yet it is still described as a game benchmark, not like a graphicscard benchmark.
and yes it is heavily cpu dependant. i dont know if you chacked the physics in that thing, but it's not small amunts used.

it might come as a surprise to you, but regular game actually IS also dependant of cpu speeds, just look at the latest athlon64/quakedemo previews.

Not *THIS* dependent... This is overkill!

well there seems to be quite a difference in performance if i enable/disable my soft9700, so i'd say its good enough.

3dmark 2001 was very cpu dependant aswell

In 3dMark you could tripple your mark just by switching 3d card...

It seems like half of Aquamark is dependent on the CPU, and the other half on the GFX card.

as it should be, ther cpu isnt a spare piece of hardware you toss in the computer just for the fun of it.
aquamark gives a score on both cpu and gpu, but i researched how they get the final score. but im sure the banchmark is as they intended. and it gives a view of the system as a whole. and there IS a huge difference between a 2000+ and a p4 3ghz with hyperthreading. so that sould be taken into consideration too

In most games, thats all there is. Since my 1ghz I have updated my CPU 4 times, each time it have been an dissapointment that cannot be compared to the times I updated my graphiccard.

If you do a test between a 2Ghz/Radeon 9800 Pro VS a 3,2Ghz/GeForce 4, which would you think will score the highest score in all modern games ...

... except for Morrowind.

Best Regards
JemyM

while other games do. take a look at the jedi knight games, and *gasp* aquanox, and they are used as benchmarks anyways. and they can, because when you read reviews, they benchmark with identical systems, besides the graphics they are testing, so the esult is comparable after-all. aquamark benches your whole system.

4 times since 1ghz? well that would make small intervals, and the difference wouldnt be very clear. and in the mean time games has gotten heavyer on the cou aswell... try putting your 1ghz back in and play some bf1942 or jedi.

and..


If you do a test between a 2Ghz/Radeon 9800 Pro VS a 3,2Ghz/GeForce 4, which would you think will score the highest score in aquamark???
this IS directx 9, remember?

Me and my friend have both 2400+/512mb. I have fx5900u, he have GF3Ti500.
While I could play Jedi Academy in 1600x1200 top-quality-everything, he could barely run the game in 800x600... He claimed it felt 'nostalgic' since it looked like the first Jedi Knight games at that resolution

But very well. Perhaps a 1,4ghz difference would actually 'feel' different in a modern game... But it would be a 10-20% tradeoff at max...

Best Regards
JemyM

ok i had my 20.099

now looking in the ARC result thingy, i see a guy with the samce cpu as i (2000+) but with a 9700pro (i have a slightly oc'ed 9500np - currently without the softmod), and his results is 30.171
so i wouldnt excactly say your therory is valid, since he got 50% more than me.

http://arc.aquamark3.com/arc/arc_view.ph...=230819338

There is something fishy going on here. There is a guy with almost the exact same hardware as me that posted here that got 10k more than me... The only real difference is that he have 100mhz more CPU than me...

or your windows could be dragging ressources from the game and pour them in the big pool of oblivion

get all the info u want on Aquamark 03

http://www.madshrimps.be/?action=getarticle&articID=101

I ran 38,000 something

2500+ Barton o/c 2.3
A7N8X
Corsair XMS PC3200LL
Radeon 9700 Pro

I ran it again o/c my 9700 Pro to 364/344 and improved!!

41,598