3DMark06 Benchmark Results

3DMark is a computer benchmark by Futuremark (formerly named Mad Onion) to determine the DirectX 9 performance of 3D game performance with graphics cards. 3DMark06 uses advanced real-time 3D game workloads to measure PC performance using a suite of DirectX 9 3D graphics tests, CPU tests, and 3D feature tests.

3DMark06 tests include all new HDR/SM3.0 graphics tests, SM2.0 graphics tests, AI and physics driven single and multiple cores or processor CPU tests and a collection of comprehensive feature tests to reliably measure next generation gaming performance today. Some enthusiasts may note that Benchmark Reviews does not include CPU-bound tests in our benchmark battery, and that only graphic-bound tests are included.

Here at Benchmark Reviews, we believe that synthetic benchmark tools are just as valuable as video games, but only so long as you're comparing apples to apples. Since the same test is applied in the same controlled method with each test run, I believe 3DMark is a very reliable tool for comparing graphic cards against one-another.

More visitors to Benchmark Reviews operate at 1280x1024 resolution than any other, as it represents the native resolution of 19" LCD monitors. Using this resolution as a starting point, the maximum settings were applied to 3dMark06 which for these tests include 8x Anti-Aliasing and 16x Anisotropic Filtering. Low-resolution testing allows the graphics processor to plateau maximum output performance, which thereby shifts demand onto the system components to keep up. At the lower resolutions 3DMark will reflect the GPU's top-end speed in the composite score, indicating full-throttle performance with little load. This makes for a less GPU-dependant test environment, and is helpful in measuring the maximum output performance in the test results.

In this first test, 3DMark06 is set to its default settings. Within a certain margin of error, this allows our results to be compared to countless other systems out there. Here we can see no significant different in the SM 2.0 and SM 3.0 graphics tests and a 2-3% difference in the CPU test. In these tests, it's clear that the extra bandwidth of the DDR3 memory on the ASUS P5Q3 has had little effect.

When we add anti-aliasing and anisotropic filtering to the mix, however, the DDR3 based P5Q3 does come out on top. The SM 2.0 test is still too close to call, but the SM 3.0 tests suggests nearly a 10% performance advantage. We'll find out how these numbers relate to real world gaming performance a bit later in this review. Before we get there, though, let's have a look at a few more to synthetic tests to help determine the source of these improvements.

<< Previous Page - Next Page >>