| Page 3 of 3 |
Sayko
Posts: 286
Location: Pless
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
 Posted: Thu, 30th Sep 2004 15:02 Post subject: |
|
|
1590
9700 nonPRO
xp1800+
1G ram
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
thudo
Posts: 6309
Location: Mellonville North, Canada
|
| Posted: Thu, 30th Sep 2004 15:09 Post subject: |
|
|
My score as attached below. Will be getting an HIS X800XT PE as its the best ATI uber-card at present. Selling off my 9800XT will help ease the upgrade path. Still.. 2637 ain't bad. 3dMark2005 actually didn't run too bad although I think I kept certain DirectX details too high. Will have to rerun.
MSI GT72S 6QF Dominator Pro S 29th Anniversary Intel i7 6820HK @ 4.0Ghz, 32GB DDR4-2133 RAM, 2x256GB Raid0 Toshiba NVMe 2.5 inch PCIe SSD, Nvidia Geforce GTX 980 OC'ed 200+ Core / 200+ Mem, 17.3 inch LG IPS HD Display @ 75Hz, Intel 7265AC Wifi, Windows 10 Pro BIOS version: .112 EC Firmware version: .105
Current Broadband speed record: 329.1 Mb/sec down // 21.73 Mb/sec up
http://www.dslreports.com/speedtest/3933292.png
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Thu, 30th Sep 2004 15:12 Post subject: |
|
|
| Surray wrote: | | Drop^Da^Bass wrote: | | no with normal drivers (4,9) x800 XT PE gets normally 4500 or so while on on beta drivers released recently it gives 5800(!)..... i used those betas but to *OLD* R300/R360 core they give really little boost (20-30 marks) so comon use betas those official are already old and alot slower.. u shud get like umm 3k atleast (yeah and remember Athlon 64 is slower in 3dmark 2003/5 comparing to P4 on P4 results are higher abit......) |
what new beta drivers are you talking about? I thought 4.9 were the newest... |
http://www2.ati.com/drivers/hotfix/wxp-w2k-8-07-018380E.exe
Newest and FASTEST ati drivers (beta tho).
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Thu, 30th Sep 2004 15:34 Post subject: |
|
|
I've never done one of these before, but I'm pretty happy with my box and I'd like to take it out for a spin. I don't have SP2 on my XP though, is that going to be a problem?
P
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Surray
Posts: 5409
Location: Europe
|
| Posted: Thu, 30th Sep 2004 15:48 Post subject: |
|
|
| Drop^Da^Bass wrote: | | Surray wrote: | | Drop^Da^Bass wrote: | | no with normal drivers (4,9) x800 XT PE gets normally 4500 or so while on on beta drivers released recently it gives 5800(!)..... i used those betas but to *OLD* R300/R360 core they give really little boost (20-30 marks) so comon use betas those official are already old and alot slower.. u shud get like umm 3k atleast (yeah and remember Athlon 64 is slower in 3dmark 2003/5 comparing to P4 on P4 results are higher abit......) |
what new beta drivers are you talking about? I thought 4.9 were the newest... |
http://www2.ati.com/drivers/hotfix/wxp-w2k-8-07-018380E.exe
Newest and FASTEST ati drivers (beta tho). |
These drivers really improve performance quite a bit, looks like ATI is finally starting to see that driver improvements can change a whole lot, just like Nvidia realized a long time ago.
Here my scores with Athlon XP 3000+ and X800 Pro@16 Pipes with Official Catalyst 4.9 :
3DMark Score 3766 3DMarks
GT1 - Return To Proxycon 14,9 FPS
GT2 - Firefly Forest 10,4 FPS
GT3 - Canyon Flight 21,9 FPS
And here the same system with the new beta drivers :
3DMark Score 4964 3DMarks
GT1 - Return To Proxycon 22,3 FPS
GT2 - Firefly Forest 14,5 FPS
GT3 - Canyon Flight 24,2 FPS
These are outstanding results featuring a 50% FPS increase on Return to Proxycon as well as Firefly Forest. The increase is only minor on Canyon Flight, just 10%, but 10% more FPS by a driver improvement is still great.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jojox
Posts: 124
Location: 0x486f6d65
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Thu, 30th Sep 2004 16:09 Post subject: |
|
|
these drivers were officially tested by futuremark crew and approoved for use.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Surray
Posts: 5409
Location: Europe
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jojox
Posts: 124
Location: 0x486f6d65
|
| Posted: Thu, 30th Sep 2004 16:17 Post subject: |
|
|
well if they were released before 3dmark05 forget what i just said, it just felt funky because it all happened before 
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Surray
Posts: 5409
Location: Europe
|
| Posted: Thu, 30th Sep 2004 16:24 Post subject: |
|
|
| jojox wrote: | | well if they were released before 3dmark05 forget what i just said, it just felt funky because it all happened before |
yeah, it happened before, one more reason for it not to happen again considering all the fuzz it caused. People got pretty upset about that 3dmark cheating, I don't think they would risk losing customers as someone would find out sooner or later anyway if they did something like that.
While the improvements on the framerates in these drivers are inredibly big, they are not surprising. You have to keep in mind that while Nvidia has been big on optimizing drivers for additional performance for quite some time, their improvements are small but are coming in in almost every new driver. ATI on the other hand did almost no optimizations yet and relied on their graphics cards power alone, which worked well until now but with the 6800 series, ATI is facing an even match to say at least, so it makes sense that they now want to put a lot of work into their drivers to get that additional performance boost out of their cards.
They need to do that as Pixel Shader 3.0 is going to be giving the GeForce cards quite a boost in the games that support it (like far cry with the new patch)
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Thu, 30th Sep 2004 17:02 Post subject: |
|
|
1758 3d marks here and specs are below.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Thu, 30th Sep 2004 17:38 Post subject: |
|
|
Got 2380.
Specs: P4 2.66 GHz, 1500 DDR (dual channel), Gigabyte GA-8IK1100, Radeon 9800 Pro.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Thu, 30th Sep 2004 17:39 Post subject: |
|
|
hmm only 3777 must be something wrong specs below
CPU: P4 3GHz RAM: 1GB DDR400 VideoCard: Geforce 6800 256mb GT
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
sTo0z
[Moderator] Babysitter
Posts: 7449
Location: USA
|
| Posted: Thu, 30th Sep 2004 18:54 Post subject: |
|
|
Jeez guys.. why the fuck did I only get 905. :\
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Thu, 30th Sep 2004 19:03 Post subject: |
|
|
make sure your agp thingiebob in ur bios is set to your gfx card memory.. mine was on 64mb ;p and my card is 256mb so i changed it and now my 3dmarks points are alot higher.
dust.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Thu, 30th Sep 2004 19:24 Post subject: |
|
|
| sTo0z wrote: | | Jeez guys.. why the fuck did I only get 905. :\ |
if ur running 5900 XT at nominal speeds then its NORMAL result...... considering 5950 ultra gets about 1000 or so. Tests are purely based on Pixel Shader 2.0+ and and 5900 cards are very slow there....
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
sTo0z
[Moderator] Babysitter
Posts: 7449
Location: USA
|
| Posted: Thu, 30th Sep 2004 20:08 Post subject: |
|
|
Damn.. guess so. 
Oh well. Thanks for the info.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Thu, 30th Sep 2004 21:15 Post subject: |
|
|
2008 3dmarks
amd2800+
1024 mb ddr pc3200
radeon9700+
all stock.
| Quote: | | PC awesome button = Uninstall! |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Fri, 1st Oct 2004 01:49 Post subject: |
|
|
| Oddmaker wrote: | | make sure your agp thingiebob in ur bios is set to your gfx card memory.. mine was on 64mb ;p and my card is 256mb so i changed it and now my 3dmarks points are alot higher. |
You mean agp aparture size?
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Surray
Posts: 5409
Location: Europe
|
| Posted: Fri, 1st Oct 2004 03:41 Post subject: |
|
|
| exon wrote: | | Oddmaker wrote: | | make sure your agp thingiebob in ur bios is set to your gfx card memory.. mine was on 64mb ;p and my card is 256mb so i changed it and now my 3dmarks points are alot higher. |
You mean agp aparture size? |
It seems that he means aparture size. However, that setting merely sets what amount of RAM your PC is allowed to use to extend the graphic's card memory. So With a 256MB Card you probably don't need to set it any higher than 128MB as you won't fully use the 256 MB of memory on your card unless you're playing Doom 3.
What is more important is that your card is set to use AGP Texture Acceleration. It happens sometimes that driver conflicts and DirectX stuff sets that to off, resulting in major performance drops.
run "dxdiag" and go to the Display tab to see if yours is set to Enabled if your score is a lot lower than it should be.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Fri, 1st Oct 2004 05:29 Post subject: |
|
|
default settings = 3400 or so.
3ghz p4 + 1gb corsair twinx + nvidia 6800gt 256.
Maybe new drivers will help, I'm not sure whats out yet. Still pretty respectable.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Rzooq
Posts: 536
Location: "Mexico of Europe"
|
| Posted: Fri, 1st Oct 2004 10:31 Post subject: |
|
|
Check "FutureMark Approved" 66.51, they are on 3d Guru.
From 2925 at 66.32, now I get 3491 at 66.51.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Fri, 1st Oct 2004 10:43 Post subject: |
|
|
| Surray wrote: | | exon wrote: | | Oddmaker wrote: | | make sure your agp thingiebob in ur bios is set to your gfx card memory.. mine was on 64mb ;p and my card is 256mb so i changed it and now my 3dmarks points are alot higher. |
You mean agp aparture size? |
It seems that he means aparture size. However, that setting merely sets what amount of RAM your PC is allowed to use to extend the graphic's card memory. So With a 256MB Card you probably don't need to set it any higher than 128MB as you won't fully use the 256 MB of memory on your card unless you're playing Doom 3.
What is more important is that your card is set to use AGP Texture Acceleration. It happens sometimes that driver conflicts and DirectX stuff sets that to off, resulting in major performance drops.
run "dxdiag" and go to the Display tab to see if yours is set to Enabled if your score is a lot lower than it should be. |
There used to be the rule that you should set it to half the size of your ram (not your gfx ram). But this rule is out of date i guess, with ram getting cheaper and ppl having more ram. I have set it to 512MB, it doesn't really matter because the mobo can still use the reserved ram as usually. It's not like the old shadow ram, wich was exclusivly reserved.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Page 3 of 3 |
All times are GMT + 1 Hour |
