Radeon 7000 3DMark2001SE scores......is this right?

Lcarvone

Platinum Member
Sep 20, 2000
2,875
0
0
Need some feedback on my video card performance....I recently "upgraded" (go ahead and laugh but I am not a gamer) to a Radeon 7000 32 meg AGP vid card. The pertinent parts of my overall system is as follows:

Athlon 1900+ (Palomino)
ECS K7S5A (version 1.X)
512 megs PC2700 RAM
Windows XP with Service Pack 2

After updating to the newest SIS AGP drivers for my board and the newest ATI Catalyst drivers for the card I ran 3DMark2001SE twice. My scores were 738 and 739......huh? 738 & 739? That seemed really low for the older benchmark. I checked the Futuremark site for similar configurations and lo and behold the range most people reported with a similar speed Athlon and same vid card was anywhere from ~1300 up to 2800. Sheesh...I am barely half as fast as the bottom end reported score? What am I missing?
 

Gamingphreek

Lifer
Mar 31, 2003
11,679
0
81
You are using a 32Mb SDRAM card.

THat is about what it comes to. Additionally 3dMark penalizes you A LOT for lack of DX8 support.

If you aren't a gamer why are you benchmarking?

-Kevin
 

dguy6789

Diamond Member
Dec 9, 2002
8,558
3
76
It should score MUCH higher than that. My Geforce 2 MX400 64MB SDR PCI gets upwards of 2500 3dmarks in 01, with an Athlon XP 2000+. I would think a radeon 7000 would be very close to that.
 

Lcarvone

Platinum Member
Sep 20, 2000
2,875
0
0
The benchmarking is simply to verify that it is working in the range it should...plus they are fun to watch sorta.
 

CraigRT

Lifer
Jun 16, 2000
31,440
5
0
yeah should be higher
something is missing

my old gaming rig... P3 700@933 with a GF2 GTS used to score 7200 on 3dmark01.
 

Gamingphreek

Lifer
Mar 31, 2003
11,679
0
81
Originally posted by: CraigRT
yeah should be higher
something is missing

my old gaming rig... P3 700@933 with a GF2 GTS used to score 7200 on 3dmark01.
Creig there is no way. With my Barton 2500+ at 3000+, with my Geforce 2 Ti, and Soundstorm audio i barely broke 7000.

-Kevin
 

Lcarvone

Platinum Member
Sep 20, 2000
2,875
0
0
So anyone got any clues why it would be so low? A setting somewhere or something in the BIOS?
 

Mojo027

Member
Jan 29, 2005
99
0
0
My old P4 1.7ghz and Radeon 7200 64mb only scored about 2000 in 3D Mark 2001. Your score isn't too far off probably. 32mb is really quite bad for gaming.
 

Lcarvone

Platinum Member
Sep 20, 2000
2,875
0
0
I ran again and got this as the results.....anything look odd or is it just the truth?

Operating System Microsoft Windows XP
DirectX Version 9.0

Mobo Manufacturer ECS
Mobo Model K7S5A
AGP Rates (Current/Available) 4x / 1x 2x 4x

CPU AMD Athlon(tm) XP/MP/4 1609 MHz
FSB 66 MHz
Memory 512 MB

Graphics Chipset ATI RADEON 7000 Series
Driver Name RADEON 7000 Series
Driver Version 6.14.10.6512
Video Memory 32 MB

Program Version 3DMark2001 SE
Resolution 1024x768 32bit
Texture Format Compressed
FSAA Disabled
Z-Buffer Depth 24bit
Frame Buffer Double
Rendering Pipeline D3D Pure Hardware T&L

Detailed Test Results
3DMark Score 731 3D marks

Game 1 Car Chase - Low Detail 11.5 FPS
Game 1 Car Chase - High Detail 7.5 FPS
Game 2 Dragothic - Low Detail 11.4 FPS
Game 2 Dragothic - High Detail 8.5 FPS
Game 3 Lobby - Low Detail 8.5 FPS
Game 3 Lobby - High Detail 4.8 FPS
Game 4 Nature No hardware support

Fill Rate (Single-Texturing) 51.2 MTexels/s
Fill Rate (Multi-Texturing) 124.8 MTexels/s

High Polygon Count (1 light) 6.5 MTriangels/s
High Polygon Count (8 lights) 3.0 MTriangels/s

Environment Bump Mapping 12.0 FPS
DOT3 Bump Mapping 5.0 FPS

Vertex Shader 9.3 FPS
Pixel Shader No hardware support
Advanced Pixel Shader No hardware support

Point Sprite 1.8 MSprites/s


Thanks for all of the input!
 

bigal40

Senior member
Sep 7, 2004
849
0
0
I'm not sure how 3DMark gets the scores but not being able to run the nature test is probably hurting you score pretty bad.
 

Gamingphreek

Lifer
Mar 31, 2003
11,679
0
81
Jeez what is with your FSB. It seems that you have a wrong jumper for the FSB. It should be a 133mhz FSB x2 (266FSB).

Additionally you are using the 4.10 drivers from what it looks like. Upgrade to the 5.2 drivers, and switch the jumper for the FSB.

Then you should be working much better.

-Kevin
 

Gamingphreek

Lifer
Mar 31, 2003
11,679
0
81
Originally posted by: bigal40
I'm not sure how 3DMark gets the scores but not being able to run the nature test is probably hurting you score pretty bad.
Anything that lacks support for the DX that 3dMark is based on the score is penalized a lot.

For example if your card supports HW DX up to DX7 and you run 3dMark01 which is a DX8.1 benchmark it penalizes you for all the DX8.1 tests that are skipped.

-Kevin
 

Lcarvone

Platinum Member
Sep 20, 2000
2,875
0
0
Well the DX thing may explain some of it but if memory serves (not often) the card does support DX8.....as for the 66 bus I noticed that too but according to the BIOS (I doubled checked) it is running at 133 and the resulting CPU id is listed as an Athlon 1900+ (locked 12X mulitplier with 133 fsb = ~1600mhz). It may be since I am using a honey X overclocking BIOS it reports wrong but that is a complete guess (CPU not overclocked BTW)
 

Lcarvone

Platinum Member
Sep 20, 2000
2,875
0
0
Ran the Sisoft Sandra CPU benchmark and got a result that was 50% than the P4 1.6 ghz listed as reference so I think definately the CPU is running on a 133 bus.....
 

dds14u

Golden Member
Feb 24, 2004
1,310
0
0
I'm not completely sure about this, but generally speaking drivers tend to reduce speed and increase stability. So if your comparing your scores to older sets of scores that could be one reason. The newest drivers aren't always the best...and this is especially true if you have an older video card since the newest drivers are created with focus around the performance/problems of the newer cards.
 

VirtualLarry

No Lifer
Aug 25, 2001
54,043
8,254
126
Originally posted by: Lcarvone
I ran again and got this as the results.....anything look odd or is it just the truth?
Graphics Chipset ATI RADEON 7000 Series
Driver Name RADEON 7000 Series
Driver Version 6.14.10.6512
Video Memory 32 MB

Program Version 3DMark2001 SE
Resolution 1024x768 32bit
Texture Format Compressed
FSAA Disabled
Z-Buffer Depth 24bit
Frame Buffer Double
Rendering Pipeline D3D Pure Hardware T&L
So.. why are you running the bench using the hardware T&L pipeline, when the card doesn't even have hardware T&L support?
Originally posted by: Lcarvone
Detailed Test Results
3DMark Score 731 3D marks
Still, that does seem low. According to this, you should be getting around ~1800.
ATI RADEON 7000/VE ATI v6.13.10.6218 183/183 64Bit DDR
That is the card that they benchmarked - if yours is only 64-bit SDR, then halve that benchmark score shown. It's vaguely in the ballpark then.

If you run DXDIAG.EXE, what speed does it give for your CPU, and does it show that 2D, 3D, and AGP accel are all enabled for your video card?
 

Lcarvone

Platinum Member
Sep 20, 2000
2,875
0
0
In response to VirtualLarry,

I simply run the default benchmark which includes the T&L.....as for dxdiag yes all are enabled and the CPU is listed as 1900+.

Well it looks like this may be a bit slow but not out of range of normalcy
 

clarkey01

Diamond Member
Feb 4, 2004
3,419
0
0
Originally posted by: Gamingphreek
You are using a 32Mb SDRAM card.

THat is about what it comes to. Additionally 3dMark penalizes you A LOT for lack of DX8 support.

If you aren't a gamer why are you benchmarking?

-Kevin
 

irwincur

Golden Member
Jul 8, 2002
1,899
0
0
The 7000 card lacks a strong 3D engine. It is a business/2D card with an older 3D engine which they then crippled. I believe it has half of the pipe of a 7500 and no hardware T&L capability. It also does not have some of the advanced memory management that the gaming cards use.

In short, it is not a gaming card. However, I have found that it is one hell of an HTPC card for some reason.
 

Gamingphreek

Lifer
Mar 31, 2003
11,679
0
81
Originally posted by: dds14u
I'm not completely sure about this, but generally speaking drivers tend to reduce speed and increase stability. So if your comparing your scores to older sets of scores that could be one reason. The newest drivers aren't always the best...and this is especially true if you have an older video card since the newest drivers are created with focus around the performance/problems of the newer cards.
No. Occasionally you will have a bad driver but "generally speaking" drivers tend to increase speed and increase stability.

-Kevin
 

Malladine

Diamond Member
Mar 31, 2003
4,618
0
71
Originally posted by: irwincur
The 7000 card lacks a strong 3D engine. It is a business/2D card with an older 3D engine which they then crippled. I believe it has half of the pipe of a 7500 and no hardware T&L capability. It also does not have some of the advanced memory management that the gaming cards use.

In short, it is not a gaming card. However, I have found that it is one hell of an HTPC card for some reason.
it was a decent gaming card. Ran daoc, cs, eq, original vampire masquerade, etc.

I like this question though: why care about 3d performance if you don't game?
 

Lcarvone

Platinum Member
Sep 20, 2000
2,875
0
0
A good question Malladine and my answer (albeit not necessarily a strong one I fear) is I still perform some video related tasks whether it be video playback from captured analog/digital sources or digital photography. These may not be important areas when considering 3D peformance but the whole point of the original post was to determine if something was "wrong" with the card due to below level 3DMark scores (again at least as compared to the published results). A simple benchmarking utility seems an easy way to compare one card to anothers and determine if all is well.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY