• 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.

New 3dmark score>

9

94transam

Member
Let me know what you guys think of these odd ratios

3Dmark2001se
13x133fsb=1733mhz
my score: 10500
13x166fsb=2166
my score: 13890

ok that sounds reasonable
but check these out

3Dmark2003
13x133fsb=1733
my score = 4352
13x166fsb=2166
my score: 4579

isnt that a kinda lame difference?
 
... its a 3d benchie ...

(gamers benchmark ... right on the 1st screen)

try the video forum
 
Am I missing something? Why are your scores so low? This is with a 2100 set to the clock of a 2800 with 512 330mhz DDR and radeon 9700 pro you say? Shouldn't you be 15 or 16k?
 
I wounldnt put much stock in it, its even more synthetic than the last edition (its not even based on a game engine anymore, just written directly on dx9).

Peace
butch
 
Originally posted by: KingofFah
Am I missing something? Why are your scores so low? This is with a 2100 set to the clock of a 2800 with 512 330mhz DDR and radeon 9700 pro you say? Shouldn't you be 15 or 16k?
Click to expand...

Hi, note that this is his "New 3dmark score", meaning his score with 3DMark2003. If he had run 3DMark2001SE, then yes, your number would be fairly accurate.
 
Originally posted by: tbates757
Originally posted by: KingofFah
Am I missing something? Why are your scores so low? This is with a 2100 set to the clock of a 2800 with 512 330mhz DDR and radeon 9700 pro you say? Shouldn't you be 15 or 16k?
Click to expand...

Hi, note that this is his "New 3dmark score", meaning his score with 3DMark2003. If he had run 3DMark2001SE, then yes, your number would be fairly accurate.
Click to expand...

yah
the ratio by which the scores dropped is insane lol
 
yes, but my scores with 3dmark2001 are still in 13800 not the 15-16 i see everyone else with. I have no idea why i get so much lower.
Its not like i dont have good stuff.
 
Originally posted by: 94transam
yes, but my scores with 3dmark2001 are still in 13800 not the 15-16 i see everyone else with. I have no idea why i get so much lower.
Its not like i dont have good stuff.
Click to expand...

yeah that is REALLY LOW!!! considering that i can get to 13,600 with my ti4200 🙂
 
Yeah that is low. I scored 4910 on 3DMark2003 and your system is definitely running at higher speeds than mine. I got that with a 380/350 o/c on my AIW but the cpu is underclocked slightly at 131MHz FSB.

OG
 
Ok..well, now that we've all decided that that's low, lol, what can i do about it to get it up, and why do you guys think its soo low.

Help me guys!

Thanks always
rob
 
That is exactly what I was saying, hehe. I have no idea how cards are performing in 2003. I was just reading that his 2001se was 13.89k. Even the stock radeon should be getting 14.5, shouldn't it? Not sure if the radeon has one, but maybe it is in compatibility mode (e.g. PCI mode). My ti4600 was getting ~11k. Once I started screwing with all of my drivers I got it to get out of compatibility mode and get 12.5k without overclocking the card itself (running 166X10.5 palmino until I get my tbred). Overclocking the card did not help much (I think it was 13k and change with 320/700). I am interested in seeing how much the new tbred will increase that 13k.
 
Really who cares about a benchmark...as long as your machine is running fast enough for you. The 3dmark2003 is all about the next generation of video cards anyways.
 
Originally posted by: 94transam
Ok..well, now that we've all decided that that's low, lol, what can i do about it to get it up, and why do you guys think its soo low.

rob
Click to expand...

Two things. On the low scores overall, I think you need to up your FSB to get to the 15-16k level on 3dmark2001. On the difference between o'clocking 3dmark2001 and 3dmark2003, futurmark has tried to make the test less CPU sensitive, and more a straight test of the vid card. Obviously, that cannot be achieved perfectly, but the relative scores show some success in moving in that direction.

 
I hate 3DMark2003. It won't give you a readout of your results and it euns like hell! Futuremark certainly pushed thru this piece of crap way before its time!:|
 
Ok, well, i have gotten my 2001 score to 14181, thats still Oc'd at 13x166/33 and what gave me the extra ~600 points was lowering my DDR latency and stuff. But I really am having major stability probs at any higher FSB or Multiplier. I get lockups and reboots.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top