Yeah, maybe you guys are right. Maybe my scores are OK. My games do run fast and smooth and I don't have any problems whatsoever with my rig. Considering it's my first AMD system, that's pretty good.
It's just that I was expecting something a bit better, especially in UT which is heavily influenced by the CPU.
Wait...but shouldn't the video card matter? I mean leaving saturation aside...the geforce3 is faster than a geforce2, even at 640X480, no?
With today's top of the line CPUs it isn't unless you're using DX8 optimised programs which use programmable T&L.
Maybe I'm not thinking straight, but if you went by saturation logic alone you could test the setup with a TNT and get the same numbers?
No, look: the easiest way to tell if you're video card limited or not is to lower the resolution. If your scores stay the same when you do this, you're CPU limited. If they increase, you're video card limited.
Regardless of whether I run my tests at
640 x 480 x 32 or
320 x 240 x 16,
the scores stay the same. That means I'm CPU limited and that's precisely why I chose such settings to begin with. Usually I don't use such low-res settings.
Honestly, they're very basic benchmarking principles.