• We should now be fully online following an overnight outage. Apologies for any inconvenience, we do not expect there to be any further issues.

Can anyone with a similar system tell me what kinda scores they get on benchmark testing & gaming performance?

Turkish

Lifer
May 26, 2003
15,547
1
81
Just ordered some parts for replacing my dating system. Specs:

Case: COOLERMAS|STC-T01-UWK RT
Motherboard: MSI|VIA K8T800 K8T NEO-FIS2R RT
Processor: AMD 64 |3700+ ATHLON 64 754 RT
Video Card: PNY|6800GT 256M VCG6800GAPB
Memory: 1 GB Corsair XMS DDR 400 (512x2)
Harddrive: 1 x 120 GB WD SE w/ 8mb Cache, 1 x 200 GB WD SE w/ 8mb Cache.

Thanks.
 

DAPUNISHER

Super Moderator CPU Forum Mod and Elite Member
Super Moderator
Aug 22, 2001
32,056
32,579
146
That GT will likely hit Ultra speed no trouble, but even@stock that rig should pull 12kish 3DM'03 5kish'05 65kish AQ3 and let you play most the newest games@12x10 lot 'o eye candy and just about anything else@16x12 with some eye candy. I have a similar setup except 512k cache@2.4ghz=3400+ 240HTT but with ram@ default 400DDR and that has been my experience.

I would have went 939@this time personally, but I get the impression you will run this setup a good while so no BFD :)
 

Turkish

Lifer
May 26, 2003
15,547
1
81
Originally posted by: DAPUNISHER
That GT will likely hit Ultra speed no trouble, but even@stock that rig should pull 12kish 3DM'03 5kish'05 65kish AQ3 and let you play most the newest games@12x10 lot 'o eye candy and just about anything else@16x12 with some eye candy. I have a similar setup except 512k cache@2.4ghz=3400+ 240HTT but with ram@ default 400DDR and that has been my experience.

I would have went 939@this time personally, but I get the impression you will run this setup a good while so no BFD :)

Thanks for the response man. Why would you have gone 939? I'm probably going to keep this setup till the end of Summer'05 so I just need something that'll run most games/apps good till then. I don't know how it will be priced but I may go with Intel's 64bit when they come out next year. We'll see.

And what do you mean when you say ram@ default 400DDR? Do they come with some other default setting? :confused: Excuse my noobness :)
 

DAPUNISHER

Super Moderator CPU Forum Mod and Elite Member
Super Moderator
Aug 22, 2001
32,056
32,579
146
I'd have gone 939 for the 4 ram slots and dual channel * not a big performance gain for gaming but still better, and in some areas significantly better* and Winchester core CPUs. All that isn't a big deal as mentioned, but still a better choice IMO since that 3700+ is expensive and will likely not overclock much while the $200 3200+ Winchester may potentially match or beat it in performance when overclocked for a lot less money.

The reason I mentioned 400DDR is because I run 240HTT which if I had started with the ram@400DDR default would have resulted in overclocking my ram beyond what it can handle. So I started it@333DDR so that it is running in spec with the HTT overclocked thanks to the different divider.
 

Turkish

Lifer
May 26, 2003
15,547
1
81
Originally posted by: DAPUNISHER
I'd have gone 939 for the 4 ram slots and dual channel * not a big performance gain for gaming but still better, and in some areas significantly better* and Winchester core CPUs. All that isn't a big deal as mentioned, but still a better choice IMO since that 3700+ is expensive and will likely not overclock much while the $200 3200+ Winchester may potentially match or beat it in performance when overclocked for a lot less money.

The reason I mentioned 400DDR is because I run 240HTT which if I had started with the ram@400DDR default would have resulted in overclocking my ram beyond what it can handle. So I started it@333DDR so that it is running in spec with the HTT overclocked thanks to the different divider.


I thought about the 4 ram slots but I already have 1 GB of RAM and it seems to handle most applications/games well. So I'm probably going to upgrade to 2GB by this summer and that should get me through 2005. There'll be better processors/motherboards/memory so I'll just upgrade again then.

I'll probably keep my rig as it is (stock), I'm not a big fan of overclocking unless I see thousands of people do it everyday and keep a silent/cool system :p I know AMD is known by its overclocking friendliness so will it be a shame if I don't overlock? :)

 

thegimp03

Diamond Member
Jul 5, 2004
7,420
2
81
No, you won't need to with that beast of a computer. I think dapunisher was just referring to the fact that you could have saved some bucks by going 939 winchester. Not a big deal if you have the money though. Have fun with that system! :)
Oh, and I can't give you what kinda scores you'll get because I currently run a p4 2.4/400 mhz fsb. :(