Kinc and Shamino Break the 3D Mark 2006 World Record - Score 27,039 Points

[malware]

After being robbed during the Games Convention, Kinc and Shamino have returned to their everyday life and started benching again with Mushkin, ATI and ASUS. The result is another broken world record. Kinc and Shamino are back to the top of the 3DMark 06 Hall of Fame with a personal record of 27,039 3D marks achieved with Shamino's QX6850 at 5119MHz(3DMark stable) on an ASUS Blitz Extreme, Mushkin's new DDR3-1333 memories and a pair of ASUS Radeon HD 2900 XT video cards overclocked to 1175/950MHz. The processor and the video cards were cooled by Shamino's Dragonpot, which in other terms mean liquid nitrogen. Here's the Futuremark ORB verification link.

View at TechPowerUp Main Site

 

[SK-1]

The battle continues.

 

[cdawall]

nice though this seems to show something... WR with 2900s not 8800s

 

[kwchang007]

Again...here we go. A weeks worth of news between Kinc and Shamino and their 2900's and 8800's.

 

[WarEagleAU]

its taken a little while for ATI to get up there, but its living proof that the 2900 xt is no laughing matter.

 

[yogurt_21]

actually if you check the last 2900xt record against the last 8800ultra record, the 2900's were outperforming the 8800's, it was the cpu that made the record. and this one is by a good margin, a whole 400pts (whereas the 8800ultra rig beat the 2900's by a mere 50pts)

http://service.futuremark.com/compare?3dm06=2574448
26008
2.0 10224
3.0 11875
cpu 7813

http://service.futuremark.com/compare?3dm06=2551377
25972
2.0 10413
3.0 11850
cpu 7540


now we get a look at the 2900's still wining even with kingpins cpu out performing kinc and shaminos.
http://service.futuremark.com/compare?3dm06=2835078
27039
2.0 11273
3.0 12088
cpu 7619

http://service.futuremark.com/compare?3dm06=2799693
26623
2.0 10683
3.0 11836
cpu 8148

so really the 8800's can't compete with the 2900's in 3dmark 05 or 06. and that's not the worst part, the 8800's used for the record cost 70% more than the 2900's used for the test.

 

[Nemesis881]

ATI FTW!!!

 

[[I.R.A]_FBi]

ATI ..boom bang, connect!

 

[Weer]

its taken a little while for ATI to get up there, but its living proof that the 2900 xt is no laughing matter.

In that it's only good for synthetic benchmarks?
It does good with 3DMark06 because it's an old program that uses less complex and more parllel shading.

 

[insider]

Barely old when most games ain't even that demanding compared to the benchmark, but yes synthetic benchmarks don't give you the real picture about actual in game performance.

 

[Scrizz]

w00t

 

[DRDNA]

here here
BOOYAKA

 

[Wile E]

In that it's only good for synthetic benchmarks?
It does good with 3DMark06 because it's an old program that uses less complex and more parllel shading.

And with the latest drivers, it performs just as well in games.

 

[pt]

And with the latest drivers, it performs just as well in games.

hurray for nv crying in the corner!

 

[p_o_s_pc]

hell yes it is nice to see that ATI was used to break the record.

 

[KennyT772]

Since the 2900's came out I've noticed one thing. 3dmark performance hasnt improved much, while gaming performance has greatly. What does that say you might ask? The drivers were optimised for 3dmark from the get go while everything else was shit. Good job ATI..my next card very well may be a 8800.

 

[yogurt_21]

Since the 2900's came out I've noticed one thing. 3dmark performance hasnt improved much, while gaming performance has greatly. What does that say you might ask? The drivers were optimised for 3dmark from the get go while everything else was shit. Good job ATI..my next card very well may be a 8800.

wow thats a baseless remark, why sure ati optimised the 2900's for 3dmark and yet in the open of the firefly forest test in both 05 and 06 I get 0fps for about 3 second, then it jumps to 50. and the canyon test is all jittery with jumpinf framrates.

but sure the drivers are totally optimised for 3dmark. lol

don't go making speculations on things you know nothing of. I mean seriously I hate sounding like a boiken record, but it seems I have to repeat the above statement daily in threads. This forum is seeming to grow more towards baseless speculation and further and further from FACTS!

 

[Wile E]

wow thats a baseless remark, why sure ati optimised the 2900's for 3dmark and yet in the open of the firefly forest test in both 05 and 06 I get 0fps for about 3 second, then it jumps to 50. and the canyon test is all jittery with jumpinf framrates.

but sure the drivers are totally optimised for 3dmark. lol

don't go making speculations on things you know nothing of. I mean seriously I hate sounding like a boiken record, but it seems I have to repeat the above statement daily in threads. This forum is seeming to grow more towards baseless speculation and further and further from FACTS!

I have to agree with you 100%. I'll go one step further and add that 3DMark performance has, in fact, improved as the drivers mature.


Also, I thought I was the only one with those 06 problems. I was beginning to think I just had a crappy card. lol.

 

[KennyT772]

Well when I read countless reports of compeditive scores on 3dmark with the 8800's while in actual game play the cards were not even close.


this

compared to

Go ahead and call me on it but you all know the 2900's were nothing what we expected them to be. We all know that when they were first released 3dmark was on par with the gtx's. For the most part gaming was on par with the gts's.

Also in my post I said much, of course performance is going to improve over time, but it sure as hell hasn't scaled the same as gaming performance since release.

At launch ATI only had 3dmark and a couple games optimized, mainly oblivion and other new games. At that same time nVidia had time to optimize everything, because they too at launch only had half the driver optimized. I'm not saying your card is crap and the 8800's are better just that the drivers were crap at launch and have developed greatly in gaming since then. I just find it very odd that a card is on par for records with another in only one set of programs so far, I haven't heard of any 2900's out pacing gtx's yet.

 

[insider]

Both ATI and nVidia spend ALOT of time optimizing their drivers for higher and higher 3DMark scores, it's no secret.

It's because they know most people (the uninformed mass) use the scores to assess how fast a card is in relation to another believing it equates to actual gaming performance, while in fact the reality is quite different, higher 3DMark scores sells more cards.

 

[driver66]

Till next week? :shadedshu

 

[p_o_s_pc]

i don't have a problem with what they are doing considering i am a benchmark junky

 

[yogurt_21]

Well when I read countless reports of compeditive scores on 3dmark with the 8800's while in actual game play the cards were not even close.


this

compared to

Go ahead and call me on it but you all know the 2900's were nothing what we expected them to be. We all know that when they were first released 3dmark was on par with the gtx's. For the most part gaming was on par with the gts's.

Also in my post I said much, of course performance is going to improve over time, but it sure as hell hasn't scaled the same as gaming performance since release.

At launch ATI only had 3dmark and a couple games optimized, mainly oblivion and other new games. At that same time nVidia had time to optimize everything, because they too at launch only had half the driver optimized. I'm not saying your card is crap and the 8800's are better just that the drivers were crap at launch and have developed greatly in gaming since then. I just find it very odd that a card is on par for records with another in only one set of programs so far, I haven't heard of any 2900's out pacing gtx's yet.

okay lets see there's alot wrong with that post so we'll have to start with the "benches" you posted.
issue 1: ummm that bench shows the 8800gtx beating an x1950xtx by only 6% whereas all the benches I've seen show the gtx crushing the x1950XTX
issue 2: that bench show the x1950gt beating the 2900xt, I've NEVER seen a bench that the gt even comes close to the 2900. much less the xtx.

issue 3: no source no citing, which means in laymans terms you've just plagiarised online, nice one.

issue 4: when I run 3dmark 05 with full 16x aa and 16x af at that res, I get 12900. yet overclocked with lower details the 2900 is shown as getting only slightly higher and the gtx the same.

something tells me that bench list is as bogus as a used car sales pitch. could be bias, or could be those pesky little facts i was talking about earlier. lol

now heres the golden point you're making an ASUMPTION about a card you don't own and have never actually seen. and you're making it against another card which you also haven't owned or seen. you know what happens when you AssUMe right?

 

[Wile E]

okay lets see there's alot wrong with that post so we'll have to start with the "benches" you posted.
issue 1: ummm that bench shows the 8800gtx beating an x1950xtx by only 6% whereas all the benches I've seen show the gtx crushing the x1950XTX
issue 2: that bench show the x1950gt beating the 2900xt, I've NEVER seen a bench that the gt even comes close to the 2900. much less the xtx.

issue 3: no source no citing, which means in laymans terms you've just plagiarised online, nice one.

issue 4: when I run 3dmark 05 with full 16x aa and 16x af at that res, I get 12900. yet overclocked with lower details the 2900 is shown as getting only slightly higher and the gtx the same.

something tells me that bench list is as bogus as a used car sales pitch. could be bias, or could be those pesky little facts i was talking about earlier. lol

now heres the golden point you're making an ASUMPTION about a card you don't own and have never actually seen. and you're making it against another card which you also haven't owned or seen. you know what happens when you AssUMe right?

Just a fyi, those are TPU's numbers from W1z's review after the NDA was lifted. That's also on launch drivers.

But still, I disagree with Kenny. I have first hand experience with the card. I bought mine the day it launched, and my 3DMark scores have improved with new drivers.

 

[driver66]

JUST WAIT TILL NEXT WEEK LOL :shadedshu

they are both holding back!