DirectCompute Benchmark for Vista SP2 with DX11 or Win7


Recommended Posts

In case you run into any compatibility issues, I assume. And it's quite obvious as to why the benchmark won't run on Windows XP. It doesn't support DX10, let alone DX11.

Yes thats why i was curious about why dx9 was provided ^_^

Core i7 920

GTX 275

GPU checksum: 1370969.153194

CPU checksum: 1370969.611431

*** PASSED ***

DirectCompute Score: D14171

OpenCL not supported...(will get back to that :p)

CPU Score: M2499

Edited by DDStriker

I get the impression that this benchmark is poorly written at best, not only are cards that are meant to be slower than mine (9800 GT, 9500) achieving far higher results, we also have a faster card (GTX 260) achieving significantly lower results than my card achieved. Something about this benchmarking app doesn't seem right to me :/

I get the impression that this benchmark is poorly written at best, not only are cards that are meant to be slower than mine (9800 GT, 9500) achieving far higher results, we also have a faster card (GTX 260) achieving significantly lower results than my card achieved. Something about this benchmarking app doesn't seem right to me :/

From what I've seen that confusion is becuase some people are still posting results from the .35 version which gives much higher scores.

I can't explain the discrepancy between the scores for NVIDIA but from what I've read, ATI's video cards have less CPU usage which results in a better score. Don't take my word for it though, I could be 100% wrong.

From what I've seen that confusion is becuase some people are still posting results from the .35 version which gives much higher scores.

I've tried the 0.45b version, the thing refuses to benchmark my GPU, but has no problem with my CPU, however that score jumps all over the place.

tsupersonic has the GTX260 he is using 0.45 and his result is a lot lower than mine, but your point is well taken about the 2 folks with the 9500 and 9800

Indeed, the scoring is interesting. Just for comparative measures for the folks who are still posting with v0.35, I got D10670, C59900, M2900, as I mentioned in post #11.

I can't explain the discrepancy between the scores for NVIDIA but from what I've read, ATI's video cards have less CPU usage which results in a better score. Don't take my word for it though, I could be 100% wrong.

I got > 14000 on a single 9800 GT. :)

Can someone please update the first post to link to build 0.45d, these results are so variable it makes direct comparison almost impossible

Done. :)

I got > 14000 on a single 9800 GT. :)

You probably used v0.35. That one gave me a score greater than 150,000. Use v0.45b for more accurate results.

Indeed, the scoring is interesting. Just for comparative measures for the folks who are still posting with v0.35, I got D10670, C59900, M2900, as I mentioned in post #11.

I think even my 0.35 scores where substantially higher than yours, even though you own a faster card :/

Edit: Thanks Anaron, now can everyone who used 0.35 please re-do it, so that I can decide whether the program is dodgy or if it just doesn't like tsupersonic's system for some reason :laugh:

His program does not support the latest ATI drivers properly.

According to his ReadMe:

2) You DON'T need DX11 hardware, DirectCompute is supported on DX10 class devices if only drivers support it (forceware >= 190.62, Catalyst currently doesn't support DirectCompute on DX10/10.1 GPUs)

Now according to the latest ATI drivers (9.12):

This release of ATI Catalyst™ provides full support for DirectCompute 10.1 for the ATI

Radeon™ HD 4800 Series, ATI Radeon™ HD 4700 Series for both single card and ATI

CrossFireX™ supported configurations.

The older version (0.35) seemed to work fine as I used it in the past, but now its almost as if he intentionally blocked using the GPU to do the DirectCompute calculations on ATI cards.

That being said, I cannot get the program to give me a DirectComputer Score, I can get a CPU score, and thats the only score that updates no matter what test API I use. I do not have the ATI OpenCL drivers installed so I do not have a score for that either. But even without OpenCL I should still be able to get a DirectCompute Score, I did so on the past versions with the same exact setup.

The results are very consistent on my machine when I re-run the tests. It is definitely odd that there is such big discrepancies in some systems that have the same video cards. The most likely cause I can think of is people running different driver versions.

His program does not support the latest ATI drivers properly.

According to his ReadMe:

Now according to the latest ATI drivers (9.12):

The older version (0.35) seemed to work fine as I used it in the past, but now its almost as if he intentionally blocked using the GPU to do the DirectCompute calculations on ATI cards.

That being said, I cannot get the program to give me a DirectComputer Score, I can get a CPU score, and thats the only score that updates no matter what test API I use. I do not have the ATI OpenCL drivers installed so I do not have a score for that either. But even without OpenCL I should still be able to get a DirectCompute Score, I did so on the past versions with the same exact setup.

err.... this is something on your end bro. I have cat 9.12 and a 4870. .45 works perfectly for DirectCompute, OpenCL and cpu.

err.... this is something on your end bro. I have cat 9.12 and a 4870. .45 works perfectly for DirectCompute, OpenCL and cpu.

I doubt it, at least not exclusively.

DirectCompute Benchmark 0.35: Generates a DirectCompute Score without a problem.

DirectCompute Benchmark 0.45b: Refuses to generate a DirectCompute Score.

How exactly is that "On my end"?

Edit: Thanks Anaron, now can everyone who used 0.35 please re-do it, so that I can decide whether the program is dodgy or if it just doesn't like tsupersonic's system for some reason :laugh:

It may well be :unsure: but if a benchmark program can't keep scores properly, then it doesn't do its job right. Hopefully the future versions keep the scores consistent.

I doubt it, at least not exclusively.

DirectCompute Benchmark 0.35: Generates a DirectCompute Score without a problem.

DirectCompute Benchmark 0.45b: Refuses to generate a DirectCompute Score.

How exactly is that "On my end"?

The fact that most other people with ATI 4 series cards are able to generate scores suggests a problem with your setup, not the application.

It may well be :unsure: but if a benchmark program can't keep scores properly, then it doesn't do its job right. Hopefully the future versions keep the scores consistent.

Absolutely, suppose a number of things could be causing it to work like that, but regardless of where the fault lies, I believe we can safely say that your score probably isn't overly accurate xD

The fact that most other people with ATI 4 series cards are able to generate scores suggests a problem with your setup, not the application.

While that is true, an older version of the application works fine, while the newer version does not. This means he changed something in his application that caused it to refuse to generate a DirectCompute Score for my setup. It does not mean my setup is faulty, it means his application is not working 100%. Also, Cy-Kill has the same issue as I do, so its not something wrong with my setup and my setup only.

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • Anthropic accuses Alibaba of using 25,000 fake accounts to copy Claude's capabilities by Karthik Mudaliar Anthropic has accused Alibaba of using nearly 25,000 fraudulent accounts to extract capabilities from Claude on a huge scale. According to a report from Reuters, Anthropic told US lawmakers that operators linked to Alibaba and the company’s Qwen AI team generated 28.8 million exchanges with Claude between April 22 and June 5, 2026. That is a lot of Claude conversations, but Anthropic says this was not ordinary chatbot use. The company believes the accounts were part of a coordinated effort to collect answers that could help train or improve rival AI systems. The alleged campaign reportedly focused on some of Claude’s most valuable skills, including software development, multi-step reasoning, and agentic tasks. In practical terms, that means getting an AI model to plan and complete work across several stages rather than simply answering a single question. This is called 'distillation,' where AI companies use outputs from a larger model to train a smaller and cheaper one. The smaller model learns to imitate useful parts of the more capable system without needing the same amount of computing power. The distillation process isn't automatically suspicious, but the problem comes when one company gathers another provider's outputs without permission and at an industrial scale. Also, this does not mean Alibaba obtained Claude’s source code, model weights, or original training data. Instead, Anthropic claims the accounts repeatedly asked Claude carefully designed questions and collected the answers. Those answers could then be used as training material for another model. Anthropic has made similar accusations against DeepSeek, Moonshot AI, and MiniMax earlier this year. As Neowin previously reported, Anthropic said those three companies collectively generated more than 16 million Claude exchanges through roughly 24,000 accounts. Anthropic says the new campaign produced almost twice as many exchanges in a matter of weeks. Anthropic reportedly told lawmakers that the campaign could help Chinese AI developers approach the capabilities of its Mythos Preview model. Mythos is focused on advanced cybersecurity work, including finding and exploiting complex software vulnerabilities. via Reuters | Photo via DepositPhotos.com
    • An Indian manufacturer that assembles roughly one-third of Apple's iPhones and supplies semiconductor components to Tesla confirmed Monday that attackers had stolen and publicly published a 630-gigabyte cache of confidential files — including engineering blueprints stamped "TRADE SECRET," a 52-page quality inspection document for iPhone circuit board components, and cryptographic certificates that security experts say could be weaponized in follow-on attacks. https://www.techtimes.com/articles/319019/20260624/apple-tesla-supplier-tata-electronics-confirms-630-gb-data-theft-iphone-specs-dark-web.htm
    • I don't think it was ever a big question. In fact, I don't think anyone ever asked about how clocks work on Mars.
    • I don't know what the price difference is between a 5GbE and a 10GbE part, but it seems that putting a 10GbE port in might be a bit more 'standard'.
  • Recent Achievements

    • Rookie
      krychek57 went up a rank
      Rookie
    • Grand Master
      Jaybonaut went up a rank
      Grand Master
    • One Year In
      Philsl earned a badge
      One Year In
    • Dedicated
      Scoobystu earned a badge
      Dedicated
    • First Post
      Tom Schmidt earned a badge
      First Post
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      440
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      175
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      133
    4. 4
      Michael Scrip
      79
    5. 5
      Xenon
      77
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!