Pathetic 3D Mark 05 scores on my new rig

[Mullzy]

P4 2.8C @ 3.29Ghz
Sapphire 9800 Pro 128MB

3dMark05 Scores:

9800 Pro @ Stock (378/337): ~1900
9800 Pro oc'd to 435/366: ~2500


EDIT: I these are with quality (or is it high quality?) image/texture settings, not performance.

 

[effee]

I have a 128MB card, is that a problem? My scores look about the same as Mullzy, Have a A64 3200+ and a Sapphire 9800 PRO 128, Marks at 1775 around there...

 

[shilala]

I just upgraded my rig with the same stuff, less RAM than what you've got. I'm pullin about 2500 on 3DMark05, I think I topped out at around 2700 ocing my 9800. I had the same problem you did at first. The MAIN priority was upgrading ALL the drivers. The ones that came with the board were way outdated (as always), and mine is a rev 2 board.
Gather up all your drivers, update, and see what shakes.
Another thing I had to do was make sure my VGA was on it's own IRQ. That helped.
I had to chenge the AGP settings (and almost everything else) in the bios. I also upgraded the board's bios.
The whole affair has been a real joy, and I'm still not happy with the numbers, but they're average, and what I should be getting. The only bios performance tweaks were to raise the FSB by 15 and go to turbo.
One of the first things I had to change was the ram setting to ddr 400. Default was a lot lower.
I got a lot of help at another forum that made all the difference in the world. If you don't iron it out, I'll post a link to the thread.
Hope this helps!!!
Scott

 

[Zebo]

Originally posted by: SimsFreak
Mine gives me a DirectX 9 error lol

Whats your system? Have you installed Dx 9.0C?

 

[elkinm]

Did you figure it out yet? That is way to slow. Only a 9600 class score. I get just under 2000 with AXP 2500+@2200 and a 9700 Pro stock and I am still disappointed.

 

[Shortass]

The score you get isn't affected by the cpu, so don't worry about that. Make sure the settings in 3dMark05 are all set to default, changing settings changes your score by a large margin. I have a Sapphire 9800 Pro OCed to 405/364, and I'm getting 2661 (only one pass, I'll do it again later after I update drivers and stuff). You should be getting about what I am, maybe a little less if you didn't OC.

 

[aka1nas]

Do the GeforceFX series cards typically score much worse on 2k5 than ATI cards? Everyone on this thread so far has a 9800 class card it seems so I wonder how normal my score of 1147 is.

 

[EightySix Four]

Yes GeForce FX are horrible with 3dmark 05

 

[KDKPSJ]

Originally posted by: crazySOB297
Yes GeForce FX are horrible with 3dmark 05

True. 05 uses a lot of shader, because shader is being used by a lot of newer games and defintely will be used more and more in the future. Shader has been ATI's strength, while nVidia's weakest point. So, no doubt GeForce is horrible with 05. (even 6800GT scores about same as 9800 Pro, if I remeber right)

 

[Jeff7181]

Originally posted by: everydae

Originally posted by: crazySOB297
Yes GeForce FX are horrible with 3dmark 05

True. 05 uses a lot of shader, because shader is being used by a lot of newer games and defintely will be used more and more in the future. Shader has been ATI's strength, while nVidia's weakest point. So, no doubt GeForce is horrible with 05. (even 6800GT scores about same as 9800 Pro, if I remeber right)

I don't think you remember right. My 9800 Pro scores ~2400... I highly doubt a 16 pipe card with 256 MB of RAM scores the same as an 8 pipe card with 128 MB of RAM.

 

[KDKPSJ]

Oops.. my bad. I feel so stupid. It was 6600GT, not 6800GT, lol..

 

[effee]

So if I have this lousy 1500 3Dmark score, does this mean that the games I am running are not running as fast or as high as they can be?

 

[imported_DarkMatter]

Originally posted by: SneakyStuff
I got 773, so, DONT COMPLAIN!

Hahaha. Either can I. BUT! That will all be changing as I just ordered new computer parts. GeForce 6800GT is on the way along with an A64 3200+.

 

[user1234]

Originally posted by: effee
So if I have this lousy 1500 3Dmark score, does this mean that the games I am running are not running as fast or as high as they can be?

Yes it does. Just get the new Radeon drivers from ATI website already, and run the test again (make sure to close all other apps). If that doesn't help (that is, your score is less 2500), then try updating to update your motherboard chipset drivers (download from your mobo manufacturer website). This should work, but if it doesn't, you could try more drastic stuff, like a fresh windows install.

 

[kamranziadar]

Ok like i said i got 3010, i installed new Omega Drivers, and i have Powercolor 9800SE unlocked all 8 pipelines and Overclocked upto you can see in my Signature with VGA Silencer Ver3. It means my system rock , with only 512MB Samsung ram, and Processor it CLAWHAMMER A64 3200+ Overlcoked to 2.25

 

[DAPUNISHER]

Originally posted by: crazySOB297
Yes GeForce FX are horrible with 3dmark 05

or anything else with advanced P&V shaders for that matter.

 

[imported_SLIM]

"Sapphire 9800 PRO 128"

Are you really sure you have a pro and not an SE (Sapphire's naming practices have been called into question before)? Any idea whether it has a 128bit or 256bit memory interface, core/memory clocks? You might try looking at the original receipts or take a glance at the card itself to make sure what ya got under the hood. IIRC, the SE was a severely castrated version of the 9800 that might put up numbers more like a 9600 series card.
Just a thought,
SLIM

 

[effee]

Yup I'm sure I have a 9800 Pro 128 using a R350 core, in a L shape..

anyway, if it helps I'm using omega drivers based on ATI's 4.8 catalyst

 

[Mullzy]

Originally posted by: effee
Yup I'm sure I have a 9800 Pro 128 using a R350 core, in a L shape..

anyway, if it helps I'm using omega drivers based on ATI's 4.8 catalyst

I think it's still possible to get a 128bit card with those specs (as opposed to the 256bit). My Sapphire 9800Pro 128MB is definately the 256bit version, perhaps your's isn't. I can't remember what tools besides ATITool have shown me my core and memory bandwith. If you have the Omega drivers based on Cat 4.8 I think ATITool is still bundled. They removed it from the 4.9 Cat version.

Anyway, you should definately be getting around 2500 without overclocking your 9800 Pro, if it is indead the 256bit version. Did your card say anything about being an "Atlantis"? I'm pretty sure those are choked bandwidth version.

 

[effee]

Nope, I have checked the bus width, it is 256bit so I think everything checks out for a 128 mb 9800 Pro, though I might have missed something out, how do I check if its an Atlantis? Also, I have tried turning down all the settings down on ATI catalyst control panel but I still get only a 100 point increase which is really negligible

If I'm not able to find the root of the prob tomorrow, i'll do a reformat =) I need one anyway and I'll see how the format works out

 

[user1234]

Originally posted by: everydae

Originally posted by: crazySOB297
Yes GeForce FX are horrible with 3dmark 05

True. 05 uses a lot of shader, because shader is being used by a lot of newer games and defintely will be used more and more in the future. Shader has been ATI's strength, while nVidia's weakest point. So, no doubt GeForce is horrible with 05. (even 6800GT scores about same as 9800 Pro, if I remeber right)

When you people say nvidia is horrible in shaders, I guess you rely on the fact the X800XT scores about 10% higher than 6800U, right? well, have you cansidered the fact that's it's running at a clock speed which is 25% faster than nvidia ? At the same speed, nvidia will dominate

 

[effee]

PROBLEM SOLVED! HEAT ISSUE!