Benchmarks I
For the benchmarks I've decided to run the test on 2 different processor speeds, to see how the GeForce 3 performs on a lower spec PC. I've decided on 800MHz as that is a fairly common speed for quite a few new PC's and also the benchmarks are run at 1333MHz the fastest CPU that AMD currently sell.3DMark 2001, one of the first real benchmarks for the GeForce 3 came out on the 13th March, it use the new features incorporated into the GeForce3 GPU, and also gives every other Graphics card in existence a good old hammering the benchmark also runs on older hardware such as the GeForce 2 series, The one benchmark that doesn't run on the GeForce 2 is test 7 "Nature" it utilises hardware pixel and vertex shaders for a very very realistic looking rendered nature scene showing a stream with fast flowing water down a tree covered hillside. The first time I saw this it blew me away. When games are written to specifically use the GeForce3 properly they certainly do look very very good indeed.
3DMark 2001
Obviously everyone wants to see this benchmark, so here it is to make it a fairer comparison between the GeForce 2 Ultra and the GeForce 3 I have switched off the Game test "Nature" as this does not run on the GeForce2, so this is a fairly direct comparison between the GeForce 2 Ultra and the new speed king the GeForce3, below that I've run the test again with the nature test turned on
Here are a few shots from the Nature test, and below the Bump mapping test which doesn't run on the GeForce2 and finally the Pixel Shader test which shows rolling ocean waves. All the shots I've shown below really do look rather cool when you see them in action
As always click on the images above to see a full sized shot
If you look closely at the Nature screenshots you will see that the framerate counter in the corner still isn't very high even with a 1333MHz CPU and a GeForce 3, the nature test is pushing the system to the limits.
3DMark 2001 Benchmarks
I've run the same test on the Geforce 2 Ultra to show the difference between the 2 cards, to make it fair I've disabled the "Nature" test as this count towards the scores, and the GeForce2 cannot run the nature test.
| 3DMark 2001 no Nature Test. | 640*480 | 800*600 | 1024*768 | 1280*1024 | 1600*1200 |
| 800MHz GF3 | 4488 | 4352 | 4123 | 3640 | 3066 |
| 1333MHz GF3 | 5571 | 5371 | 4887 | 4140 | 3331 |
| 800MHz GF2 U | 3476 | 3441 | 3289 | 2781 | 2303 |
| 1333MHz GF2 U | 4643 | 4418 | 3983 | 3112 | 2395 |
Even with out the nature test the GeForce3 beats the GeForce2 Ultra by quite a margin in all the different resolutions
| 3DMark 2001 inc Nature Test. | 640*480 | 800*600 | 1024*768 | 1280*1024 | 1600*1200 |
| 800MHz GF3na | 4931 | 4776 | 4502 | 3946 | 3336 |
| 1333MHz GF3 na | 6124 | 5897 | 5385 | 4483 | 3572 |
Vulpine GL Mark 1.1
This benchmark uses the OpenGL API, it also has a specific benchmark for the Geforce 3, the start up screen is shown below. GLMark 1.1 is a free download from http://www.vulpine.de/ , it weighs in at about 39MB, but its got some pretty cool graphics in it hehe. As always I've run it in the common resolutions.
| 640*480 | 800*600 | 1024*768 | 1280*1024 | 1600*1200 | |
| 800MHz | 66.1 | 61.3 | 57.3 | 46.1 | 35.6 |
| 1333MHz | 87.1 | 76.5 | 65.7 | 49.8 | 37.4 |
Quake 3
I know this game doesn't use any new features in the GeForce3, but people still play it so lets see how it runs, I've done benchmarks in all the normal settings and also with all the various FSAA options turned on.
| Quake 3 Demo1 | 640*480 | 800*600 | 1024*768 | 1280*1024 | 1600*1200 |
| Fastest | 157.2 | 156.1 | 152.3 | 137.3 | 109.7 |
| HQ | 145.1 | 142.9 | 134.5 | 105.5 | 75.3 |
| EHQ | 141.1 | 139.5 | 128.2 | 93.6 | 66.2 |
| Quincunx EHQ | 136.1 | 107.1 | 69.1 | 41.2 | 25.4 |
| FSAA 2* EHQ | 138.1 | 122.1 | 81.9 | 48.4 | 30.9 |
| FSAA 4* EHQ | 125.3 | 89.1 | 51.1 | 27.6 | 30.9 |
There is one very very odd result in the bunch at 4* FSAA in 1600*1200 I repeatedly got a higher FPS than I did in the same setting at 1280*1024, this is really rather odd, almost as if the card is falling back to 2* FSAA at the higher res, thats the only explanation I can come up with, as the result in 1600 res for 4* FSAA is the same as the 2* FSAA result.
Some results taken at 800MHz
| 640*480 | 800*600 | 1024*768 | 1280*1024 | 1600*1200 | |
| Fastest | 114.6 | 114.1 | 112.7 | 108.4 | 98.4 |
| HQ | 105.1 | 105.1 | 102.4 | 93.3 | 74.4 |
| EHQ | 102.5 | 102.3 | 99.9 | 88.1 | 65.9 |
Obviously the results with the 800MHz CPU speed are different, the 800MHz CPU just isn't taxing the GeForce3 sufficiently, at 1333MHz all the results are higher. Previously with the GeForce 2 Ultra these results would have peaked at the higher resolutions of 1600*1200. But with the GeForce3 in 1600 resolution the 1333MHz CPU still beats the 800MMHz, only by a few FPS but still it shows that the GeForce3 has better scalability.
