Hey can you duys explain why in the review on the 9700


The 3D mark for Sli(2GPU) shows over 9000 and for one shows over 6000.
But when it comes to the game testing (Quake FPS) there is not much change between the two figures...
Can you guys explain why this is, I know that 3dMark does not relate to the game performance directly, but there seem to be quite a change.
Also
http://www.pcpro.co.uk/reviews/88738...t-nemesis.html
Also with the evesham review of the same pc the fps score for COD2 all settings max is 38fps in Call of Duty 2 at 1,440 x 900. Is this good because I play COD2 all settings max at 1900 x 1200. Far Cry I have not tested but this not seem right for a system that gets over 9000 in 3Dmark, evenso because in COD2 the have an option in the settings "optimizing for sli".
Many thanks for your response
JKK


The 3D mark for Sli(2GPU) shows over 9000 and for one shows over 6000.
But when it comes to the game testing (Quake FPS) there is not much change between the two figures...
Can you guys explain why this is, I know that 3dMark does not relate to the game performance directly, but there seem to be quite a change.
Also
http://www.pcpro.co.uk/reviews/88738...t-nemesis.html
Also with the evesham review of the same pc the fps score for COD2 all settings max is 38fps in Call of Duty 2 at 1,440 x 900. Is this good because I play COD2 all settings max at 1900 x 1200. Far Cry I have not tested but this not seem right for a system that gets over 9000 in 3Dmark, evenso because in COD2 the have an option in the settings "optimizing for sli".
Many thanks for your response
JKK






