AquaMark 3 scores

Just installed and results,
system slight O/C 169fsb
1280x1024X32 @ 85hRZ (desktop)
bench auto setting
1024x768x32
AA off
Aniso 4X
Details VHigh
169fsb 175fsb
GFX 5,430 5,463
CPU 6,705 6,839
38,657 38,934
Ref: 3DMark2001SE @ 175fsb 16719
O/C 10.5
200 fsb 205fsb
GFX 5,427 5,451
CPU 7,069 7,249
39,212 39,528
Ref: 3DMark2001SE @ 205 17213

37,828 with new ultra FX 5900
34,821 with the none ultra

Similar Messages

Low 3dmark 03 / Aquamark score

For some reason im getting low scores for these 2 programs, im not sure why.
Anyone have any ideas?
http://service.futuremark.com/compare?2k3=2729106
my CPU score seems extremely slow.
Ive also tried installing the intel chipset drivers (latest ones) but still no luck...
Same with aquamark:
http://arc.aquamark3.com/arc/arc_view.php?run=1621912558
only 8,000 for the CPU test... many of them have 9,000-10,000 at 3.25GHz

the other card was a 5900XT with 56.72 drivers.
ok ill give it a go with the 3 tests and see what the outcome is...
here are the results from the 5900XT (as i can only publish 1 result with 03)
Main Test Results
3DMark Score   5439 3DMarks
CPU Score   631.0 CPUMarks
Detailed Test Results
Game Tests
GT1 - Wings of Fury   174.0 fps
GT2 - Battle of Proxycon   39.3 fps
GT3 - Troll's Lair   31.6 fps
GT4 - Mother Nature   31.7 fps
CPU Tests
CPU Test 1   65.4 fps
CPU Test 2   12.0 fps
this was done at 2.6GHz, no overclocking
the 9800 pro has:
3DMark Score   5914 3DMarks
CPU Score   559.0 CPUMarks
Detailed Test Results
Game Tests
GT1 - Wings of Fury   198.4 fps
GT2 - Battle of Proxycon   37.6 fps
GT3 - Troll's Lair   33.9 fps
GT4 - Mother Nature   38.2 fps
CPU Tests
CPU Test 1   62.0 fps
CPU Test 2   10.0 fps
this was done at 3.25GHz, FSB on 250MHz, RAM on 333. 250 fsb made it to 400.
note the huge difference? almost 100 marks.

Low aquamark CPU scores :(

I have a 3200+ newcastle(stock) and neo platinum. my aquamark cpu score seems low at 7019. is this abnormal and if so, any ideas on what could be causing it? btw, my 3dmark01 score is 16,900...is that low too?

OK this is how it supose to be, just ran AM3 again after i gave my AGp some juice here is the new result:
http://arc.aquamark3.com/arc/arc_view.php?run=1152541865
AquaMark Score: 47921
AquaMark CPU Score: 9904
AquaMark GFX Score: 6321
Average FramesPS: 47.921
Average TrianglesPS: 14425 K
Im aiming to 50k, but need to break the wall first on my fsb coz neo freezes up on 216 x 11 fsb 1:1.
ill loosen the timings next time mayb i get better luck then.
Oh yeh is this the latest cpu driver( AMD Athlon™ 64 Processor Driver for Windows XP, Version (exe) 1.1.0.14 )?????/
Got it from AMD.com

Very low CPU scores

I made a go at this once before, but here we go again!!
My rig is scoring very low in the CPU benchmarking dept. My main concern is 3d Mark03 and aquamark. In 3d mark I'm scoring 250 for a CPU score, and my overall aquamark score is pretty bad too - 14288. I was scoring ~28k with my 28000+ setup and the same vid card. My Sandra scores seem okay, there all in line with the referance scores. I've been thinking maybe the problem lies with my memory, since the mem and cpu are directly connected could a mem problem be disguised as a CPU issue. I've got c'n'c enabled, but I've tried it w/o it enabled-no difference. I've tried one stick, different slots, I'm at a loss. Thanks in advance.

Quote
Originally posted by McGeyser
jimboy, what BIOS version are you running? After switching to version 1.2 and upping my RAM voltage to 2.8V I get great performance with OCZ.
I am convinced your AGP GART is your problem. If all else fails, do a fresh install of Windows and load the 4N1 4.51 before your ATI drivers. If 3dMark03 is having trouble with CPU, chances are your games are suffering too, you may not know how great your setup really is yet.
Yeah, So I've found the problem, but how to fix it?? Funnny thing is I know I've checked it before and it was @ 8x, but I've also had to change it bacj to 8x from off before. I polly took it for granted that it changed to 8x. My bios is 1.2. I'm glad to hear from you and flam3h that your OCZ is working fine, I have always liked OCZ and really didn't want to give it up.

3DMark 2001 won't run

Something funny. 3DMark 2001 won't run on my computer. It gives me an error message saying it needs DirectX 8.1 or higher to run, but i have DirectX 9 installed on my machine. I am able to run 3DMark 03 with no problems (with a score of 3660.. is this bad?)
Anyone know any quirky things with 3DMark 2001 that would make it not able to run?

thanks pterhune.
btw.
my 3DMark 03 score is 3660.
my Aquamark score was about 28,800.
are these scores a little low for my system? I know the 3DMark 03 one surely must be. I'm wondering what I can do to get my scores up a little bit. I still am getting those stuttering frames in final fantasy XI sometimes. I figure if I could optimize some things I might increase my benchmark scores, and also eliminate the frame stuttering.

VTDR-128 fx5600 - No Color Red on VGA plug (d-sub port)

okay, i have a couple other posts here and i've decided to clean up my plea for help a little bit because i've solved the worst of my problems and, being more educated, can explain things a little easier.
i will recap my experiance now:
2-3 months ago i bought my spanking new VTDR-128 fx5600 card from a well known vendor. i was given a period of 2 weeks for vendor RMA, but i waited too long as this card was intended for a system i was building for someone else. when we finally were able to test it:
1: system would crash within five minutes, max.
2: no color red output from the monitor plug (d-sub port?)
3: bad, horrible artifacting in all games and even during low resolutions 2D windows usage. after power off, card heatspreader could almost burn my finger if i touched it.
4: color looked fine on both tv-out dongle and dvi > CRT adapter that came with the card, if only i could boot for more than a few minutes at a time
i wish i had taken pictures, but one day, i was convinced the card was "dead" and i decided to take the cooler off and put it on an older card i have. i carefully removed the cooler front, then back, and noticed on the back, one of the ram chips was a smudge of thermal interface material (in the pins and such, on other components as well)
i was astonished, i jumped with glee, and spent 45 minutes with a fine bristled brush. after many inspections with a magnifying glass, and almost half a can of maxell "blast away" canned air, i put the card in my computer, re-loaded the newer drivers, installed all the msi software, and proceeded to run benchmarks!
i was so happy i could pee my pants. somewhere in the manufacturing process i think something got a little messed up and the thermal paste was smudged. even with hefty overclocks the cooler doesnt feel NEARLY as hot as my old ti4200.
many people have been disappointed with performance from this card, but i am very impressed! i was able to run halo before at ~20-30FPS, now i'm getting 50 and things are much prettier. its added 4000-6000 to my aquamark score, and i went from 11000 to 16000 in 3Dmark2001SE.
the reason i'm posting again is because i want the vga plug to work. nview dualview does not work with the DVI adapter and i use my TV for gaming. so if i want to game i have to deal with the monitor having no color red.
this card has been tried now in 3 systems, with 3 different monitors and the color RED is not visible on any (with the vga plug (d-sub))
i am forced to believe nothing is wrong with my system, and it relies solely on a mistake made in manufacturing. the card overheated and crashed and burnt before i took the heatspreader off, after cleaning the paste off it works perfectly.
so, maybe GlennVidia will be kind to tell me if:
MSI will help me fix or issue a replacement. i doubt this has happened too many times before, i am probably one out of a million buying a graphics card with this mistake.
i've made many attempts at contacting MSI support, and i've read through faqs and KB so many times i could write an encyclopaedia.
do you think MSI would even admit a mistake, i am betting that first they just tell me "i voided my warranty". that makes me want to cry! i emailed them 5 times so far, and they only tell me to "RMA with vendor" and "test in another systems" even after i explained everything...
::sigh::
i'd do anything to get this card working, i love it regardless of it's redless vga!

[ 13.093] (==) No Layout section. Using the first Screen section.
[ 13.093] (==) No screen section available. Using defaults.
[ 13.093] (**) |-->Screen "Default Screen Section" (0)
[ 13.093] (**) | |-->Monitor "<default monitor>"
[ 13.093] (==) No monitor specified for screen "Default Screen Section".
Using a default monitor configuration.
First step would be to create the necessary entries (easier to make a complete xorg.conf versus xorg.conf.d/##-whatever.conf).
All Desktop Environments / Window Managers rely on X. Man pages are helpful, possibly some headaches ahead as I fought a dual-monitor display this way.
I currently run a xrandr script to switch displays on my hp pavilion: https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Xrandr#Scripts
Check it out.

Benchmarks i have been seeing. Pls read...

I have been reading thru the posts. Alot of people giving 3dmark2001,2003,aquamark scores that semm very low to me.
With my p4 2.8 not overclocked at all and 2-3-3-7-1 ram in dual channel
I score 3dmark2001se 18400-18700
aquamark 3 44000-44800
3dmark2003 6000-6200
What am i missing here ? I am not overclocked with a p4 2.8 .
I am seeing people with amd 1mb 3400 and top noych memory posting scores that a newbie like me would laugh at . Should i send this stuff back or is this possible that such a high end chip and ramm scores alot slower then my mediocre setup.
Pls explain if you can or prove me wrong somehow. In my signature is what i have ordered ands its due to arrive friday. Should i send this back and wait or am i missing something and are people scoring high benchmarks. I havent seen any please feel free to enlighten me or tell me what,who , when, and why ?
I saw a post saying he scored 8000 in 3dmaark2001 se . I got that score with an old X2 caRD AND I THINK AMD TBIRD 875 OR SOMETHING(BEEN TOO LONG).
WHAT AM I MISSING HERE ? Sorry about the capslock i try to type as fast as i can thus i make a few typos and hit it by accident ..
I am confused about all the benchmarks i have been seeing, and all of the descent ones are way overclocked....
Talk to me. Im learning here. Id appreciate it. I just spent over 700 dollars and i dont want this if my p4 2.8 not overclocked at all kicks the c out of such a high end system i have ordered.
Confused............

a system like i just ordered would smoke chains and blow doors over what i have now not only in synthetic marks but games too..
I guess i am wrong....
Maybe i should stay with my intel setup. I have not been searching intels p4 3.0-3.4 benchmarks but im sure it would be better then my rig that i am using now.
hrm. Whats the newegg restocking fee omg .. I dont know what to do now....
I was thinking i would blow the door down on my system i have now.
neolsr875p
p4 2.8 not overclocked.
dual kit of ram(mediocre not performance 1)LOL
Either way im going to get something, but i am unsure now. I might just go and look up and read scores of people that have p4 3.2e 1mb.
I very much like what i have ordered(the graphics card is in my current system now). But not downing MSi or any board. I had the impression that a 3200 would smoke over my current system(at stock).
Thinking very hard atm about what to do . I dont know. I want benchmarks. i dont overclock cause i dont have the money to fokr out on parts every 5 months if something fries.I might mildly overclock ...... I am very confused atm thats all. Tired too .Crap il take a big hit if i return this stuff but i guess im a dreamer and this is too good to be true maybe atm.

MSI Auto-Updater 3.62 VS 3.63

I have installed the latest version of MSI Live Monitor 3.62 (Before that I was with 3.61) - after I have installed this version of the program - the program stopped to searh Drivers and BIOS for my Video Card !!! What is the problem I'm using the official drivers from ATI - version 4.8 (they are detecting my card as 9800XT) - I don't think that this is the problem because with previous version of the Live Update (3.61) - everything was - OK !!! I don't know what to do - does any body else have the same problem or is it only me???
P.S. When I start the MSI Live Update 3 - It says - your card does not support MSI Live Update 3.xx - How this can be

Quote
Originally posted by TimKessler
Im actually glad that happened to me with LU3, because since then i decided to use the ati drivers catalyst version 4.8.
I never did it on my own before but read the instructions on the ati site and did it without any glitches. I think they are better. My aquamark score went up by 1000 points and 3dmark went up but only 30 points. Either way im scoring higher. Also it is recognized by the system and other utilities as a 9800xt now.
Another problem it fixed for me (im not sure if it happens to you) is after i play a game and go back to the desktop- the desktop colors kick back in. Before it would go back to the desktop with the higher gamma settings for the games and id have to go into my properties to change it back. Now its automatic .
Then you must definitly try out the new version ATI catalyst 4.9 !!! I don't know which version exatly is better - the version with ATI Catalyst Control Center or ATI Catalyst Standart Pannels - the first difference is the size. Control Center is 50MB, Standart panel is 26MB. Standart Panel is just like the old drivers - Control Center requires Microsoft .NET Framework 1.1 to be installed on your system! Good luck in trying them - I'm with Control Center right now - but to tell you the truth It feels a little strange to get use to this new version so if you want try the Standart one. And for now (It's my feeling) it looks like the computer takes more time to load the Windows XP. Good Luck to You
P.S. If I don't like it this way I will definitly change back to 4.9 ATI Catalyst Standart Panel drivers !!!

D.O.T. Problem

I'm new to this forum and building computers in general, but I've tinkered with them for years. Here's what I have. I like the idea of the D.O.T. to automatically overclock for me, but, I can't run it past the "Private" setting. Can't do much with manual either. At Sargeant, 3DMark03 won't run, and burn-in (using SiSoft Sandra) fails. The computer I built runs great otherwise, with no problems (maybe I should leave well enough alone). I have successfully overclocked the video card using Radlinker. Here are the specs: (The first part of this info is via Everest).
AMD Athlon 64 3000+
CPU Clock   2001.41 MHz
MSI K8T Neo-FIS2R (MS-6702)
SPD Memory Modules   (2 each, Dimm slots 1 and 3)
OCZ OCZ400256EL   256 MB PC3200 DDR SDRAM (CL 2.0 @ 200 MHz)
OCZ OCZ400256EL   256 MB PC3200 DDR SDRAM (CL 2.0 @ 200 MHz)
CAS Latency (CL)   2T
RAS To CAS Delay (tRCD)   3T
RAS Precharge (tRP)   3T
RAS Active Time (tRAS)   6T
(is this optimal for my memory??)
Video Adapter   ATI Radeon 9600 Pro
GPU Clock    500 MHz
Memory Clock 344 MHz
PSU
450W Mustang LC-B450E
+3.3V/28A, +5V/50A, +12V/18A
Hard drive
Maxtor 7200 RPM (SATA) VIA controller
I have most settings in bios set to auto except 400Mhz limit verses auto.
I've tried cool and quiet enabled/disabled. Board bios looks up to date (1.2), video card drivers up to date. Tried the latest AMD driver for the CPU, looked like it dropped to 800 mhz from 2000 so I removed it.
3DMark score is 4129 (pre-overclocking of video card was 3400)
Aquamark score 32,382
Any suggestions would be appreciated.

Make sure first off that you don't have Turbo turned on. That also overclocks but with a mixed bag of results as it can cause issues with the AGP/PCI clocks. Also if you change the FSB turn off DOT as your overclocking with both at the smae time.
Typically you will want Memtest86+ and Prime95 so that you can be sure you are stable with each step. Use the FSB and turn it up one step at a time and test between each step to be sure that you remain stable. Simply put if the test fail your not stable so turn it back down to where it was.
Some folks have reached 220 or higher on the FSB but don't jump right there and expect it to work as you will likely harm something if your system can't handle it. Use small steps of 1 or 2 at a time and I can't stress testing enough. If something seems odd then stop and go back to an earlier setting.
Keep in mind that overclocking is not assured nor are high overclock values. Whatever you do can put hardware at risk and if your not sure then don't go there. Overclocking vcoids warrenties and any problems are on your head and can dig deep into your wallot. That said don't send me hate mail if things don't go well. LOL
These CPU's are not very good overclockers as yet because the AGP/PCI clocks go up with each step of increase in the FSB. That means that while your CPU may handle it your other cards may become unstable as well. Note SATA HD's are also very problem children when it comes to hi overclocks. If you start getting 0 Byte files written to the HD your running them to fast. Everything is tied ATM to the FSB speed so any change you make there effects the speed of everything in the computer in this regard.
Have fun and be sure to test if your going to attempt it.

OCing 2500+ K7N2 Delta-L (which bios to use)

i wanna OC my cpu 2500+ to 3200+, my bios is the default i think, cuz i never changed it.
my system
amd 2500+ XP barton
k7n2 delta-L
2x256Mb ddr400 twinmos
20Gb 5400rom maxtor
40Gb 7200rpm Maxtor
160Gb 7200rpm Samsung
370W
Gigabyte 9600Pro 128Mb
52x24x52 cdrw
120mm fan, 2x80mm fan, stock cooler for my cpu
hmm so jo think my PSu can still handle OCing? i got 50+ ultra bright red LEDs running too (@ 2.3Volts each)

well the cpu temp stay in 40-55 degrees celcius and case temp 20-35C
i run 3dmark03 with no hangs and stuff
however on Aquamark3 i only get a score of 21826
DATE: 2004-12-11 04:18:11 Set this Measurement to be public. Delete this measurement
CPU: AMD Athlon(tm) XP 3200+ CR: 2186 MHz SRAM: 512 MB OS: Microsoft Windows XP
GFX: GIGABYTE RADEON 9600 PRO CM: 398 / 297 MHz VRAM: 115 MB DRIVER: 6.14.10.6467
# 1 AquaMark Score: 21826 (CPU: 4611, GFX: 2868) FPS: 21.83 TPS: 6570 K Compare
RES: 1024x768 x 32bit AA: Off AF: 4x DETAILS: Very High View
DATE: 2004-11-29 11:32:32 Set this Measurement to be private. Delete this measurement
CPU: AMD Athlon(tm) XP 2500+ CR: 1819 MHz SRAM: 512 MB OS: Microsoft Windows XP
GFX: GIGABYTE RADEON 9600 PRO CM: 398 / 297 MHz VRAM: 125 MB DRIVER: 6.14.10.6467
# 1 AquaMark Score: 25538 (CPU: 5803, GFX: 3297) FPS: 25.54 TPS: 7687 K Compare
RES: 1024x768 x 32bit AA: Off AF: 4x DETAILS: Very High View
not really sure why, im thinking of Service Pack 2, ever since i installed SP2 my computer had been running slower than before (installed it 2 days ago cuz i repaired my sindows xp and downloading sp1 would make me go over my monthly bandwdth limit)

6800 GT AGP aquamark 3 scores 1024x768 4xAF VERY HIGH

Do you find a 8000 graphics score low with 6800 gt AGP?

Quote from: tstathop2003 on 05-May-05, 01:46:59
Do you find a 8000 graphics score low with 6800 gt AGP?
It depends on the Drivers, CPU, RAM ,PSU, Motherboard and general settings of the computer. A lot of factors will come into play as to why the score is so low. It should at least be over 10k, unless it's running in a 3 year old XP or P4 rig, then 8k would be OK.... For what it's worth, I can squeeze 10.5k out of my 6800nu, but that is OCing it to hell and back. The link to my score is in my sig.

Most relevant test score for PPro CS5 to run on notebook?

Hi, I hope I didn't miss this topic anywhere in the forum. Since I am in the market for a new notebook to occasionally edit 3-5min clips of panasonic HMC 150 AVCHD material (most of the time just office work), I was wondering what the best and still affordable notebook (EUR 1500-1800) would be. Apart for a wide discussion of system requirements and recommendations I couldn't find what would be the most relevant test score to assess how well PPro CS5 is going to work. Some say you need to get a notebook for EUR 3000, some say one for EUR 1200 would still work - I guess it depends on how much you are going to edit and how much time you have. I was curious if there was such a score that serves as a guideline. For example, below you find such test scores for a Sony notebook. What would be the most informative as to whether and how well PPro CS5 will work. Any information is greatly appreciated.
btw: I would appreciate recommendations on these two notebooks
Acers Aspire TimelineX 4820TG-624G16Mnks
Core i7-620M 2x 2.66GHz • 4096MB • 160GB SSD • DVD+/-RW DL • ATI Mobility Radeon HD 5650 1024MB • 4x USB 2.0/Gb LAN/WLAN 802.11abgn/Bluetooth • HDMI • 5in1 Card Reader (SD/MMC/MS/MS Pro/xD) • Webcam (1.3 Megapixel) • Multi-Touch Trackpad • 14.1" WXGA glare LED TFT (1366x768)
Sony Vaio VPC-Z12
Core i5-520M 2x 2.40GHz • 4096MB (2x 2048MB) • 128GB Dual SSD • DVD+/-RW DL • NVIDIA GeForce GT330M 1024MB und Intel GMA HD (IGP) • 3x USB 2.0/Gb LAN/WLAN 802.11abgn/Bluetooth • HDMI • UMTS/HSDPA • ExpressCard/34 Slot
Thanks!
simpsonix
Benchmark: PCMark05
k.A.
Benchmark: PCMark Vantage
12.114 Punkte
Benchmark: Sysmark 2007
k.A.
Benchmark: 3DMark01
32.989 Punkte
Benchmark: 3DMark03
k.A.
Benchmark: 3DMark05
k.A.
Benchmark: 3DMark06
7.675 Punkte
Benchmark: Cinebench (1 CPU)
687 Punkte
Benchmark: Cinebench (2 CPUs)
1.416 Punkte
Benchmark: Quake 3 Arena
744 fps
Benchmark: UT2003
k.A.
Benchmark: Aquamark 2.3
k.A.
Benchmark: CCS 10x7
274 fps
Benchmark: CCS native
272 fps

thank you very much for your answer. Do you think the following notebook would be suitable for occasional editing of 3-4min clips (we have got a desktop editing machine with i7, 12gb, nvidia gts250, and 4 7200 barracuda hdds)? so basically it should only be able to work as a backup editing machine in case two clips have to be finished at the same time. since there is only one hdd, I could put an sdd into it as well. and I could upgrade to 16gb ram. the reason, why this particular notebook is interesting for me, is that through a student discount I can get it for EUR 1,700 instead of EUR 2,500 (cheapest price on the market for this setup). I am aware that it won't be as fast as my desktop (which works spledidly with avchd!), but it should be faster than a retired snail overtaking during his afternoon nap ;-)
I would really appreciate your opinion on that one or from anybody else that has particular experiences with this notebook and avchd!
thanks
simpsonix
HP EliteBook 8540w
Prozessor: Intel® Core™ i7-740QM Prozessor
Takt: 1,73 GHz, 6 MB L3 Cache, bis zu 2,93 GHz mit Intel Turbo-Boost-Technologie
HD: 500 GB SATA (7200rpm) mit HP 3D DriveGuard
RAM: 2 x 4 GB (DDR3 1333 MHz), upgradeable to 16 GB RAM
Display: 15,6" (16:9) Full-HD anti-glare Display mit LED-Hintergrundbeleuchtung (1920 x 1080); Umgebungslichtsensor & HP Nightlight
Graphik: NVIDIA Quadro FX 1800M mit 1 GB dediziert GDDR5 RAM
WWAN: WWAN Modul nicht integriert, im nachhinein aufrüstbar
Batterie: HP 8-Zellen Long-Life-Akku (68 WHr) (3 Jahre Garantie)
optisches Laufwerk: DVD+/–RW, Blu-Ray Player/Writer, SuperMulti Dual Layer mit LightScribe Technologie (Upgrade Bay, second disk drive)
Kamera: 2 Megapixel Webcam
Gewicht: ca. 2,9 kg
Garantie: 3 Jahre PickUp & Return Garantie (3-3-0)

3dMark Scores

Right then - lets get this one started
3dmark scores please for system benching comparisons?
Mine is as follows:
No ocing at all:
24281 - 3dMark 2001SE
11299 - 3dMark 2003 - Build 340
4027 - 3dMark 2005 - Ver1
62,746 - Aquamark
4,873 - PCMark04
with ONLY my GT graphics card clocked to Ultra speeds (which it has been since day one) - for those that dont know - 350/1Ghz to 400/1.1Ghz ;>
25780 - 3dmark2001SE
12,668 -3dmark2003 - Build 340
5085 - 3dmark2005 - Ver 1.1.0
67,527 - Aquamark
4915 - PCMark04

Quote
Originally posted by OafyC
Quote
Originally posted by RexB
Quote
Originally posted by phrozin
shouldent this be over at benchmarks ? oh well
a64 3500+ neo2 x800pro
3d 01 29560
3d 01 14089
aqua 3 75k
a64 3500+a8v x800pro
3d 01 30532
3d 03 14490
aqua 03 77231
doom 3 1024x768 88.7
a64 3200+ 1 mb neo 1 x800pro
3d 01 29700
3d 03 13780
aqua 3 72k
a64 3400+ 1mb neo1 x800pro
3d 01 29570
3d 03 13349
aqua 3 71k
Holy Shmoly phrozin! You running a NOS in those rigs?
Those score are a bit high. About what I get on my comparable 3400 system if I force null ps 1.x
How so?? all you haft to do is flash with xt bios to open 16 pipes then flash it back then volt mod it easy null px shader lol don’t thinks so! all scores are with fm approved drivers and whql
03
01
aqua
stock card o/c system runs 26500 01 13089 03
I finally get my fx 53 and vapour chill next week so im looking for mid 16k in 03 1 interesting point is the difference between k8n neo 2 and the asus both were running same clocks and same mem timings (I though at least 1 of you would have picked that up instead of craping on about null shader aint thats a nv thing anyhow) some what disappointing i had high hopes for the neo2
The same old story I cant do so it's impossible instead of asking how!

Aquamark 03

I tried aquamark and scored 43. 332 . is that a decent score?

sounds pretty good. i got around 42,000 with my 9800pro at stock speeds and ati catalyst 10.0. im up to 52,000 now with a new heatsink(vga silencer) which allowed me to overclock to 450/375 and using omega drivers. I just got some ramsinks in today which i hope will let me push the ram speed a little more.

MSI Ti4200 8x scores

Hey, just checking, what are people getting in 3d Mark 03? I know that the Ti cards are not DX9 compatible, but I udgraded to DX9, and now I cant run 3d Mark 01...hehe. So I was just looking to compare. I get about 16700 in Aquamark 3,
UT benchmark is 158.8 flyby,and 72.7 bot. But my 3d Mark 2003 is only 1633.
where i was getting 14500+ (oc'd) in 3d Mark 2001. Grrr. What is everyone else getting in 3d '03, and am I on track? Nvidia driver 44.03 is the fastest driver for me, after benching them all.

Your 3DMark2003-score is ok because your vga-card doesn't support dx9 by hardware. My system scores 1553 at 3DMark03 and 11487 at 3DMark01 (without oc ).
I had tested my 2.4Ghz-P4-Sony-Vaio-Laptop (with radeon7500) - 5(!!!) points in 3DMark03... :D

AquaMark 3 scores

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for