9600GSO Crappy 3DMark 06 scores

[Scouzer]

I just upgraded my dad's PC:

Athlon X2 3800+
Asus M2N-E
2GB PC2-5300
450W PSU
Windows XP

And I popped in the new 9600 GSO 512MB, upgraded the drivers... and got 6800 in 3DMark06... seems really low. The average score for even crappy processors was around 8500-9500.

What could be wrong? The computer had a malware infection (since cleaned) but formatting isn't really an option.

 

[AzN]

That's normal. CPU sway the score. This is an old benchmark. Why not test it in actual games instead?

 

[Leyawiin]

My old 2007 build had an X2 5200+ and an 8800 GTX. I only got about 9900 on 3DMark06 and it was a much stronger setup than the one you listed. Your score sounds about right for the hardware.

 

[Scouzer]

Guess his next upgrade will be the CPU! I didn't realize how badly it'd bottleneck him.

 

[OCGuy]

9600GSO isnt exactly what you would call "high end." I doubt you are really that bottlenecked.

 

[Scouzer]

Originally posted by: OCguy
9600GSO isnt exactly what you would call "high end." I doubt you are really that bottlenecked.

It was a nice upgrade from a 7600 GT for $45

 

[OCGuy]

Originally posted by: Scouzer

Originally posted by: OCguy
9600GSO isnt exactly what you would call "high end." I doubt you are really that bottlenecked.

It was a nice upgrade from a 7600 GT for $45

Oh I'm sure it fits your needs fine. I just meant that it isnt going to be shattering any benches. :beer:

 

[Leyawiin]

Originally posted by: OCguy

Originally posted by: Scouzer

Originally posted by: OCguy
9600GSO isnt exactly what you would call "high end." I doubt you are really that bottlenecked.

It was a nice upgrade from a 7600 GT for $45

Oh I'm sure it fits your needs fine. I just meant that it isnt going to be shattering any benches. :beer:

Exactly. Thats a fine step up for a small price and is well suited for his system. You did good.

 

[cusideabelincoln]

If it's the 9600GSO with the 48 SPs (not the 96 SPs of older 9600GSOs), then that score looks ok. Those higher average scores are probably for the 9600GSOs with the 96 shader processors, similar to the 8800GS.

 

[deputc26]

I'll tell you exactly what it is. I bet you have the 512mb DDR2 version that has a 128bit memory bus. The 96 shader processors are being HORRIBLY bottlenecked by the slow memory. for reference most 9600gso's have DDR3 on 384bit bus so you have about 1/4 the bandwidth of a normal 9600GSO.

 

[Scouzer]

Huh. I had no idea there was so much difference...

But I still think it might be a bad score... I just realized 3DMark 06 is defaulting to only 1280x768... quite a bit lower than the usual res of 1280x1024.

So I think something is wrong with the score anyway.

It's this card: http://www.newegg.ca/Product/P...x?Item=N82E16814121314

which says it's DDR3

 

[Andrew1990]

Originally posted by: Scouzer
Huh. I had no idea there was so much difference...

But I still think it might be a bad score... I just realized 3DMark 06 is defaulting to only 1280x768... quite a bit lower than the usual res of 1280x1024.

So I think something is wrong with the score anyway.

It's this card: http://www.newegg.ca/Product/P...x?Item=N82E16814121314

which says it's DDR3

WTF, That card is all screwy. 512MB GDDR3 with a 192bit bus and 96SP? I never seen this 9600GSO Before.

 

[Scouzer]

Yeah, I don't know, I'm pretty out of the loop on this stuff. This is the first desktop upgrading I've done in 4 years.

 

[Andrew1990]

Well usually the 9600GSO came in these flavors

Old Flavor = 96sp 384mb/768mb DDR3 192bit memory bus
Old Slow Flavor = The same as abobe but with DDR2
Asus screwy version = 96sp 512mb GDDR2 128bit Memory Bus
New Crappy version = 48sp 512mb/1GB GDDR3 256bit memory bus

The one you have seems to be some sort of Hybrid.

 

[Scouzer]

Originally posted by: Andrew1990
Well usually the 9600GSO came in these flavors

Old Flavor = 96sp 384mb/768mb DDR3 192bit memory bus
Old Slow Flavor = The same as abobe but with DDR2
Asus screwy version = 96sp 512mb GDDR2 128bit Memory Bus
New Crappy version = 48sp 512mb/1GB GDDR3 256bit memory bus

The one you have seems to be some sort of Hybrid.

Weird. I probably should have done a bit more research first, lol.

I fixed the dual channel memory (DIMMs were in the wrong slots) and overclocked him from 2ghz to 2.2ghz and I've got it up to 7200 at 1280x768. Not great. It should be doing better given the non standard resolution (3dmark usually uses 1280x1024)

I managed to test it in proper 1280x1024 (my TV doesn't support that so I had to get fancy) and it gets 6665. I guess that's OK, I was still expecting a bit better.

 

[bigsnyder]

You also need to consider if your default GPU clocks are equal to the other 9600s you are comparing to. It is not always a given they will be clocked the same.

 

[VirtualLarry]

Originally posted by: deputc26
I'll tell you exactly what it is. I bet you have the 512mb DDR2 version that has a 128bit memory bus. The 96 shader processors are being HORRIBLY bottlenecked by the slow memory. for reference most 9600gso's have DDR3 on 384bit bus so you have about 1/4 the bandwidth of a normal 9600GSO.

Except... the 512MB version HAS TO BE the 48SP version. So it's impossible to have a situation like that.

Edit: Nevermind. Screwy card specs indeed! I thought that there was a direct relationship between memory bus width and quads, such that any card with a 192-bit memory bus had to have either 384 or 768MB of RAM. Dunno how they enabled another memory bus quad, unless... that card might really be a 9800GT in disguise, perhaps the fourth quad is only locked out at the BIOS level (in terms of SPs), and is really functional at a hardware level.

 

[0roo0roo]

there are 6 versions of the card on asus site now.
http://www.asus.com/ProductGro...PG_ID=r3EWBZcGQvxHvrb4

 

[happy medium]

Originally posted by: Andrew1990

Originally posted by: Scouzer
Huh. I had no idea there was so much difference...

But I still think it might be a bad score... I just realized 3DMark 06 is defaulting to only 1280x768... quite a bit lower than the usual res of 1280x1024.

So I think something is wrong with the score anyway.

It's this card: http://www.newegg.ca/Product/P...x?Item=N82E16814121314

which says it's DDR3

WTF, That card is all screwy. 512MB GDDR3 with a 192bit bus and 96SP? I never seen this 9600GSO Before.

Yea thats the old/new asus 9600gso. Not bad for 45$

This I beleive is the newer version. It's the same but has a 128 bit for 35$ after rebate.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/...A&Item=N82E16814121320

 

[nemesismk2]

Originally posted by: OCguy
9600GSO isnt exactly what you would call "high end." I doubt you are really that bottlenecked.

My thoughts too

 

[nemesismk2]

Originally posted by: cusideabelincoln
If it's the 9600GSO with the 48 SPs (not the 96 SPs of older 9600GSOs), then that score looks ok. Those higher average scores are probably for the 9600GSOs with the 96 shader processors, similar to the 8800GS.

I have used a 9600 GSO 384mb with 96 SP and I got over 12,000

 

[toyota]

Originally posted by: nemesismk2

Originally posted by: cusideabelincoln
If it's the 9600GSO with the 48 SPs (not the 96 SPs of older 9600GSOs), then that score looks ok. Those higher average scores are probably for the 9600GSOs with the 96 shader processors, similar to the 8800GS.

I have used a 9600 GSO 384mb with 96 SP and I got over 12,000

probably not with a 3800 X2

 

[Keysplayr]

Originally posted by: Andrew1990

Originally posted by: Scouzer
Huh. I had no idea there was so much difference...

But I still think it might be a bad score... I just realized 3DMark 06 is defaulting to only 1280x768... quite a bit lower than the usual res of 1280x1024.

So I think something is wrong with the score anyway.

It's this card: http://www.newegg.ca/Product/P...x?Item=N82E16814121314

which says it's DDR3

WTF, That card is all screwy. 512MB GDDR3 with a 192bit bus and 96SP? I never seen this 9600GSO Before.

I have that exact card. 192-bit bus is a typo on newegg. It's actually 128-bit. If the card had been a 192-bit bus, it would have had either 384MB or 768MB of GDDR3. Not 512MB.
And it does have a 96 shader G92 core. I think G94 had only 64 shaders max.

 

[crisium]

I just checked my old 3Dmark scores because 6800 seemed familiar. I was right. I got 6800 exactly way back when I had an Athlon 64 3800+ (that's single core) @2640MHz with an overclocked Radeon 3850 512MB and 2GB of overclocked DDR400 (PC3200).

I know that 9600GSO is a slower card, your memory is weaker, and your CPU is clocked lower, but being dual core CPU I'd think it would do more than even out. Guess not. Overclock that CPU dude - that will help.

http://service.futuremark.com/...=4226646&resultType=14

With my stock X2 4200 (only a little faster than stock X2 3800, obviously) I improved to 7900. If a 3850 is worth 1000 points more than a 9600GSO then maybe it's all good.

http://service.futuremark.com/...=4360374&resultType=14

 

[rogue1979]

$45 for a 9600GSO "new flavor" is a fair deal. It is slower than the original 9600GSO and the 9600GT. I think your 3800+ is AM2? If so, you should be able to get 2.4-2.6GHz out of it even if it is 90nm, maybe more if it's 65nm.

Don't worry about 3DMark. If you can get a little more speed out of your 3800+ it will be a nice match for the video card. Test it in the games your Dad plays at the resolution he uses.

If it works, then your done