Well, after all sorts of trials and tribulations, RFO Benchmark v3 is finally here. My apologies for the delay.
Please post your results in
RFO Benchmark v3 2017 results
RFO Benchmark v3 2016 results
RFO Benchmark v3 2015 results
This v3 benchmark changes a few things you should be aware of.
1: Model creation now includes benchmarking of area plan creation and View Template use. Note that Revit Structure does not have Area Plans, so these two tests will not run for RST 2015 & RST 2016. With Autodesk abandoning the separate verticals approach this will not be an issue moving forward.
2: Exports have been moved to a separate Export group, and expanded to include export to DWF as well as Vector & Raster printing. The latter two require the Microsoft XPS Document Writer printer be installed.
3: Graphics without Hardware Acceleration has been removed from the Standard set. This test was added to help make the argument that decent GPUs and Hardware Acceleration where worth the extra cost. I think that argument has been made, so this rather slow test series has been relegated to the Expanded test only, to make room for the Model and Export additions.
4: The results now show update status. This is important as the R2/.1 releases show some real performance improvements over the corresponding FCS release.
5: To ensure consistency and address some of the failures some folks have been seeing, the benchmark now backs up and completely replaces your user Revit.ini. Upon successful completion your Revit.ini is restored. If you do have a failure, use the _Terminate Benchmark link to kill the benchmark & Revit and restore your Revit.ini.
It goes almost without saying that v3 benchmarks cannot be compared meaningfully with previous versions. Thus version 3 is provided for Revit 2015-2017 to facilitate year to year comparisons.
Also, be aware that Revit 2017 FCS has a pretty serious memory leak in the DWG export code. As a result, the Expanded test is likely to crash or take a day or more to process. The expanded test is really only appropriate for extended testing for major purchase decisions, but for 2017 it is even less appropriate unless you have 2017.1. The Standard set will demonstrate this improvement in 2017.1 more than adequately.