EXTREMELY low 2D mark

[Arctucas]

Performance Test 10

When I say EXTREMELY low, I mean EXTREMELY low.

eVGA RTX 2080 FTW3 Ultra, at default clocks scores 28.5 in 2D Mark.

3D Mark is 13642.

What?

EDIT:

Tried my older eVGA GTX 970 SSC. Scores 15 2D Marks.

Also, for both cards, 2D SVG test says "Failed to create Direct 3D environment, most likely this means that your card does not support DirectX 11."

I believe both GPUs support DX11, as the 3D DX11 tests run.


What is wrong with your test?

[David (PassMark)]

Is this Win7 ?

Win7 doesn't support SVG or displaying PDFs.

[Arctucas]

Yes, W7.

Is that what is causing the low score?

In PT9 my rig was like 99th percentile.

[Arctucas]

Yes, W7.

Is that what is causing the low score?

In PT9 my rig was like 99th percentile.

[David (PassMark)]

Some test scores and the 2D mark value in older versions of Windows (eg Windows 7) will be far lower in PerformanceTest V10 as it isn't possible to scale meaningfully when multiple tests can't be run.

Newer versions of Windows have added more available drawing APIs such as PDF and SVG rendering functions. The PDF and SVG test will not be able to run in Windows 7 at all due to missing Windows API functions. The DX11 parts of the Image Filters and Image Rendering test may be able to run in Windows 7 if DX11 is installed and a DX11 compatible video card is being used.

[Arctucas]

So, will future versions be able to detect OS and disable those tests that are unavailable, or otherwise ignore them, thereby not causing such abysmal scores on otherwise capable hardware?

After all, I believed that Performance Test was for testing hardware, not software.

[David (PassMark)]

will future versions be able to detect OS and disable those tests that are unavailable

This is what already happens. Can't run the test if the O/S & hardware doesn't support it.

thereby not causing such abysmal scores

This is more a question of philosophy.

If a video card isn't DirectX11 capable and the test requires DirectX11 for hardware acceleration, should we pretend it ran the test and give it a good score, even though that card can never really perform that function?

After all, I believed that Performance Test was for testing hardware, not software

For the CPU, RAM and (to some extent) the disk, this is possible, as direct low level access to the hardware is avaiable.
But for 2D and 3D we are forced to use high level interfaces (e.g. GDI+ and DirectX) and not use the hardware directly.

Many many years ago (Mid 80s) 2D and basic 3D were coded directly to hardware. But device drivers, GDI, GDI+, OpenGL and DirectX standardized high level access and avoided the need to write different code for each different video card.

[Arctucas]

Video card is eVGA RTX 2080 FTW3 Ultra.

It is, I am quite sure, DX11 capable.

[David (PassMark)]

Argument is the same. Win7 is missing SVG rendering, PDF rendering & DirectX12 support.
Should we just pretend you got a great benchmark score when the functionality is completely missing to run the actual test?

[Arctucas]

Not asking anyone pretend anything.

You could possibly note on the Passmark page that Windows 7 is no longer fully supported.

And, other than the 2D graphics test, which is certainly not the gold standard for a gaming rig, the other benchmarks are reasonable.

Thanks anyway.

[David (PassMark)]

Issues are noted in the FAQ
https://www.passmark.com/support/per...cetest_faq.php

87% of our users are now on Win10.

See,
https://www.pcbenchmarks.net/os-marketshare.html

2D is barely used in gaming anymore. Is more important for video editing & photoshop and web browsing.

But missing DirectX12 will effect some games. Not many yet, but as time goes on.....