Author: Ivan Pritula
A bit of overclocking and overclockers
In recent years increasingly have to deal with the terms "overclockers" and "overclocking". What lies behind these foreign-language terms? Overclocking (from the English. Over clocking) means nothing but overclocked computer components. For many people, dispersal – a way to increase system performance because of inability or lack of desire to purchase more powerful components.
In Russia, given the economic situation of our country, the crackdown has become very topical, because the user with proper selection of components, could not get enough performance for less money.
But there is another category of overclockers, as clocked his own system exclusively for the acceleration of the process. Their motto: "Squeeze till the last megahertz." The vast majority of overclockers, as a rule, financially wealthy people are able to put quite a lot of money to buy high-power components or specialized cooling systems.
Water cooling in the range of people – at least, most of them use the compressor stages, and sometimes liquid nitrogen. But even with such a vast arsenal of technical tools, thirst for competition among overclockers only intensified. Continuation of the race for megahertz, and excellent results for them is not only an obsession, but more than that, the meaning of their lives. In other words, for them there are no limits to the "pursuit of overclocking" but technological capabilities of the hardware.
But let's not forget that not all overclockers can afford to buy such expensive components and cooling systems, and according to their performance and overclocking results are strikingly different from the results of the most "elite overclocking." And then what is so "elite" these people, except the opportunity to spend significant sums of money overclocking? That issue is devoted to the material, while a bit distracted and talk about the most popular overclocking benchmarks – 3DMark 2001SE.
3DMark 2001SE as a tool for overclockers
To a very large part of the overclocking community, 3DMark 2001SE no more, no less – the sport, even in spite of the fact that this package has long been obsolete, along with API DirectX 7, which features most of the tests, and uses this package.
These men, loudly call themselves Bencher, a "sport", invented by them, respectively, the benching. But in fact all is not as "sporty" as it may seem at first glance. Let's try, leaving aside the "sport of passion," a little to analyze the situation and show that represents the 3DMark 2001 in fact – a sport or just a way of self-satisfaction for some Bencher …
So, in terms of technical implementation, 3DMark 2001SE – it is a very old package. The basis of most tests of this package is the API DirectX 7, as we have mentioned that in the beginning, and only one test is constructed based DX8 – a test, got a beautiful name, Nature. With the thus Nature, as it should be remembered attentive reader, last year was a lot of scandals connected.
As we know, pixel and vertex shaders are used to create complex effects in the DX8 / 9 can be easily modified, and this benefited the producers of graphics processors, adding to driver-specific code, modifying in some way from the test shaders Nature. The picture on the eyes did not differ from the originally conceived by the developers of the test, but some minor details of the scene was rotated at a slightly different angle. In other words, the essence of the scene has not changed – it's just a little bit different scene from a slightly different geometry. Due to the machinations of shader programs, performance test, Nature has changed from one version to another driver. Soon, the trick was discovered, which greatly undermined the reputation as the chip maker, and of the 3DMark 2001 – after all who needs a test that anyone can twist as you like?
And yet, in spite of everything, 3DMark 2001SE – the de facto benchmark for most overclockers. One of the aspects, motivating the use 3DMark 2001SE it was a simple system to make the results of an online rating, which is a competition and the participants.
Fake, in other words, a fake pretty quickly deleted by moderators rating and therefore ranking Futuremark ORB (Online Result Browser) was unanimously adopted by all the overclockers.
Another important aspect is the way of presenting results in a single number – points derived from the aggregate of all the FPS tests. After all, what could be easier, instead of displaying the FPS seven different scenes to calculate a single score. By the way, in Russia, in memory of the old cartoon scores 3DMark'a became known as "parrots", is a well established name in the results of this test.
Thus, the mere presentation of results and an excellent online ratings have played a role – 3DMark has been recognized people.
Yes, apparently everything goes very smoothly. It would seem, a good test (if you do not take into account the driver optimizations for this benchmark and the aging of the technical tests – for XXI century in the yard, DX9 circle), with a convenient system to make the results – just what you need overclockers to compete for the championship. But just now we come to the main problem – the conditions are obtained, at least, equal. From such a conclusion? It is this aspect and will be devoted almost all of the following exposition.
How much parrots?
What you need to achieve maximum results in 3DMark 2001SE? First of all, the power system. But as we know, in order to achieve the greatest frequency of the processor, video card or RAM to raise the supply voltage at which invariably follows increased power consumption and heat dissipation. Consequently, the overclocked components have cooled very seriously, and familiar to us, "air" as coolers with cooling hot components are no longer cope. It is necessary to install water cooling system, compressor cascades on freon, or use liquid nitrogen.
What we can draw conclusions from the above? Creating these systems requires a significant cash expenditures, or to put it simple, age-old Russian, a parrot will have more of whose wallet fatter. No matter how corny it sounds, but it's true.
It is here and is applied in full, our axiom about unequal conditions of competition. The overwhelming majority of users simply can not afford to purchase such systems.
It turns out that the overclockers spend considerable sums of money in order to achieve extremely high performance in 3DMark 2001SE. Paradoxically, it is a fact.
Sport? Yes, it is possible to compare, for example, with racing, where racing cars are investing huge amounts, but again, the race is largely pay for themselves. A 3DMark? No. Several unusual sport is obtained, is not it? Perhaps this is a sport for some people, but in general, achieving high performance in 3DMark on the extremely overclocked systems – a simple way to self-satisfaction of owners of these systems.
While we are talking exclusively about the hardware. But it plays an important role, and software optimization. To achieve good results, overclockers raped operating system, shut down services, optimize. And for what?
But let's imagine another situation, if the acceleration is not dealing with a normal user, and any testing laboratory? Almost any test laboratory can type the fastest component, with a few copies for the selection of the most overclockable samples. In this test lab gets equipment to test, but do not buy it, and therefore absolutely does not incur any expense. Yes, and opportunities for testlabov much more than ordinary users, and this in turn means that more and a chance for the top result.
And what about the even more or less equal, we are talking about? In this case, they can not by definition – the winner is who has the most features or thicker wallet.
After all is said there is one question – who needs it, this sport? Sport, which was originally ordained the chances? On this question we have answered in the previous paragraph. Ordinary users can also participate in the rating, no one disputes, but the results will be much lower. Immediately comes to mind an interesting thesis – "3DMark – fun rich" and not otherwise. Alas.
In the end, overclockers do not get anything except self-gratification, but the manufacturer, the company Futuremark gets quite a lot of money from sales of the test suite. This marketing ploy Futuremark, no doubt, worthy of all respect.
A little bit about the technical implementation
But we are technically competent people and we know that the results of any test, you can tweak or forge and 3DMark2001 – is no exception.
So, all the textures, the description of light sources, as well as codes of pixel and vertex shaders in 3DMark 2001, which was built on the engine of the famous game, Max Payne, called MAX-FX, is stored in the archives of the RAS and the format easy to extract.
In this case the default priority is given not in 3DMark2001 RAS-archives, and file system – we can create subdirectories in the directory the program data and textures, draw back all or part of the contents of files and data.ras textures.ras respectively, and the program will use these files . Accordingly, we can arbitrarily change the lighting scenes, textures and shaders of course.
To get the result, who took 5th place in the GeForce FX 5900XT in the world ranking, we have used is just a modification of the shaders from Nature, the test is very much affecting the overall score.
After a slight modification of the vertex shader code tree.vsh disappeared in the trees all the foliage is absolute – apparently the scene suffered the consequences of nuclear war 
But the performance gain of almost 40%. And then you can believe the results of 3DMark2001?
And in the end?
But let's summarize some of our lengthy discussion. Overclockers erected under the name of the program results in a 3DMark2001SE sport and compete to satisfy his own ego. To do this, they spend very large sums of money, have resorted to a variety of tricks, and for what, one wonders, do they do? To obtain better results in a particular program, has long been obsolete in terms of technical implementation. It would seem, have all been demonstrated that 3DMark'om can rotate completely at will, but not, for many of the results of this program is really in the last resort.
The situation is very strange, but in many ways and comical, but this is the sad reality of modern OC. We can only hope that this material will somehow open the eyes of the people. In the meantime, we can say only one word – "alas."