system, it's a race --


NO!!!! That's the problem - you are totally wrong! 

But in your defense, there are others who have that same wrong misunderstanding - so you are not alone! 

 It is NOT a competition in any way or sense or form. It is NOT a race. 

By definition, a benchmark is a "standard", or a "bar" of excellence for which others are measured against or compared with. It is NOT a competition. 



phanbuey said:


> When you go to a race they dont control or ask each individual runner the thickness of their socks and how much coffee they drank that morning.


What does that have to do with the price of rice in China in the summertime when it rains? Nothing. Just as it has nothing to do with benchmarking a system to see if it "measures" up to expectations - or, for example, published specs. 

But if you want to talk thickness of socks, you are wrong there too. Professional golfers, for example MUST use clubs that are at least a certain length, but no more than another length. Golf balls must comply to a specific standard. Clubs must comply with specific weight standards. Baseballs must comply with standards, as must bats. NASCAR engines must be "short" blocks, a V-8 and use carbs.  

You can indeed use a benchmark program to measure how one performs in a competition - but that is not it's purpose. In that scenario, the benchmark is just a simple tape measure, a measuring device to see how far the jumper jumped.


----------



## Deleted member 67555 (Nov 9, 2021)

I love you Bill
It's completely clear now.


----------



## R-T-B (Nov 9, 2021)

I mean it is what you make it.  There are those who make it a race, and those who want to check if their system is performing "as average" for such a config.

If can be good for both, you know.


----------



## freeagent (Nov 9, 2021)

Bill_Bright said:


> It is NOT a competition in any way or sense or form. It is NOT a race


Well, that's how it starts. Just as a user checking things out.. to make sure their rig can run it, or to see how badly it runs it.. then to see how it stacks up. If said user decides he wants to try overclocking, he can, and he can run that benchmark again and compare it against other like minded individuals. Once the user approaches the last few MHz he can get, he can take it a step further and tune the OS a bit, eeking out that last little bit. That's what makes it competitive. Not stock hardware. This is not a Dell zone. Nothing against a Dell of course, especially if it has better hardware than mine 

Maybe its just me.. but I don't do stock, my fans are loud when they don't need to be, and I am into chasing MHz.. that is more fun than watching a benchmark imo. The score is just a result of my work. I play at 1080p/60 I don't even need to overclock lol.. but I do anyways.


----------



## GerKNG (Nov 9, 2021)

basically Cinebench for GPUs (mostly)
fantastic benchmarks, comparisons between hardware, world records. but nothing to test stability with.


----------



## outpt (Nov 9, 2021)

I think it can be looped.not sure where to look though


----------



## 95Viper (Nov 9, 2021)

Alright, let's play nice and stay on topic.


----------



## looniam (Nov 9, 2021)

outpt said:


> I think it can be looped.not sure where to look though


ya gotta pay for that:





95Viper said:


> Alright, let's play nice and stay on topic.



10-4 you got me before i got to it . . .


----------



## Bill_Bright (Nov 9, 2021)

freeagent said:


> Well, that's how it starts. Just as a user checking things out.. to make sure their rig can run it, or to see how badly it runs it.. then to see how it stacks up.


Right! But that is not competing. That is just seeing if your system meets expectations. 


freeagent said:


> If said user decides he wants to try overclocking, he can, and he can run that benchmark again and compare it against other like minded individuals.


Yes. I agree - but unless he has the exact same hardware, it is not really a competition. It is just a comparison. 

Seriously, ask yourself what computer hardware is specifically designed to "compete"? I did not say "marketed". I said "designed". 

The problem here is people can thoroughly enjoy and being totally entertained with their games. Then they run one of these benchmarks and read some nonsense that someone got better FPS or better that, and now suddenly are not enjoying their game anymore because they "think" their hardware is not up to snuff. Total nonsense!


----------



## phill (Nov 9, 2021)

I think it depends on which pill you take...

Take the blue one and it's no big deal, but take the red one and its over for your wallet....

I used to bench for a UK team, I was in the top 5 in the UK for a while but when I had realised the money I'd spent and the fact if I killed my CPU I'd just bought at the time (5960X I believe, £1000 that was...) I would have been a very upset little guy....
For those sponsored or have unlimited money, it's no big deal but if your paying for it yourself wow can it suck the money from your life...  Not to mention your time too......

That said, I got back into crunching and efficiency for the most part now.  The gaming and the benchmarking are largely there when I build a new system and I'd like to see what it can do..  That said, when I had my 3090, I don't think I ever benched it!


----------



## Kissamies (Nov 9, 2021)

Personally I use 3dmark for example checking GPU OC stability and when I've upgraded something, to see has the performance got any better. Bought the Advanced license on sale for like 8EUR so I don't need to see the demo rolling every time etc.

Also 3DMark has been the leading 3d benchmark for over 20 years, that's also something. And it's from Finland.


----------



## TheoneandonlyMrK (Nov 9, 2021)

Kurt63 said:


> Thanks, folks .....once again y'all have taught me something and more importantly put it into perspective ...... much appreciated !!!!!
> 
> 
> I just snotted Mountain dew .....I'm chocking horribly !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!        ROFLMAO


Put your username in and email address  , my copy is on steam so it auto sorted.

I know what my pc scores so by testing I know if something is wrong, and due to the amount of testing I've done I now know something Is wrong, it's just not the pc.


----------



## looniam (Nov 9, 2021)

Bill_Bright said:


> Right! But that is not competing. That is just seeing if your system meets expectations.
> 
> Yes. I agree - but unless he has the exact same hardware, it is not really a competition. It is just a comparison.
> 
> ...


the problem is some people don't understand that benchmarks can be used competitively. even U/L (formally futermark) has a HOF for the highest of scores. and having the same hardware configuration is senseless. *its by having various hardware configurations is how you find out what works best w/which benchmark in the suite. *

your points are illogical; saying benchmarks can be compared but that comparison cannot be competitive or using different hardware wouldn't be competitive sounds like you've never competed.

you should try it. and btw, i would hope that all hardware is designed to compete in some manner with what's already on the market - or why design it?

for posterity:








						UNIGINE Benchmarks
					

Performance benchmarks by Unigine




					benchmark.unigine.com
				





> *Compete on the global leaderboard*
> VR mode with Oculus and SteamVR HMDs
> Loop stress-test to check hardware stability
> Use the benchmark for commercial purposes
> Automate QA tests in hardware production


----------



## RandallFlagg (Nov 10, 2021)

It's cheap to race on lower end chips, locked intel like my 10400 was or probably some of the AMD APUs.  Not free, mind you, but cheap.  Sort of like racing Go-Karts.

Not cheap to race with unlocked chips.  Sorta like trying to get into NASCAR.


----------



## Bill_Bright (Nov 10, 2021)

looniam said:


> the problem is some people don't understand that benchmarks can be used competitively


NO! It is comments like that that creates all this confusion! 

Can you use a ruler competitively? NO! 

That is all a benchmark program is - a ruler to measure how well this hardware performs. 



looniam said:


> your points are illogical; saying benchmarks can be compared but that comparison cannot be competitive or using different hardware wouldn't be competitive sounds like you've never competed.


It is this statement that is illogical.  

And I never said comparisons cannot be competitive - but that is the egos of users competing.

And to my point all along - none of that is a "true" indication of how "entertaining" a game will be. 

I have competed in many different activities and contests. It is you who don't get it. 



looniam said:


> even U/L (formally futermark) has a HOF for the highest of scores.


Right. They got further down the ruler. It is their hardware that was competing. The benchmark program measured how well the hardware did. 



looniam said:


> *its by having various hardware configurations is how you find out what works best w/which benchmark in the suite. *


 Yeah, so what? 

You don't even know what you are arguing about!   I said from the very beginning, way back in post #3, these programs are great for comparing the performance of your own machine, "before and after some change/update you make."

Sorry looniam but you are looking through a tunnel here. Can a benchmark program be used to measure performance for a competition? Yes. But is that the primary purpose of benchmarks? No. Can benchmark programs give a false sense of inferiority or superiority? Absolutely! Why? Because they don't reflect real-world play. 

You and phanbuey and others seem to think it is all about drag racing at the track. AND THAT IS FINE, if that is your thing. But that's not the real world! Achieving the best times at the track is a competition. But being the top dragster does NOT mean that car can take the family on a vacation, on a ride through a curvy mountain road, or go get a week's worth of groceries. Or take the kids to school. Or brake in time to prevent an accident.


----------



## Bones (Nov 10, 2021)

Guys, all this doesn't mean much since it boils down to a single thing - Relevance is in the eye of the beholder.
If they want to run it, they will and if not they won't.

I can't put it any simpler than that regardless of all the "Reasons" why, all that being in the "Eye" of the individual as well.


----------



## looniam (Nov 10, 2021)

Bill_Bright said:


> NO! It is comments like that that creates all this confusion!
> 
> Can you use a ruler competitively? NO!


if i am using it to measure the difference in distance two people throw a ball, YES!


Bill_Bright said:


> Right. *They got further down the ruler*. It is their hardware that was competing. The benchmark program measured how well the hardware did.


i though you just said you cannot use a ruler?

you appear to be confused that something can and does have more than one purpose and not all of them need to be written in a book. it's up to the people involved on whether or not their activities are competitive or not. the people talking about benchmark competitions don't seemed confused at all.

edit
i am now done talking about your definition of what is a competition. nice chat.


----------



## Bill_Bright (Nov 10, 2021)

Bones said:


> Relevance is in the eye of the beholder.


And that is very true. But as I have been trying to get across to those not willing to listen is that sadly, these benchmarking programs often cause those people to "perceive" their systems are inadequate simply because someone else's (maybe similar, maybe totally different) system scored better in the benchmark program. But does that mean their computer provides less gameplay or enjoyment now, because all of a sudden a benchmark program gave a lower score? Nope. But do they think or perceive otherwise? In some cases, yes. 



looniam said:


> if i am using it to measure the difference in distance two people throw a ball, YES!


No!  You are just using the ruler to simply "measure" those distances. The ruler did not cause the winning person to throw farther than the other competitors. Just the same as any benchmarking program can not make a computer the fastest computer. 

I am not confused. It is you who seem to think, or are at least suggesting these benchmark programs make one computer faster than another, or that they represent real-world performance. They don't. Does more horsepower automatically mean faster times? Nope! Will the fastest sprinter win the marathon? Hurdles? Obstacle course? Will the stop watch make one person faster than the other? 

If you want to use this benchmark program to see how your system competes against another, that's fine. But do NOT assume (or kid yourself into thinking) that faster times in your benchmarking program means that computer will provide better gameplay or be more entertaining than the other computers. Or, for that matter, that it will perform better at compiling a database, graphics editing, or any other computer tasks.


----------



## freeagent (Nov 10, 2021)

Bill_Bright said:


> these benchmarking programs often cause those people to "perceive" their systems are inadequate simply because someone else's (maybe similar, maybe totally different) system scored better in the benchmark program.


Hey, you gotta have something to blame for your incompetence. I usually blame my motherboard because its convenient. And I contemplate buying the other board "just to see". 


Bill_Bright said:


> But does that mean their computer provides less gameplay or enjoyment now, because all of a sudden a benchmark program gave a lower score?


Maybe a little.. depends on the score


----------



## looniam (Nov 10, 2021)

Bill_Bright said:


> I am not confused. It is you who seem to think, or are at least suggesting these benchmark programs make one computer faster than another, or that they represent real-world performance.


i never said anything of the sort:


looniam said:


> its fun, everyone should play .
> 
> which test? 3dmark is a benchmark suite - there are several; so a firestrike score (being DX11) would not be relevant to a DX12 game.
> 
> *still, being a synthetic benchmark, its scoring may not always translate to real world results.*


as a matter of fact - its the opposite. _actually i haven't seen anyone in this thread state anything of the sort_. now if you would stop attempting putting words in my mouth, as i said i am done discussion your definitions of a competition. 

i assure you any further effort at shoving your opinion down my throat will be a waste of effort.


----------



## watzupken (Nov 10, 2021)

For one, I don't like to run benchmarks because I think they are unrepresentative of real world performance. I run it perhaps once to make sure that the results are somewhat in line with what I see in reviews, etc. Other than that, I rather test stability and bench by means of running a few games. 

One of the thing I don't like about 3D Mark is that the tests are very short, which may not necessarily result in issues surfacing. Even if you loop it many times, each test (2 GPU and 1 CPU tests) is about a minute long at best. GPU then idles for quite awhile in between tests.


----------



## Bones (Nov 10, 2021)

Bill_Bright said:


> And that is very true. But as I have been trying to get across to those not willing to listen is that sadly, these benchmarking programs often cause those people to "perceive" their systems are inadequate simply because someone else's (maybe similar, maybe totally different) system scored better in the benchmark program. But does that mean their computer provides less gameplay or enjoyment now, because all of a sudden a benchmark program gave a lower score? Nope. *But do they think or perceive otherwise? In some cases, yes.*


I believe you touched on something here, I've known for a long time much of it is really nothing more than a marketing tool.

Think about it for a moment, there is a reason why there is a listing of who has the highest scores in said benchmark everyone can see. This appeals to the "Competitive" nature of many as in they aren't doing well enough to be in the top rankings and I mean you don't want to be "The Guy" that got left behind right?
So.... What does one do to get there?
Why buy brandnew hardware that's faster of course!

These benchmarks exists to not only let people know how they are doing with their tweaks and so on but there is a marketing angle as well, it's when you really start comparing results to others is when this effect can take hold.
It can even become an addiction, appealing to the competitive side of a person, like gambling does - And it's not as different as you may think from that.

Both certainly do one thing well and that's to get the money out of your pocket and into the pockets of the guys that makes the hardware, which is partially why at least they even have it setup this way. This is why there is a certain amount of appeal to what's perceived as faster and that in turn gets a person to wanting it, this "Want" is basically just like when the gambler places another bet, trying yet again one more time to get a win because they want it - Have to have it in fact. 
And of course to get it, you gotta spend some $$ which is really the goal of it all no matter how you want to say or spin it.

Believe me, you guys already know how it is with faster, sportier cars and compare it to faster, fancier hardware - It's no different because the appeal that helps to drives sales of it is the same.
Take a minute to think about it and you'll see.


----------



## Bill_Bright (Nov 10, 2021)

freeagent said:


> Hey, you gotta have something to blame for your incompetence.


LOL

Well, if you can't blame yourself, and you can't blame someone else, and the dog didn't do it, then you have to blame some inanimate object!  



looniam said:


> i never said anything of the sort:


Please, lets try to keep emotions out of this and work with me here for a second as I try (thus far, poorly) to struggle my way through explaining my point.

I said, you "seem to be suggesting". I was not accusing you of saying anything. But note you said, "_benchmarks can be used competitively._" And that "suggests" a benchmark program can be "used" to give one user or computer a competitive edge over another.

It "suggests" the user can choose which program to "use" to give them the advantage, in the same manner a professional tennis player may choose Racket A over Racket B because they feel the different string tension, grip or weight of Racket A will give them a competitive edge over his or her opponent. That works for tennis rackets because in professional tennis, the rules don't state all rackets must be the exact same. There are specified ranges, but not exact requirements. Players are allowed some flexibility in those "tools of the trade".

Not so in benchmarking. If a 3.0GHz CPU is pushed to a top speed of 4.216GHz (by the user changing clocks, voltages, etc. on the motherboard) it does not matter which benchmarking program is used to "measure" that speed. Any and all benchmarking programs must report the same top speed of 4.216GHz.

Right?

If a sprinter runs the 100 yard dash in 15.08 seconds, does it matter if the stopwatch is made by Seiko and not Ultrak? Does it matter that the measuring wheel to map out that 100 yards is made by Zosen and not Keson? Does using a Seiko stopwatch and a Zosen measuring wheel give this runner a competitive edge over that runner who uses a different watch and different wheel?

Yes, those tools are used in the competition, but only as tools to ensure a level playing field; not to give one player an advantage over another. Those tools are not "used competitively". 

See my point? I am sorry to you and all if have not been clear.



looniam said:


> still, being a synthetic benchmark, its scoring may not always translate to real world results.


And we have been in 100% agreement all the way through from the start on that point! 



Bones said:


> I believe you touched on something here, I've known for a long time much of it is really nothing more than a marketing tool.


Exactly!

Is a super high-tech, electronic jumbotron scoreboard more accurate, or does it give one team a competitive edge over a simple manual flip scoreboard? No. But the pretty display and fancy lights sure is more fun.


----------



## looniam (Nov 10, 2021)

Bill_Bright said:


> Please, lets try to keep emotions out of this and work with me here for a second as I try (thus far, poorly) to struggle my way through explaining my point.


my emotions are fine aside from being astounded and flabbergasted with  your replies;  sorry if my honesty is offensive.


Bill_Bright said:


> I said, you "seem to be suggesting". I was not accusing you of saying anything. But note you said, "_benchmarks can be used competitively._" And that "suggests" a benchmark program can be "used" to give one user or computer a competitive edge over another.
> 
> It "suggests" the user can choose which program to "use" to give them the advantage, in the same manner a professional tennis player may choose Racket A over Racket B because they feel the different string tension, grip or weight of Racket A will give them a competitive edge over his or her opponent. That works for tennis rackets because in professional tennis, the rules don't state all rackets must be the exact same. There are specified ranges, but not exact requirements. Players are allowed some flexibility in those "tools of the trade".
> 
> ...


you do not need to keep trying to explain yourself. i have understood from the beginning and i still will tell you, you have me all wrong. why? you keep referring to "a benchmark"; a noun, whereas i am talking "benchmark_ing"_, the activity; a verb. and that will; concluded the semantic argument for today . .

capisce? 

to direct that benchmark competitions gives the advantage to the hardware (maybe excuse the paraphrase); i can assure you that if you look at HWBot benchmarking competitions that _it's the rules is what makes it a level playing field._ that are very smart people that know how to do that. 

i do not recall the exact details since i wasn't a participate _but as an example, _there had been a HWBot cpu benchmark competition of i9-9900Ks. all the hardware was provided; HWBot purchased the cpus with gigabyte and gskill providing the mobos and ram sticks. though the 'first crack" at a specific cpu, mobo and ram kits was through a lottery - to remove "the luck of the draw" of any golden sample - each contestant had a turn using each cpu on each mobo and ram kit. in other words; all the variables were removed and it was a 10 day contest. so yeah, the contestant won, not what tennis racket hardware they had.

another submission in the "cool story bro" file:

an amd/nvidia fanboy gpu benchmarking completion on OCN a few years ago - and to try to properly set the table; maxwell was out but amd was still chugging along w/GCN - don't think polaris was out then - amd was still in hawaii. so there are some big green gun competing against little red pea shooters, yeah?  think those big guns would have the advantage right?

didn't turn out like that, nope - being a "fanboy" competition; all the amd fanboys showed up and ankle bit all of us 980ti/titan(m) submissions to win. was it fair? who cares?!? at the end of the day it was a blast to banter and talk smack back and forth while submitting benchmarks scores in the forum for a week. also the results didn't mmake me want to exchange my 980ti for a 7970. 

a side note for the side note - one guy and i had close to the ~same hardware setup cpu/gpu/ram but different mobo with his being a SFF build. we kept swapping scores back and forth but he ending up beating me. _at no time did i feel compelled to build a SFF because of that_; i don't know why anyone in their right mind would.

benchmark?
whatever.

benchmarking?
*FUN*  - maybe you should try it before you judge.


----------



## freeagent (Nov 10, 2021)

I think Bill should start overclocking with us


----------



## Mr.Scott (Nov 10, 2021)

freeagent said:


> I think Bill should start overclocking with us


Nah.
I'd rather put a gun in my mouth.


----------



## Bill_Bright (Nov 10, 2021)

freeagent said:


> I think Bill should start overclocking with us



LOL  You should never make assumptions about something you are clueless about. 

Back in my youth, we used to overclock all the time - but that was when it was a real challenge - nothing like today where you simply enter the BIOS Setup menu and change a couple settings. What's the challenge, or risk in that? In fact, motherboard makers make it so simple today, they even provide OC presets in the BIOS, and many motherboard makers have utility programs like ASUS AI Overclocking or MSI Afterburner. 

The oldtimers around here can attest to this. Back in the day, if you wanted to change voltages and/or clocks, you had to cut motherboard circuit traces and solder in jumpers. Then cross your fingers and toes, pray to the digital gods, and promise your firstborn to the underworld, you didn't cross-connect the wrong circuit. 

Talk about voiding warranties! And there was no such thing as a budget motherboard or CPU back in the 80s and early 90s - back when the original IBM PC and "IBM clones" were all we had to work with - when we could afford them. 

If you needed to flash the BIOS, you physically had to remove the EPROM and flash ("burn") it with a burner - after erasing it with a super strong UV light source. Do it wrong and you have to order a new BIOS chip from the board maker - if they would sell it to you. At least when EEPROMs came about, you didn't have to physically remove the chips from the board. 

Today, if you change a setting and the system fails to boot, or becomes unstable, no problem! Just reset it and be good to go. 

You kids today don't know how easy you have it. 

Today, if I want more power, I go buy it. 



Mr.Scott said:


> Nah.
> I'd rather put a gun in my mouth.


Me too.


----------



## tabascosauz (Nov 10, 2021)

Bill_Bright said:


> LOL  You should never make assumptions about something you are clueless about.





Bill_Bright said:


> The oldtimers





Bill_Bright said:


> You kids.



How _ironic _that you are addressing freeagent, then. 

How about you leave it at "3DMark is not relevant to daily usage", without trying to foist your opinion amongst the rest of the OC community that regularly uses 3DMark both casually and competitively? Or launching into another Pepperidge Farm tirade?

Back to OP, the tune of his post was clearly that he wanted to get into benchmarking. Doesn't matter if it's for competitive reasons, 3DMark has been a staple for a long time.


----------



## Noreng (Nov 10, 2021)

3DMark Time Spy is a pretty good benchmark, it gives you a decent idea of how well optimized your memory, CPU, and GPU are.

While the workload of physics simulations using SSE isn't all that representative today, it's a lot closer to actual gaming workloads than Cinebench will ever be.


----------



## Mr.Scott (Nov 10, 2021)

The Unigine benchmarks are more realistic of everyday use than Futuremarks are.


----------



## Bill_Bright (Nov 10, 2021)

Gee whiz, tabascosauz. That was hardly necessary or appropriate. I am entitled to express my opinion just as much as everyone else. Please go back and see what was said and you will see I generally agreed with everyone on most points - as did they me on most points.

We all agreed, for example that these are "_synthetic_" and "_may not translate to real world results_".

If they contest my opinion, as they are entitled too, that's fine. But the other way around and you launch a personal attack?

Three other moderators have been participating in this thread with civility all along. And you join just to insult. Wow.

Well, you got what you want. I'm out of here.


----------



## freeagent (Nov 10, 2021)

Bill_Bright said:


> you are clueless


Ahh.. ok.. so 25 years ago you were into clocking and now you have outgrown it.. cool. I wouldn’t say I am clueless, but I haven’t seen anything recent, hence my comment.

And yes, overclocking for the most part is pretty tame these days. It’s so easy even an old timer like you can figger it out


----------



## Bill_Bright (Nov 10, 2021)

To be sure, freeagent, you are not clueless about many things - including overclocking. I did not mean to suggest you were - only about my history with computers and overclocking. 

It was a bad choice of words, on my part. My apologies for that. It was not very "civil" of me. 

Not sure outgrown is the right word either. More like, been there, done that. Outgrown seems to suggest (to me) a mature vs immature view, and that's not it. Or at least that is not how I fee. 



freeagent said:


> And yes, overclocking for the most part is pretty tame these days. It’s so easy even an old timer like you can figger it out


Yes, it is that easy. And that is why, for me, there's no challenge (or risk) in it anymore. 

But if others are in to it - that's fine. I never suggested otherwise. And for sure, there are many useful tools those users can use to "measure" their accomplishments. I happen to agree Mr. Scott and like Unigine benchmarks better than the 3DMark products. And I think Prime95 is overrated. But that's me.


----------



## freeagent (Nov 10, 2021)

All good my man, I usually don’t hold a grudge 

I know a few people that still clock old hardware, gold fingers and all! They are good people with a ton of skill.


----------



## Bill_Bright (Nov 10, 2021)

freeagent said:


> They are good people with a ton of skill.


Often learned the hard (expensive) way since schematics were non-existent, as were folks with previous experience. Not sure about gold fingers, but sweaty foreheads, that's for sure. 



freeagent said:


> All good my man


Thanks.


----------



## Deleted member 67555 (Nov 10, 2021)

I remember back in the early 90's having a "Turbo" button. 16mhz to 20mhz....I could feel the speed.
Wing commander went from 7fps to 8 or maybe even 9fps.
That button taught me how to Overclock..
It was a simple 2 way switch...jumper 1 or jumper 2.
Didn't take long to realize what to do


----------



## johnspack (Nov 10, 2021)

Heh,  turbo button started with XTs.  From 4.77mhz to an astonishing 9.54mhz!  From what I remember back then,  ocing was done by soldering in a new faster crystal.


----------



## Mr.Scott (Nov 10, 2021)

johnspack said:


> From what I remember back then,  ocing was done by soldering in a new faster crystal.


You are correct. And jumper wires for voltage increase. Been there, done all that. Still do now and then.


----------



## seth1911 (Nov 10, 2021)

3dmark 11 was good for gpu tests, but now they goes to a cpu & gpu combinated benchmark.

It is useless to compare it let me say a 10900k with a 1080 and a i5 9600 with a 1080


----------



## freeagent (Nov 10, 2021)

I agree with Mr. Scott, I like Unigine stuff too. I actually run that more than I do UL stuff. Just because I spend more time dabbling with max daily clocks than I do with max clocks. This CPU is a real bear when it comes to trying to control heat once you get around 4700MHz all core. That's about 1.45v, and really shouldn't be running that high with ambient cooling. I've been to 4850 AC. In the end I still paid 800 for it, so I am not into hardcore abuse with it yet lol. Maybe next year.. which is just a few months away.. nice-n-cold


----------



## phill (Nov 11, 2021)

Mr.Scott said:


> The Unigine benchmarks are more realistic of everyday use than Futuremarks are.


Not to mention also nicer looking I think???

Certainly not run much of the newer Futuremark or UL whatever they wish to call themselves now programs now, I prefer the older ones    Remembering back to 99 Max and 2000 and 2001SE...  Ah those where the days....   Although, the Catzilla test is pretty funky, get the music turned up on that one!!

I feel that overclocking is just pointless really at the moment since most of things we 'could' buy are generally clocked as high as they can be out the box and so what's the point in it?  Sadly you don't really want max speeds for crunching and folding, you need efficiency and the like, not quite what Futuremark/UL is meant for you to be chasing I don't think....

But I digress...  I can always go back to Z99/Z77/X58 and even socket 462 if I really would like a challenge   Most tests that's a benchmark generally has no bearing on what real word performance is like really I don't feel...  Made to look pretty and slow down your hardware so you can buy newer, faster kit because it'll be a few more points more than the last card.....


----------



## Bill_Bright (Nov 11, 2021)

phill said:


> I feel that overclocking is just pointless really at the moment since most of things we 'could' buy are generally clocked as high as they can be out the box and so what's the point in it?


Not to mention, in "blind" real-life application scenarios, it is highly unlikely a user would actually notice any performance gains. By "blind", I mean the user is totally unaware of any "enhancements" or changes made, and has no way of monitoring speeds or performance. They just assume, and have no reason to suspect otherwise, that everything is running at "out-of-the-box" default settings. 

It would be a rare case that they would actually see better performance when playing their game, updating their social media accounts, spell checking their Word doc, moving files, etc. 

But if they knew the system was overclocked, or was told it was, then it is almost certain the placebo affect would convince them the machine was noticeable faster. 

I think it is important to note that game developers are fully aware that most gamers don't have the budgets for a $500+ CPU and a $1000+ graphics card (or 2 cards!). Many gamers would consider themselves lucky to have a $1000, or even a $500 computer. If they coded those games such that they only provided good game play on expensive, high-end gaming rigs, they would never have enough sales to stay in business. So even the most demanding games are still designed to provide great game play and enthralling entertainment on lessor systems.

If one is in it only for the bragging rights, then they will never be satisfied. Or at least not for long as someone else will come by shortly and take the crown away. But if one is in it to be entertained, and are not obsessed with that last few hertz or frame per second, they are not going to care what some benchmarking measuring tool shows.


----------



## freeagent (Nov 11, 2021)

My computer is my OCD box for the home. I can tune it any way I want or not at all. Its one of my hobbies and I am always doing something to it, moving a cable, tuning a fan curve, or power curve.. it gives me something to do when the kids are doing their thing. When I am at work I have my machine and parts to tinker with, the tighter the tolerance the better most of the time. Gives me something else to think about other than the programmer being to aggressive with that tool.

I do agree though.. not much point in overclocking these days, other than for old times sake. The real fun ended with X58 imo. Older platforms are where the real fun is. What we have now is pretty watered down.. but its still fun to hit limits, I try to stay there if I can do it safely and effectively.


----------



## Bill_Bright (Nov 11, 2021)

freeagent said:


> My computer is my OCD box for the home.


LOL


----------



## Deleted member 67555 (Nov 11, 2021)

johnspack said:


> Heh,  turbo button started with XTs.  From 4.77mhz to an astonishing 9.54mhz!  From what I remember back then,  ocing was done by soldering in a new faster crystal.


I forgot about the crystal.
My dad always did the crystal changing.


----------

