Passmark PerformanceTest 7.0

http://www.passmark.com/products/pt.htm

The people of Passmark have contacted us to check if we'd be interested in hosting their benchmark application. I've Been testing this PCMark-a-like benchmark this morning and I have to say it looks quite good. It's definitly not ready to be launched in the next couple of weeks, but with a bit of fine-tuning I think this could be a worthy PCMark alternative.

Tests:

- CPU

- VGA 2D/3D

- MEM

- HDD

- CDR (wtf!)

Few remarks after testing:

- Both CD-Rom as HDD tests are vulnarable to virtual drives

- No DX11 3D test

Good thing about this benchmark is that the storage benchmarks are not affecting the end result too much. With a 4GHz 1090T and no virtual drives I get around 2450, with 2.8GHz 1090T and virtual drives roughly the same. I think it should be possible to even disable these virtual drives (like FM did with Vantage), so I'll ask them.

Things I like to see added:

- dedicated audio/video encoding?

- USB test

- DX11 test

- A lot more security

- Direct submission to HWBOT database

Let me know what you think about the benchmark

going to test it tonight

WTF :

Runned @ the university, sorry last night I was too busy.

After I made this pic :

I clicked cancel and got a score, it's not written that the CDMark was skipped(It's even written ALL test executed.

Weird, maybe with less tests you've got a lower score but, it's not default settings(amount of tests here).

Few remarks after testing:

-CDMrak : WTF!

-Don't know if default settings are DX10/9.

-Even with tests skipped it's written : ''ALL tests executed''$

-No online scores(Or I haven't find the button )

Maybe a too young benchmark

Moved from Lounge forum to public forum for more feedback.

Tests are fast and not really stressy enough.

Needs to be DX11 and ditch the cdrom test.

Result on my gamer rig, did upload another score but know idea where though lol.

Q9650 @ 4ghz, 2gb of crap ddr3, an even worse evga 790i and a 480gtx all on air.

IMO the hdd and especially CDR tests should be ripped out, solves a lot of cheating problems that way.

If this is able to run easily without installing five billion chunks of outdated software (looking at YOU pcmark05), I'm a fan already.

Didn't have to install anything other than the application.

As for the HDD and CDR subtest, I enquired the developper of the application and he said this:

1) There is no method that can force a user to only select a traditional style physical HDD that always works. (For example what if I copy a VMWare image to a RAM disk, then boot the into VM).

 

2) People want to benchmark and compare performance of these non traditional mass storage devices. So we don’t feel it is right to stop them.

 

3) There is no real reason to say that using a solid state DRAM drive is “cheating”. They have been used for databases, CD ISO mounting and other valid solutions for many years.

It's actually an interesting point of view, I must say

I like that guy, whoever he is.

That fixes the dram drive "problem" rather nicely

So, we could just launch this benchmark if we add a small guide on how to set up the HDD and CDR subtests? I wouldn't mind this at all ... it's something 'new' (previously labeled 'illegal' haha).

The good thing about this benchmark is that it has subtest scores as well. If we can build a wrapper around it that automatically sends through all the subtest detail results ...

Overclocking CD drives could be fun

a guide that details how to run CD drives as virtual would be good if you are going to use it, and of course it wouldn't be changing the app so you can compare cd drives on your own if you want to, while eliminating that as a bottleneck/tweak so all users would be on equal ground as far the optical drive result, given its obscurity as far as benching goes (are there really any drives that are particularly fast? the only things i care about for optical is SATA interface, lightscribe, and a decently fast loading tray- just think about measuring performance of the loading tray itself LOL)

Overclocking CD drives could be fun

haha yes!

yes, the more components involved the better,

 

like cdrom components or pci-express bandwidth components, all give new challenges

True, but i know some overclocker's builds (myself included) don't have a CD drive hooked up while they overclock. Also, from what I know, you can't tweak the performance of a CD drive so that section will just be whoever can buy the best CD drive.

An all-around benchmark test is great if you really want to know the full capabilities of your build, so it would be cool to see this benchmark supported. There's my two cents.

________

Taoism forum

PassMark used to be very inconsistent, and I'm willing to gamble on it still being inconsistent

Consistency-wise I didn't see any big problems. Re-running the same config over and over again resulted in a pretty stable result output.

I like it, but I suggest test the rig without CD/DVD test, since all games run from HD and not from CD/DVD drive.

The software also gives you the option to select the HD that you want test.

Why not keep using PCMark? The better thing would be then to eliminate hdd cheats by allowing them)) I don't actually see too much difference to PCMark actually.

Give some points for running... I will bench...

Pointless benchmark to be honest. We have PCM. I would rather see another good longer (time-wise) 2D benchmark that relies on IMC/MEM/CPU raw performance with a solid encrypted validation checksum algorythm.

^this

Sounds interesting .

Mine:

just think about measuring performance of the loading tray itself LOL

On Plextor units (most anyway) u can adjust that in small increments ; at max it can literally make the disc fly off tray

ontopic: yes it will be a nice addition, but with a wrapper that uploads scores on HWBOT (cdr bench can be excluded from HWB final score)

The above is from an old rig before I contacted them and advised on some pretty simple "tweaks" to hugely inflate your score

They addressed them and the next version resulted in a massice drop, but still:

Havent bothered running it since (that last shot was January last year)