Unexplainable drop in 3D mark 06 performance!

Jun 16, 2010
47
0
0
#1
Yea, so I'm a gaming enthusiast and very neurotic... and I cannot handle performance problems on any scale :p

My pc:

i7 860 overclocked from 133 to 145 FSB
ASUS TOP 5850 @ 876/1200
Intel DP55WB
Standard harddisk
4 gigs of ram @ 1400 mhz
Creative Xtreme Audio

My scores are approx 1k lower than before. It's obvious already in the the very first test, proxycon, where I would get 130+ fps in the opening scene at some points. Now, I can barely hit 120 with the same clocks.

I don't really see anything changed. I recently got a new sound card but I tried disabling and even removing it. No difference in score. I also recently got a newer and much more effective CPU cooler. With my old cooler, I found out that my cpu got very hot, so I hope it's not damaged. The new cooler is good.

I even formatted the whole thing to no effect :(

Meanwhile, my Vantage scores seem to be alright from what I can tell. I get

17832 for the overall score.

CPU score: 19793
Graphics: 17262

What could be wrong here? Could the CPU have been damaged? I know 3D mark 06 is cpu limited in my case...

Maybe there is another test I can take to determine if my computer performances as it should? 3D mark 06 has always been reliable for me though so that's why it bothers me. Also, it might test other stuff than Vantage so even if my Vantage score is ok maybe there's still a problem?

Please help! I greatly appreciate any input :)
 
Last edited:
Jun 16, 2010
47
0
0
#2
I have a suspicion that turbo mode does not engage (fully) in 3d mark 06. Maybe the multiplier stays low. It shows my cpu frequency as 3051, but I guess the turbo should still go active during the test as only one core is used. Hmm!

Edit: I can really not think of anything but the cpu somehow underperforming!! Can I monitor the multiplier while the tests are running somehow?
 
Last edited:

aigomorla

Cases and Cooling Mod PC Gaming Mod Elite Member
Super Moderator
Sep 28, 2005
17,116
36
126
#3
no, it has to do with the way your memory and fetch was processed.

Usually your score will fluctuate.

Have you tried running the program over and over again?
Sometimes for the best benches, they usually run the program at least 3 times.
 
Feb 26, 2001
10,542
2
101
#4
Did you change your resolution? Driver version? Did you enable something that wasn't enabled before in CCC center like AA or AF?

I used to find that my overclocks would not work with CCC at times, the card would just remain at default clocks until I disabled and re-enabled the overclock.

Just some thoughts though, good luck.
 
Jun 16, 2010
47
0
0
#5
I've run the program several times and always with consistently lower scores. It's very easy to see in the beginning of the first test. It still seems to only respond to cpu frequency. When I overclock, it does respond positively, but even with overclock matching my previous max I get over 1k points less than before! That's why I'm thinking maybe the multiplier isn't working as intended...
 
Jun 16, 2010
47
0
0
#6
Hmmm.. when I disable turbo mode I only drop from 116 fps to 110. This seems odd as turbo should boost the processor's frequency considerably! It indicates to me that perhaps turbo doesn't kick in properly. Also, the problem seemed to happen from about the time when I installed the new CPU cooler. But it's a lot better than the old one?? So weird!
 
Jun 16, 2010
47
0
0
#7
If noone has an idea as to the cause, can you tell me if my Vantage score is fine considering the clocks?
 
Oct 14, 2003
5,765
79
126
#8
Hmmm.. when I disable turbo mode I only drop from 116 fps to 110. This seems odd as turbo should boost the processor's frequency considerably
It shouldn't, with 2 core active the boost is only 1 multiplier for that particular chip. It's rather easy to disengage 1 core Turbo.
 
Oct 14, 2003
5,765
79
126
#11
Thanks! From this it seems my scores I fine imo. Don't you think? Your clocks are way higher
I think the CPU portion of Vantage is threaded well-enough to take advantage of hyperthreading even with a quad core CPU. Therefore, you should be getting noticeably higher per clock. Which you are.
 
Jun 16, 2010
47
0
0
#12
It shouldn't, with 2 core active the boost is only 1 multiplier for that particular chip. It's rather easy to disengage 1 core Turbo.
Standard multiplier is 21
4 cores turbo 22
2 cores turbo 25
1 core turbo 26

So it's more than just 1! It should go from 21 to 26 in principle the way I see it at least... no turbo activated should be 21 no matter how many cores, and 3D mark 06 I would imagine only uses 1 core? This should up the multiplier by 5 to 26 + enable turbo mode...

Is there any possibility that an increased temperature could actually be beneficial in terms of pure fps? I mean like it would confuse the turbo function or whatever... I'm just asking because the change seemed to coincide with when I replaced my cpu cooler with a way more effective one
 
Last edited:
Oct 14, 2003
5,765
79
126
#13
Standard multiplier is 21
4 cores turbo 22
2 cores turbo 25
1 core turbo 26

So it's more than just 1! It should go from 21 to 26 in principle the way I see it at least... no turbo activated should be 21 no matter how many cores, and 3D mark 06 I would imagine only uses 1 core? This should up the multiplier by 5 to 26 + enable turbo mode...
Oh right, the i7 860 does better Turbo with 2 cores too.

Not that it matters too much now(+5 vs +6), but the CPU portion of 3DMark06 is at least threaded to some degree. Can't say about the GPU portion.

Edit: You should have kept your old and recent 3DMark scores. I mean not just the overall score, but the CPU, GPU as well. It would have told whether your CPU was the problem. What was the previous and now 3DMark06 scores anyway?
 
Last edited:
Jun 16, 2010
47
0
0
#14
http://www.hardwarecanucks.com/foru...e-i5-750-core-i7-870-processor-review-16.html

According to this, my cpu lands exactly where it should at as far as I can tell. That is, at least in the vantage score. I don't know if this signifies that there isn't any problem, but I'm just so puzzled why my 06 scores would drop significantly and seemingly out of nothing. And I KNOW it has dropped. I have run this test so many times and it has always been reliable for me.

Is it a real possibility that heat might've damaged my cpu making it perform worse in some situation? I would personally imagine that permanent heat damage would either just plain kill the cpu off or make it go down every now and then, not affect performance...
 
Jun 16, 2010
47
0
0
#15
Oh right, the i7 860 does better Turbo with 2 cores too.

Not that it matters too much now(+5 vs +6), but the CPU portion of 3DMark06 is at least threaded to some degree. Can't say about the GPU portion.

Edit: You should have kept your old and recent 3DMark scores. I mean not just the overall score, but the CPU, GPU as well. It would have told whether your CPU was the problem. What was the previous and now 3DMark06 scores anyway?
I absolutely agree and I hate myself for not doing that! Would've made troubleshooting easier indeed.

My previous 3Dmark06 score was JUST over 21k with FSB 145. Graphics clock doesn't matter one bit as it's cpu limited. I'll just go ahead and test it to find out exactly what it looks like with the same FSB now.

Oh, and thanks a LOT for your help so far guys. I really appreciate you taking an interest. Hope you won't give up on me :)
 
Jun 16, 2010
47
0
0
#16
With the exact same clocks that got me just above 21k before, I get 19661 now... and I know this damn test so well that I could tell just about how it would turn out. A few frames less on all graphics tests. This is so weird!
 

Oscar Meyer

Junior Member
Jul 17, 2010
6
0
0
#17
I really dont see anything wrong with your system but if it makes u feel better, just download the free versions of SiSandra and Everest and run the processor arithmetic on Sandra and the cpu benchmarks on Everest. They'll have reference score for u to compare too. I have almost the exact same stuff as you, i7 860 and radeon 5850. I get 19900 pscore in vantage, with a 18800gpu score and 24400cpu score. My stuff is clocked higher though. 4.0 ghz for cpu and 950/1150 for gpu.
 
Jun 16, 2010
47
0
0
#18
I really dont see anything wrong with your system but if it makes u feel better, just download the free versions of SiSandra and Everest and run the processor arithmetic on Sandra and the cpu benchmarks on Everest. They'll have reference score for u to compare too. I have almost the exact same stuff as you, i7 860 and radeon 5850. I get 19900 pscore in vantage, with a 18800gpu score and 24400cpu score. My stuff is clocked higher though. 4.0 ghz for cpu and 950/1150 for gpu.
Hey man will you do me a BIG favor and set the clocks the same to mine and run 3dmark06 and tell me the score?

Thanks for your input
 

Oscar Meyer

Junior Member
Jul 17, 2010
6
0
0
#19
Here ya go... http://img834.imageshack.us/img834/9097/captures.png

i just went in my bios and set it on optimized default settings, and then turned the blck up to 145. default is 133. Ram is at 1450mhz. Video card is at 876/1150. (My card doesnt run 1200 mem very well.) As you can see from the cpu-z shot, my system is always turboed up. Probably cause i got background stuff going on.
 
Jun 16, 2010
47
0
0
#20
Cool man that's so nice of you! seems like we get really close scores. I guess I actually got a bit higher, but I've just formatted my PC so that could be why.

I guess nothing's wrong then?? I hope so I'm so neurotic about this!!

What really puzzles me is that I'm absolutely 100 % certain I got 21k with FSB 145 and those gfx clocks. Maybe the very high temps of my computer at the time could've cause it SOMEHOW. They were definitely way too high, 85+ or so
 
Last edited:

Oscar Meyer

Junior Member
Jul 17, 2010
6
0
0
#21
Cool man that's so nice of you! seems like we get really close scores. I guess I actually got a bit higher, but I've just formatted my PC so that could be why.

I guess nothing's wrong then?? I hope so I'm so neurotic about this!!

What really puzzles me is that I'm absolutely 100 % certain I got 21k with FSB 145 and those gfx clocks. Maybe the very high temps of my computer at the time could've cause it SOMEHOW. They were definitely way too high, 85+ or so

Which Zalman did you get? I am running an old zalman 9700 and my chip gets way too hot when running prime. Like in the 90c's. I probably going to pick up a hyper 212, and try to lower the temps.
 
Jun 16, 2010
47
0
0
#22
Which Zalman did you get? I am running an old zalman 9700 and my chip gets way too hot when running prime. Like in the 90c's. I probably going to pick up a hyper 212, and try to lower the temps.
http://www.pc-lager.dk/vare-oversigt.php?varenummer=08900&type=0

I only saw positive reviews and my local hardware store didn't have that many models, so I figured it was a good choice. It lowered my temps CONSIDERABLY! about 15 degrees C idle and 25+ load!

Again thanks for your help. You have no reason to believe that your pc doesn't perform optimally, do you?

Because I guess that would mean that mine is running fine too :)

Btw, you talked about your multiplier always going to turbo. if you use realtemp to monitor your multiplier, I'm pretty sure you will see that it actually doesn't always max out! CPU-Z also displays mine as being very high all the time, but realtemp will account for idle states and even has a program designed specifically for i7's that will monitor each individual core.

Anyway more input is definitely appreciated. I'm still extremely puzzled about this although it would seem that my computer is running like it should when compared to Oscar's...
 
Jun 16, 2010
47
0
0
#23
Could it be the case that somehow the multiplier got all the way to turbo for 1 or 2 cores before, whereas now it doesn't go that high? Could that be the reason for the lower score?
 

Oscar Meyer

Junior Member
Jul 17, 2010
6
0
0
#24
http://www.pc-lager.dk/vare-oversigt.php?varenummer=08900&type=0

I only saw positive reviews and my local hardware store didn't have that many models, so I figured it was a good choice. It lowered my temps CONSIDERABLY! about 15 degrees C idle and 25+ load!

Again thanks for your help. You have no reason to believe that your pc doesn't perform optimally, do you?

Because I guess that would mean that mine is running fine too :)

Btw, you talked about your multiplier always going to turbo. if you use realtemp to monitor your multiplier, I'm pretty sure you will see that it actually doesn't always max out! CPU-Z also displays mine as being very high all the time, but realtemp will account for idle states and even has a program designed specifically for i7's that will monitor each individual core.

Anyway more input is definitely appreciated. I'm still extremely puzzled about this although it would seem that my computer is running like it should when compared to Oscar's...

My PC is running pretty optimally, i just don't like to see temps in the 90C's. Especially when i like to run benchies alot when buying new stuff. I really think you are overreacting to what may be a tiny discrepancy in a single benchmark. Your 145 blck overclock is hardly overclocked at all(no detrimental effects to you cpu) and i doubt there is anything wrong with your setup. Like i said before, if you can't sleep unless you know for sure, run the cpu tests in everest and sisandra. There is a whole database of systems for u to compare to.
 
Jun 16, 2010
47
0
0
#25
Thanks Oscar! I tried those benchmarks and my limited technical knowledge means that I'm a bit confused with the comparisons. I'll probably post some results here soon to see if they are where they need to be!
 


ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS