• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

3dMark 2000 score question

Its along the right lines, but I think it should be a bit higher that to be an 'average' system. Why not use the online result browser to check?
 
Hey you know what I was thinkin? 3DMark really sucks. The score it gives you means absoluly nothing.
 
Deeko, yep the score is actually a little pointless as there are many different variations in performance which could give the same score (for example a card could be great at something which isn't important and bad at the rest, while another could be a good all-round card and both get the same score).

But 3DMark itself is not a bad test. If you ignore the main score and look at the other information like fill-rate, polygon throughput, texture rendering speed, etc. This is where the real information is.
 
I'd like to know how people get above 7500 with similiar systems specs when I can't get over 7000... blah it is baloney.
 
Hey Stickhead,

If you open Sandra and right click on Drives Benchmark and left click on Module Options and then uncheck Bypass Windows Disk Cache (for some reason disk cache is off by default). This should fix your problem.

Let me know what happens.
 
I will have to deny that the score it gives you means nothing! First time I ran it I got 3150 (with it being overclocked)3dmarks with my radeon. With this I knew the card was not working right, and I pinpointed it too! After that I got it up to 4350 and fixed my high resolution rendering problem. My fps also jumped way up (about 50 fps in quake 2).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top