3800 3D marks (16 bit) with a GTS 32meg with a 1.33-266 tbird... Is this correct?

[joe4324]

Hi

for the first time on my new system I ran 3dmark 2001 last night and I'm not satisfied with the outcome. I scored right around 3250 3dmarks (32bit) and 3800 (16bit) on my new system.

Win2k Pro Service Pack 2, Directx 8 (and all windows updates)
Asus A7A266 (new Bios)
1.33 Tbird (non-oc)
512 Cas3 PC133 (half Cas2 crucial and half cheap generic crap)
Asus V770 Pure Geforce 2 GTS (running 12.41? drivers)
Main Hardrive is 30GB Maxtor DiamondMax Plus ATA100 7200RPM

I have a 2nd slightly slow Hardrive and 2 cd rooms as well. but the Core of my system is decent 1.33Ghz with 512 running at 133mhz and a geforce 2 GTS.

I ran 3dmark on my last setup. A7Pro with a 1Ghz Tbird running at 100mhz bus with 256 pc133 (running at 100mhz bus) and my 3d marks seem almost identical. Shouldnt my 3d performance benefited from the extra memory, bandwidth and cpu cycles, mystem should be on a whole 33% faster then it was, and I just simply cant see it, no in 3dmark and none of my games appear noticeably better. So befor I start 2nd guessing my hardware purchases I wanted to see what you guys think. Were are the holes if any in my setup?

 

[pac1085]

That seems about right. In 3dmark extra memory doesnt really help. The things that really help are CPU speed and video ram speed. I have a similar system and I get roughly the same number of 3dmarks. You should try the 12.90 beta drivers, alot of people claim to be getting higher scores with them...and btw this post should go in general hardware or one of those forums.

 

[br0wn]

This is not the appropriate forum for your question (check
the rules in this forum posted by Anand).
Please post your question in General Hardware Forum.

Personally, I don't think people should answer these
type of questions here.
It might seem harmless, but it actually will ruin
this forum as it encourages others to post these
types of questions.
I'd hate to see the hard work that Anand (and
others) has put in creating this new forum goes away.

 

[joe4324]

I just tried deleting the post but It seems i cant do it. So I appologize to anyone who doesnt find this technical enough to deserve to be on there board. I didnt read the Guidlines of the forum and it looks like I should have. Its pretty damned technical issue to me and I thought this crowd would the best and sharpest to rectify my situation, I guess I was wrong if you can move the post please do. Or just delete it, I'd rather not have it here anymore.

 

[br0wn]

No offense at all.
Your question is in fact technical (but in a
different sense of technical question that we
would like to have here). Don't undermine
the crowd at General Hardware Forum. In fact,
they might be more qualified to answer
these type of questions.

 

[Ionizer86]

I am sorry for replying such a post in this highly technical forum, but I think I have a good point. I upgraded my system from 128mb PC133 to 256mb. My ram runs at cas latency 2. The difference between 128 and 256 wasn't a big one, even though I use win2k. The system booted about 10 seconds faster (on win98) but no big difference. I think that pulling out the generic cas3 ram will make the system faster, as 256mb is enough, and cas3 is quite a bit slower than cas2. Joe4324, I think that selling the cheap 256mb generic ram (although waiting for ram prices to go up is a good idea)