3dMark is one of the most common tests / benchmarks of video cards in the PC world. This test is produced by Furthermark, which has been a leader in the production of various PC tests and benchmarks for several years. Besides the test program (benchmark) 3dMark, company Furthermark announced a comprehensive computer test to the world computer community PCMark, test mobile devices 3DMark Mobile other. In this article, the ABC of PC will tell novice users how to use the benchmark 3DMark and also how to test the video card.

How to install the 3DMark video card test

Test setup (benchmark) 3DMark does not differ from the installation of regular programs and is performed using the installation wizard.

The first window, as usual, is informative and tells you about the installed video card test. Next, select the installation path and wait until the process of copying files is completed and the necessary entries are made to the system registry.

After installing the program, you will be prompted to enter the purchased license code. If you have not purchased the program yet, you will be able to use a limited version that does not allow you to log the test results of video cards and change the benchmark settings. When everything is ready, press Next and run the program using the shortcut from the Desktop.

To begin with, let's decide why test a video card at all? Test the video card with a benchmark 3DMark it is possible for various reasons:

It is necessary to identify the defect or check for its presence

It is necessary to compare the test results on different configurations or with / without overclocking

I just want to show off the level of the video card or watch beautiful cartoons

We have listed the main needs of testing a video card in the test / benchmark 3DMark... You can start testing the video card.

To run the default video card tests, just press the button Run 3DMark... After that in full screen mode all the necessary tests of the video card will start, after passing which the results window will open. Number of points, in fictitious currency 3DMarks, will show how well your video card coped with the results of all tests.

To view more detailed statistics, press the button Details.

Detailed statistics provide a complete report on the scores of various tests 3DMark, of which the tests directly on the video card are GameTests, a CPU Tests- processor tests, respectively.

So the most useful purpose video card test 3DMark it remains to check for factory defects of the component. That is, with the help of this video card test, we can easily determine the presence of graphic garbage or, so-called, video card artifacts, that is, marriage graphics memory video cards. If your graphics card is faulty, you will notice strange colored stripes or dots on the screen during the test. Be vigilant, and in case of the slightest malfunction or suspicion, carry the video card in service center... Freezes when testing a video card in 3DMark also indicate a malfunction, so don't go too far while testing.

Setting up a 3DMark video card test

We have considered only the default testing, but sometimes you need to tell the program to run only the necessary tests yourself. To do this, we need to purchase a licensed version of the program.

Please note that the program window is conventionally divided into 3 columns: Tests, Settings, System.

The first column shows information about the selected tests of the video card, which you can always change by clicking the button Select.

In the window that opens, check the boxes for the necessary tests and click OK... Done now 3DMark perform only the previously noted video card tests and show the result exactly for them.

Second column, Settings, will allow you to configure the testing of the video card, click Change.

In this window, you can change screen resolution, enable or disable texture filtering and anti-aliasing, but these settings are not for novice PC users, so we recommend leaving them at their default values.

There are many different programs for testing processor performance and stability, but one of the most popular is 3DMark. The main advantage of this program is the ability to check not only the processor, but the system as a whole, including the graphics card, RAM and other parameters. The test is performed in conditions close to games, so the program allows you to most accurately assess how well the system will behave in games.

The 3DMark program is paid, but the developer provides several free tests as a demo version. They will be enough for testing the processor and video card. This article will explain how to use 3DMark. Moreover, we will focus on free version.

Unlike other programs, you will not be able to install 3Dmark from the official site as there is no download link there. There is only an opportunity to buy the program. However, you can download the demo version of the program from Steam. For this, of course, you need to have Steam installed on your computer.

Select the first found version and scroll down a little on the page that opens. There will be a button on the right Download demo version, you also need it:

The program is large enough that it can take a long time to download, depending on your internet speed. When the download is complete, the program will appear in your Steam library:

From here you can run it.

How to use 3DMark software

1. Interface Russification

By default, the program is delivered in English. However, in the settings, you can also turn on the Russian language. To do this, open the menu Options and in paragraph Language choose Russian:

Now the program will be in Russian.

2. Running the first test

Immediately in the main window of the program, you are prompted to run the Time Spy test suite. This is a small scene, during which a person walks through the museum with a special magnifying glass that allows him to look into the past and looks for weapons. You can watch the full scene here:

To run the test just go to home page and select Run or Run:

First, you will see the demo scene itself:

Then two graphics tests and a processor test will run, during which the current FPS and frame number will be displayed at the bottom of the screen:

After completing testing, the utility will give an overall assessment of your computer for all tests:

It can be compared with the ratings of other users on the Internet:

3. Running other tests

In addition to the Time Spy test, you have several more scenes available in the free version. It:

• TimeSpy- testing the performance of DirectX 12;
• Firestrike- testing the performance of DirectX 11;
• Nigth raid- DirectX 12 test for computers with integrated graphics;
• Sky driver- DirectX 11 test for computers that cannot achieve high performance in the FireStrike test;
• Cloud gate- DirectX 11 and DirectX 10 test for laptops and ordinary home PCs;
• Ice storm extreme- for mobile devices and tablets;
• Ice storm- for budget smartphones.

You can run any of these tests in the tab Tests:

Just open the test you want and click the button Run:

In the paid version, settings are also available that allow you to turn off the display of the demo video, as well as select those tests that you want from the set. Basically, these tests are used to check the 3dmark video card, but the processor is also quite loaded.

4. Stability tests

You can use stability tests to check the stability of your computer after assembling a new computer or after overclocking. But they are only available in the paid version on the tab Resilience tests:

You do not need to use 3DMark for these purposes, you can use the same AIDA64, which has a free trial, or Prime95, which is completely free.

5. Viewing results

Also in the free version you can see the results of the 3dmark test at the last check. To do this, open the tab results:

conclusions

In this article, we have discussed how to use 3DMark to test the performance of the processor and video card. As you can see, the free version of the program is enough to understand what your computer is capable of. And if you need more, then you can use other free

Key features

• Testing the video card in four modes Canyon Flight, Proxycon, Firefly Forest and Deep Freeze;
• Testing both PC and laptop;
• DirectX testing;
• Checking the processor for the possibility of supporting 3D graphics;
• Assessment of the video card's capabilities for working with ShaderModel 3.0 and HDR.

Advantages and disadvantages

Pros:

• Simple to use, intuitive interface;
• The ability to test the video card in games;
• Has a Russian-language version;
• You can adjust the parameters (if full version programs).

Minuses:

• Requires activation;
• Has a free version, which is only suitable for testing a video card in 3D, but does not allow you to change the parameters;
• Minimum requirements to run 3DMark06: Intel processor or AMD with a core frequency of 2.5 GHz, 1 GB of RAM, support for ShaderModel 2.0 or higher.

Analogs

WSAT is a program for testing not only the capabilities of a video card, but also a processor, hard disk... No installation required. Has a Russian-language interface. Compatible with all versions operating system Windows.

FurMark - software for testing the performance of the video adapter. In test mode, the user can set the screen expansion, anti-aliasing. Test results and fps will be displayed in the upper left corner of the screen. No installation required. Has two languages: Russian and English. Works free of charge.

Work principles

The installation of the program is standard. Download and run the exe file.

We accept the terms of the license agreement.

Select the folder for storing the program files. We press "Install".

The installation of the tester will start.

After installation, the program will ask for a registration key. If you downloaded the program from our site, you should enter 3DM06-YKL9-C7R6-73WW-AAPA-VHKW.

The start window of the program is divided into 4 blocks: test, settings, system, result.

Clicking "Run 3DMark" will start testing the capabilities of the video card. The game will be used.

How it looks like testing a video card using this program, see the video:

Introduction The speed of progress in the field of Hi-Tech can be compared with the speed of a courier train, which, although not very fast, does not stop. Moreover, our train does not have a terminal station, only passengers and direction change, but the speed remains the same. Of course, this is a controversial statement, but the facts speak for themselves. Progress in the field of graphics accelerators goes not only towards improving speed characteristics. The functionality of accelerators is also improving, which, in turn, has changed the picture displayed on the monitor quite dramatically over the past five years. The main impetus in this direction was made by the beginning of the use of programmable vertex and pixel shaders, which are already supported by most modern accelerators. But again, the train does not stand still, and in last generation For accelerators, support for the second version of shaders appeared, and before that there were small half-stations with intermediate versions. Shaders are small programs that can be executed inside the chip without downloading at all CPU at the same time, the quality and level of detail of the displayed graphics becomes much higher. But I will talk about this a little later.

Modern computers consist of two main parts: hardware - these are cards, processors, memory and other hardware sold in stores, and software, without which computer hardware will remain iron in the literal sense of the word, and more than a stand for a table leg will not fit. Any modern accelerator needs programs that could use all its functions 100 percent, allowing the user to understand what he paid a lot of money for. An ordinary user, if he is not an absolute cynic, is generally pleased to understand and see what he paid money for. There is also a goal of comparing new products with the previous generation, since it is necessary and important to understand what has become better. It is for these two purposes that there is a whole layer of programs called benchmarks. When testing video cards, you can use modern 3D games or specialized programs as benchmarks, which, for greater objectivity, should use all the capabilities of the latest accelerators. As I mentioned earlier, this is due to the growth of accelerators not only in height (speed) but also in width (functionality). On currently there are practically no programs that support the modern Standard, which combines the level of functionality of the current generation of accelerators - DirectX9. This situation will change soon ... or has already changed, as a test suite from FutureMark has appeared - 3DMark 2003 or 3DMark03, which will be discussed in this review.

Many expected the release of this program, and you can understand why. First of all, programs from FutureMark, which recently renamed itself from MadOnion to its original name, have a special status, perhaps similar only to the status of programs from Id Software. Because both of them release products that work on the verge of the capabilities of modern Hi-end hardware, and begin to fully work for the average user only after a year after the release.

Let us, by the way, since we are talking about this, decide on one question. By the Hi-End of the modern graphics accelerator market, I mean ATI R300 and Nvidia NV30 chips, and everything that has been released so far after them.

3DMark is usually the flagship new era, based on the quality and realism of his scenes, conclusions are usually drawn about the realistic graphics in games for the entire near future, before the release new version DirectX. This program was expected by users who have the most modern hardware in their computers, testers and authors were waiting for this program, since it is a powerful tool for obtaining objective information, finally, marketers in hardware selling companies were waiting for it, since they need to study what they write testers and buy that iron, which has a future, and for which there will be demand in the near future.

By itself, 3DMark is a set of three-dimensional scenes based on its own graphics engine, which puts a load on various accelerator capabilities. It is also a set of synthetic tests that determine performance parameters in a more "theoretical" sense. The final index is calculated according to a certain formula, but we will talk about it later. And of course, there is also a demo mode, so beloved by all users who are not interested in the index result, but are interested in a beautiful video with good sound.

Each time, 3dmark swells more and more and, if the previous version, 3DMark 2001SE, took only 40 megabytes, then 3DMark03 takes 171 megabytes in the archive and 470 megabytes in the expanded state, that is, almost 4 times more than its predecessor. This fact can also be considered a hint that we should not expect modern games that fit on one or two CDs, and in general it will be great if everything fits on one DVD. 3DMark03 is distributed according to a shareware scheme, that is, from the developer's website you can download only a demo version, in which there are many restrictions, including:
Impossibility to change resolution and settings during Demo playback and for testing.
Inability to change the number of tests
Impossibility to use command line

In fact, from unregistered 3DMark, you can only get a general idea of ​​testing and watch the Demo in a fixed resolution. In order to register 3DMark, you need to transfer $ 40 to the company's account, although, of course, there are alternative ways solutions to the problem, if you understand what I'm talking about.

Demo Mode

In demo mode, if you have a DirectX9 accelerator, you can see four scenes. The graphics quality in these scenes is really impressive. Everything looks really pretty, and as expected, works with difficulty even on the most modern hardware (we will discuss later why this is so). It should be noted separately that during the demo mode, the post-processing mode works in all scenes, for users it looks like the effect of the camera's focal length, or the effect of an old movie at the beginning of the demonstration. There are other beautiful effects that are noticeable to the eye. In general, the demo mode in the new 3D-Mark met all the users' expectations, and this is what everyone expected. Which, unfortunately, cannot be said about all the other functions of the new product. Unfortunately, it is very difficult to use the new 3D-Mark as a full-fledged test suite, and I will try to explain below why I think so.

Program description

As I wrote earlier, in 3DMark, four full-fledged gaming tests have been created, according to which the final index is calculated. There are also the following tests:
Two tests of the load on the central processor
Fill Rate Single and Multi Texturing
Vertex shader execution speed test.
Test for the speed of execution of pixel shaders version 2.0.
Havok Physical Model Testing (RagTroll)
Sound card test for 3D sound processing.

Interface

The program interface is clear and very similar to previous version 3DMark 2001. Of course, we can describe it again, but we do not set ourselves the goal of translating the help file for 3DMark03.

Everything is absolutely clear and transparent. It is only worth mentioning a few changes. First of all, there is no interface for running BATCH tests at all. Now all the functionality of BATCH modes has been ported to the command line. In a sense, this is correct and sometimes more convenient, but still, the absence of this regime is not encouraging. The syntax for launching 3DMark03 from the command line is described in the help file for 3DMark03, and of course, all BATCH sequences can now be compiled as batch BAT files of the operating system. This can help testers to significantly reduce the time to test the card.

Further, there is no option to save the results in a simple text file, but instead introduced the ability to save the results to Excel format... This is not very convenient for professional testers. The interface for obtaining ImageQuality screenshots has been significantly improved, but these are just cosmetic fixes. At the same time, there is no possibility to control the displayed effects inside post-processing, and many other things that are sometimes necessary in the work.

Version 330 has the ability to force the use of shaders version 1.1 instead of version 1.4. We will discuss why this is necessary again later.

Now we will go over each test in a little more detail:

GT1 (Game Test 1 - Wings of Fury)

Used DirectX version... 7.0
Versions of the used shaders ... 1.1

The scene depicts an air battle in August 1944, that is, this test emulates a flight simulator (uh, well, a phrase). Flight simulators in the gaming industry occupy a special position, since the graphics engine for creating such games has very specific features. Most often, during the game, not a single large object is visible on the screen, but two large textures are observed: the earth and the sky, and the main emphasis in the game is on the physics of aircraft control. Almost all modern flight simulators are built on this principle, the scene in 3DMark is no exception. Most of the artists and programmers from FutureMark did their best to draw the planes. When drawing aircraft, multitexturing is used, with each aircraft being wrapped in four textures: color, lightmap, reflection map, and specular and tint map. As conceived by the developers, the graphics accelerator should be able to cover the plane with textures in one clock cycle. The scene also uses point sprites and square particle systems to create smoke and fire. To be honest, the expediency of having this test in the 3DMark package is rather unclear. Its main goal is to maintain compatibility with outdated accelerators, such as GeForce 3. At the same time, there is no compatibility with accelerators of the GeForce 2, GeForce 2MX and GeForce 4MX class, since these accelerators do not support the use of vertex shaders. By the way, this test does not require the use of shaders, you could easily do without them. The question arises: why include a test aimed at a narrow segment of obsolete graphics chip models in a package intended for testing new generation accelerators? You can, in principle, pull the explanation here by the ears that this was done to ensure a comparison of the new generation of accelerators with the previous one, but this will be just a far-fetched explanation, since each generation of accelerators has its own games, and all previous generations of games were created for accelerators of that time, easily work on modern hardware. This is the essence of the DirectX API architecture.

GT2 (Game Test 2 - Battle of Proxycon)

Battle of Proxycon.

3DAction ... that's the mainstream of the 3D games industry. Battle of Proxycon is a typical first person shooter game. The action takes place either on a space station or on a large spaceship. Some people in suits attack him, others try to resist, and end up escaping in a space boat to hell. The scene ends there. Isn't it a tempting plot? In general, it should be noted that games with such properties have always been very resource-intensive and had the most beautiful graphics. There is an attempt in the scene to depict a 3D shooter of the near future. At first glance, everything turned out pretty well. There are also normal maps in the scene, with which you can create relief in places where there are no polygons for it, and dynamic shadows, and the possibility of post-processing effects, when the effects are applied to the created frame, like filters in Photoshop. Normal maps are a kind of analogue of Bump-mapping maps, only the relief looks a little more voluminous, this effect is clearly visible on the folds of soldiers' clothes in the scene. Shadows organized with stencil-buffer are created dynamically and fall on both static objects (walls, floor) and dynamic objects (soldiers, doors), while the shadows fall taking into account multiple light sources. And after turning on the post-processing mode, cinematic effects begin to appear, such as the camera's out of focus (Depth of Field) or the effect of oversaturation with light (bloom). The post-processing effect is turned on in the same way as any pixel processing effect, for example, Anti-Aliasing, and at the same time cannot be combined with it.

Everything would be fine, but there are very serious questions about the implementation of the engine for this test. An engine is a software module that makes a three-dimensional world come to life, it is the basis of any game. And the basis of this test, in the opinion of many experts, is not implemented correctly. For example, in a scene with five lights, each object will be textured 11 times. And in some places, when using stencil calculations, the number of vertices in the scene can increase up to 6 times, which, if we still have the same 5 light sources, means that the texture will be wrapped around one object 36 times. There are no such realizations in nature, and I hope there never will be. In fact, the technology used by FutureMark was not considered by the accelerator developers as possible, and therefore no optimization was made for it both at the hardware level and at the driver level. In a little more detail, for support this method implementation of the game engine, manufacturers would have to adapt the structure of accelerator chips and rewrite the drivers, but since existing system suits the current game producers and on the basis of it they do much more developed things, they are unlikely to do this. As a result of the efforts of FutureMark programmers, an unnatural load is created on the vertex part of the graphics pipeline. From the outside, it looks like an artificial bottleneck. In this case, the load on the GPU will be very strong, although most of the modules themselves GPU(pixel, raster, etc.) will not be used in full force, which will lead to some bias in the evaluation of the chip, which for an ordinary user simply means the meaninglessness of the results, because in games everything will be completely different. And we'll talk about the use of pixel shaders version 1.4 later, because this is the topic of at least a separate chapter.

GT3 (Gaming Test 3 - Trolls Lair)

DirectX version being used ... 8.1
Versions of the used shaders ... 1.1 and 1.4

This test was created on the same engine as Game Test 2. Which means that it has all the same problems as the previous test. This is an RPG. The heroes are always viewed from the third person. The essence of the scene is simple: a girl with a magic sword enters some semblance of a library, approaches a secret door and ... kills the trolls "peacefully" resting at a board game. One of them even tries to run in panic, but wherever there, the girl is so terrible in her anger that he forgets to open the door and loses consciousness from the blow. There are women in Russian villages ... In general, 3DMark does not like trolls, and therefore they are subjected to brutal genocide.

This scene is considered more complex than the Battle of Proxycon, although, in fact, it differs from the previous one only in the presence of Volume Light (volumetric light visible in the dust) and a rather interesting implementation of the hair on the girl's head. According to FutureMark, each hair is calculated separately and has its own physics, while anisotropic lighting (a light map stretched along one axis) acts on it. Truly: "Before my hair was dry and lifeless, and now it is wet and moving."

GT4 (Gaming Test 4 - Mother Nature)

DirectX version being used ... 9
Versions of the used shaders ... 1.1; 1.4; 2.0

Ah, mother nature, you are beautiful in your greatness. The scene really looks just great. For example, I just didn't like the trees at the top, they really look unnatural, but so ... everything is pretty. The grass turns green, the sun shines, butterflies fly and shaders are buggy .. brrr, no, they don’t seem to be buggy. Although how to say. It all depends on the accelerator, but more on that later. Oh, those shaders. The scene uses almost all versions of shaders that exist at the moment. Just some kind of zoo. What is the problem here, will be written again below.

In this scene, the FutureMark programmers tried their best: each blade of grass here is calculated separately, and is a separate object. Five textures are applied to the water created with Pixel Shaders 2.0 at the same time: a texture with normal coordinates, a wave map, a reflection map, a transparency map, and a distortion map. The sky and the sun are also built on the basis of shaders 2.0. But the ground pumped up, it is built on the basis of pixel shaders 1.4, although even the texture of the shadows from the clouds travels along it. In general, everything would be fine, but programmers who write tests need to think not only about beauty, and if they use shaders, then do not interfere with each other, making a vinaigrette out of them. Otherwise it will work equally bad everywhere. And yet, tests are usually created according to the principle "Eat some more of these soft French rolls and have some tea", that is, so as to use all the capabilities of the API. Otherwise, it is not clear what we are testing - the chip or the art of programmers.

FutureMark programmers think differently.

Parrot Formula

Thirty-eight parrots and one parrot's wing is the result of the benchmark of an ordinary boa constrictor. The fact that in parrots it is much longer, I remember, did not upset him, everything is at least some kind of unit of measurement. So 3Dmark03 measures the speed of your video subsystem in arbitrary units, in parrots. The formula for calculating the final speed index is as follows:

End Index = (GT1_fps * 7.3) + (GT2_fps * 37) + (GT3_fps * 47.1) + (GT4_fps * 38.7)

As you can see from the formula, the average frame rate in each game test is multiplied by a certain "test significance index", and then the result is summed up. That is, the first test has the lowest value, the second and fourth are approximately equal in importance, and the third test has the maximum impact on the final result. As you can see, only game scenes are involved in the final index formula, all other tests present in the package have no effect on the final index. Also, you should pay attention to the fact that if your card does not support shaders 2.0 and the GT4 (Mother Nature) scene does not start on it, then the final index for your card will be about a third or a quarter less than the result actually possible for it, since the result of this scene will not be summed up. Therefore, it is not recommended to compare cards that support shaders 2.0 and do not support these shaders by the final index.

Texture Filtering

Texture Filtering.

This function is now separated into a separate group, and does not work as a rail-type, where the camera cannot be controlled, but as an ordinary game. This test is much closer to ImgeQuality, since the number of frames per unit of time is not scanned here. In this test, the most important thing is the quality of the displayed picture, or rather, how this picture is displayed in perspective. This test shows how well the accelerator can do texture filtering. different methods: anisotropic ( best quality), linear (average) and point (worst). Each of these methods is set for each level of distance from the camera. With these functions, you can type the types of filtering used in games:

You can also rotate the camera by a certain angle and change the level of anisotropy. This function can be very useful for testers, and the user can understand the difference between "Bilinear filtering" and "Trilinear Anisotropic filtering". Convenient system, and its only drawback is the absence of this test inside automated system to create screenshots. This is bad, because errors are visible in it much better than on any Game Test.

CPU Test

Two gaming benchmarks GT1 and GT3 are used for this test. Both of these tests are run one after the other at 640x480, so that the test depends as little as possible on the speed of the video card. During the execution of these tests, a rather powerful load falls on the central processor, since all vertex shaders are started by the central processor (probably, for GT1 it would be worth doing this in the main test as well). Also, in the GT3 test, all shadows are turned off and pixel shaders are switched: from version 1.4 to version 1.1. This is done in order to average the result on most maps used. The test will not run if the accelerator does not support Pixel Shaders 1.1. And this test is ambiguous, because its result is still very much dependent on installed card, although it seems that the central processor is being tested. Rather, it is not clear what is being tested, since the load is applied to both the processor and the video card at the same time. The formula by which the final index is calculated is as follows.

This article was submitted to our second competition.

This article is written for the prepared reader. If you're looking for a system setup guide or overclocking tips, this is not the place for you. On the agenda is the task of getting really maximum result in a single test - 3DMark 2001SE. It is assumed that you are quite experienced in overclocking your system, therefore, this article provides only specific tips for increasing the test result. It will be problematic to work on the resulting system, but even using only some of the subtleties and tricks listed above, you can increase the result by an average of 500-700 "parrots".

advertising

Initially, this material was conceived as a guide to setting up RivaTuner, but soon I realized that the main subject of the article was not performance in general, but exactly how to achieve the maximum result in 3DMark. Here it dawned on me that there is not a single Russian 3DMark Tweaking Guide, and therefore it is my duty to fill this annoying gap in domestic hardware journalism. Starting with my own observations and advice from other members of the ModLabs team, I gradually began to collect a variety of tips & tricks from different sources. As a result, the information provided has been collected bit by bit on various overclocking forums for quite a long time and it is simply impossible to list the names of people who contributed to this guide. However, most of the advice was given by real 3DMark gurus, who are in the TOP-100 by Online Result Browser. Separately, I note the contributions of bowman1964, mackenz, jason1570, MrIcee, OPPainter, nvidiaguy, Macci, DigitalJesus ,. Unfortunately, there is not much information on the systems on Intel and ATI, but I keep looking and hope to please the owners of the fastest video cards in the near future. By the way, about video cards. Minimum " system requirements"many tips for setting them up - GeForce 4 Ti, in some cases - GeForce 3. However, hardly anyone would even think of doing such things on GF2MX and similar cards ...

On the fate of dispersal in Russia

A small lyrical digression. The attitude to overclocking in our country (I mean the entire territory of the former USSR) is ambivalent. On the one hand, there is perhaps nowhere else in the world with such a number of overclockers per 1000 computer owners. Overclocking has really become a popular pastime, allowing you to save money on the purchase of components (and our person will never pass by a freebie). But on the other hand, the number of professional overclocking people across the country can be counted on one hand. For almost two years of working on my own website (and therefore daily browsing dozens of overclocking and modding sites), I only once saw that the overclocking message from Russia bypassed major English-language overclocking sites - this is news about our own overclocking of Celeron 2400 to 3600 MHz (by the way, the current record for a stable processor frequency in the CIS, according to the website database). The results of overclocking with the use of liquid nitrogen were published for the only time, there are no data on water chillers and phase-change systems, the rarest cases of installing Peltier modules ... It's a shame for the state, gentlemen overclockers! Don't you want to be among the first?

By the way, in the West there are dozens of teams of hardcore overclockers who compete in benchmarks with online services (primarily 3DMark 2001 and 2003) and simply ratings (the most popular benchmark in Asia SuperPI, VR-Zone OC Rating, Holicho's MAXV3 Rating and PC-Zone MAXWCPUID Rating for overclocking records). Particularly known are the so-called "3DMark Teams" such as VR-Zone 3DMark Team, GamersHQ 3DMark Team, Xtremesystems.org 3DMark Team and Team Finland. Almost all the top steps in the ratings 3DMark2001 and 3DMark03 are occupied representatives of these teams.

Therefore, I bring up for discussion in the forum the idea of ​​creating such a team with us. You can find out more about the idea, express your fabrications on this matter and show a desire to join such a team in the corresponding forum thread.