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

    • Stellarium 26.2 by Razvan Serea Stellarium is a free open source planetarium for your computer. It shows a realistic sky in 3D, just like what you see with the naked eye, binoculars or a telescope. It is being used in planetarium projectors. Just set your coordinates and go. Stellarium key features: Realistic simulation of the sky, sunrise and sunset Default catalogue of over 600,000 stars Downloadable additional catalogues for up to 210 million stars Catalog data for all New General Catalogue (NGC) objects Images of almost all Messier objects and the Milky Way Artistic illustrations for all 88 modern constellations More than a dozen different cultures with their constellations Solar and lunar eclipse simulation Photorealistic landscapes (more are available on the website) Scripting support with ECMAScript (a few demo scripts are included) Extendable with plug-ins: 8 plug-ins installed by default, including: artificial satellites plug-in (updated from an on-line TLE database) ocular simulation plug-in (shows how objects look like in a given ocular) Solar System editor plug-in (imports comet and asteroid data from the MPC) telescope control plug-in (Meade LX200 and Celestron NexStar compatible) The major changes of this version: Added new sky culture Added new plugin: Planes Many improvements in plugins Many improvements in Core and GUI Many updates in sky cultures. [full release notes] Download: Stellarium 26.2 (64-bit) | 456.0 MB (Open Source) View: Stellarium Home Page | Other Operating Systems | Screenshot Get alerted to all of our Software updates on Twitter at @NeowinSoftware
    • NASA: This asteroid may not kill us but it probably won't be far off either by Sayan Sen Image by Zelch Csaba via Pexels New observations by NASA's James Webb Space Telescope have eliminated the last remaining impact threat posed by asteroid 2024 YR4, ruling out the possibility that the near-Earth object could strike the Moon in December 2032. NASA said observations collected by Webb on February 18 and 26, 2026, enabled scientists to refine the asteroid's orbit enough to "rule out a chance of lunar impact on Dec. 22, 2032." Instead, asteroid 2024 YR4 is now expected to pass the Moon at a distance of about 13,200 miles (21,200 km). The agency stressed that the update "reflects improved precision in our understanding of where the asteroid is expected to be in 2032 rather than a shift in its orbital path." The announcement closes a remarkable chapter in planetary defence that began in late 2024, when the approximately 60-metre-wide asteroid briefly became the most closely watched near-Earth object in the world. Discovered on December 27, 2024, by the ATLAS telescope in Chile, 2024 YR4 initially appeared to have a small chance of colliding with Earth on December 22, 2032. As astronomers gathered more observations, the impact probability briefly climbed to around 3%—the highest ever recorded for an asteroid of its size—before steadily falling as its orbit became better understood. By early 2025, international observations had ruled out any significant risk to Earth. However, astronomers were left with another possibility: a roughly 4% chance that the asteroid could instead strike the Moon. "The probability that asteroid 2024 YR4 will strike the Moon on 22 December 2032 is now approximately 4%," the European Space Agency (ESA) had said last year, noting that "there is a 96% chance that the asteroid will not impact the Moon." ESA said such an impact, while unlikely, would have presented an extraordinary scientific opportunity. "It is a very rare event for an asteroid this large to impact the Moon – and it is rarer still that we know about it in advance. The impact would likely be visible from Earth, and so scientists will be very excited by the prospect of observing and analysing it," said Richard Moissl, Head of ESA's Planetary Defence Office. "It would certainly leave a new crater on the surface. However, we wouldn't be able to accurately predict in advance how much material would be thrown into space, or whether any would reach Earth," he added. The asteroid also exposed an important blind spot in planetary defence. Because 2024 YR4 approached Earth from the direction of the Sun, it remained hidden from ground-based telescopes until after its closest approach. "We looked into how Neomir would have performed in this situation, and the simulations surprised even us," Moissl said. "Neomir would have detected asteroid 2024 YR4 about a month earlier than ground-based telescopes did. This would have given astronomers more time to study the asteroid's trajectory and allowed them to much sooner rule out any chance of Earth impact in 2032." He added, "As an infrared telescope, like Webb, Neomir would have also immediately given us a much better estimate for the asteroid's size, which is very important for assessing the significance of the hazard." The latest NASA observations underscore the value of space-based infrared telescopes in tracking faint asteroids. According to NASA, Webb made "among the faintest ever observations of an asteroid," extending the object's observational record by nearly eight months at a time when it had become too faint for other telescopes. That additional data allowed scientists to eliminate the remaining uncertainty surrounding its 2032 flyby. Although asteroid 2024 YR4 is now confirmed to pose no threat to either Earth or the Moon, scientists say its discovery remains one of the most significant real-world tests of the international planetary defence system, demonstrating how continued observations can rapidly transform an object once considered hazardous into one whose future path is known with high confidence. Source: NASA, ESA This article was generated with some help from AI and reviewed by an editor. Under Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, this material is used for the purpose of news reporting. Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statute that might otherwise be infringing.
    • Yup. Google is just scraping the entire internet for their own ad profits without sharing revenue with the sources. It's obviously stealing, but since these sites depend upon Google's search scraps to survive... As for me, I just stopped using Google for anything except Reddit searches. If Reddit's own search wasn't complete crapola, I'd never use Google search again.
    • I had a feeling this was coming. Picked up my first Mac ever last Saturday. Glad I did.
  • Recent Achievements

    • Conversation Starter
      Admir earned a badge
      Conversation Starter
    • First Post
      The_Focal_Point earned a badge
      First Post
    • Apprentice
      daryld went up a rank
      Apprentice
    • Contributor
      Carltonbar went up a rank
      Contributor
    • One Month Later
      The_Focal_Point earned a badge
      One Month Later
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      418
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      170
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      130
    4. 4
      Xenon
      69
    5. 5
      neufuse
      69
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!