3dMark06 @ 1920x1200

[halabb]

Specs in sig.

Been having trouble with Quad-SLI since the beginning. I actually held off OCing for about 3-4 weeks because I wanted to get it working right. Tried drivers and Rivatuner and just about everything I can think of. One 9800GX2 performs better and doesn't stutter and lag.

Anyways, I'm just waiting for better drivers. So meanwhile, I ran 3dMark06 @ 1920x1200 because that's what run everything at.
I'm curious how my score compares to others.
Care to take a shot at it? I'm really curious.

18498

Just change res and start.

 

[idiotekniQues]

10,120

 

[halabb]

Nice pics. Are you a professional photographer? I'm more of the nature-scenic type but I like your style. You are definitely from New York, no?

I'd really like to see how I compare to ATI's X2. Anyone up to it?

 

[idiotekniQues]

Thanks, glad you like.

I am from north jersey very close to NYC. No professional here, just a hobbyist - I make a lil money on the side here and there selling a print or now I am doing some shots for a realtor to see if we can work out a long term freelance gig on the side - shoot their listings and get paid a lil scratch.

When i get my second sapphire toxic 3870 ill give 3dmarks a go again

 

[Throckmorton]

8800GT 1gb, 2.4ghz C2D, 3.5gb DDR800

I get 8881 with standard settings and 1920x1200

With 4xAA I get 6637

 

[halabb]

Sure, I'll be waiting

I have an option in 3dMark06 for AA 'quality'. I just lef it on 0 and turned AA to 4x and got:


16473

 

[soul59]

15974

 

[soul59]

1900x1200--4xAA=13055

 

[sgrinavi]

q6600 rig @ 3.0 - 2x3870's in cross fire

14537 @1900x1200
17145 @1280x1024

e8400 rig @ 3.6 - 9800 gx2

15892 @1900x1200
18143 @1280x1024

 

[halabb]

Hmmm... this is odd.... sgrinavi, we have similar setups as far as 3dMark06 is concerned. But I get like 15k in 3dMark on default settings. Yet I get 18.5k @ 1920x1200...
w/e I'm just glad I'm getting avg of 50fps in Crysis. I have come to realize that my QuadSLI is SERIOUSLY bottlenecked by my CPU. I also saw reviews of how a 200Mhz bump on my CPU will get me past 20k in 3dMark.

 

[idiotekniQues]

3dmark is not the best gauge of performance anyways.

ati wins 3dmarks but loses in more actual real world performance.

 

[halabb]

Especially with the 9800GX2s. I know and I could care less about the score. I'm just trying to gauge my performance compared with others to see if there are any discrepencies with my SLI setup.
Judging by how good Crysis runs (all very high I'm gonna have to say my problem lies within Steam/HL2 program. SLI is working great.

 

[sgrinavi]

Originally posted by: halabb
Hmmm... this is odd.... sgrinavi, we have similar setups as far as 3dMark06 is concerned. But I get like 15k in 3dMark on default settings. Yet I get 18.5k @ 1920x1200...
w/e I'm just glad I'm getting avg of 50fps in Crysis. I have come to realize that my QuadSLI is SERIOUSLY bottlenecked by my CPU. I also saw reviews of how a 200Mhz bump on my CPU will get me past 20k in 3dMark.

That is very odd considering I have one card (vs your 2) and it is running on my e8400 system (vs your quad) . I find that my quad core blows my dual core away in 3dmark06; for example my 8800GT on the quad gave me nearly as good a benchmark as my 8800 GTS (g92) did on my 8400....

Your score should be a good deal higher at lower resolutions, no question. EVEN if there was a bottleneck it certainly would not be any less, ya know? You should send me your second gx2 so I can test it in my quad core ;-)