17230 points in 3DMark2001SE. Good ?

[NDD]

http://www.vr-zone.com/guides/Madonion/3DMark2001SE/12.gif
Here (http://www.vr-zone.com/guides/Madonion/3DMark2001SE/) :)

[Benssax]

I think the score should be higher than that considering its clocked at 3.9Ghz.. I think it should hit at least 19,000. Thats just what I think..

[michaelwest]

This is a great score well done.

[Bizkitkid2001]

Originally posted by Benssax
I think the score should be higher than that considering its clocked at 3.9Ghz.. I think it should hit at least 19,000. Thats just what I think..


I think hes right, that score seems a bit low for that system;)

[bushmaster]

Yeah I agree I got 10,575 using a P4 @ 2.26 and a Ti 4200 W/O overclocking anything with all default settings. you should be able to get higher!!!!

[fluffycow]

3.9Ghz????? but????how?????? wow.
Too bad that system will proly die after a few weeks(if kept at that speed) becuase of too much overclocking :(. I dont see why they don't make 3 ghz cpus already if its possible to clock these things to almost 4

[cheekymonkey]

3Ghz CPU's out end of this summer/year

Also, in reply to PC_Oldgames question . . .take a look at the window on the right (WCPUID)and read the internal clock figure about half way down . . .

Got it ? 3916 Mhz

Thats a P4 @ 3.916Ghz so take a guess . . .

Stock / Overclocked :confused:

[Ankerson]

I would say the Video card is maxxed out there.:D

Need a faster video card to improve on that LOW score...HAHA. :D

[tricktx]

just shows that the P4 is ****

[Ralf]

:eek:
that is a great score, u even beat the ATI Radeon 9700 which score 14k using 3dmark2001se.

[tricktx]

mind you the radeon 9700 wasnt run with a 4GHZ processor. If it was then it would score muich more

[bushmaster]

yeah! Follow the link at the bottom left corner to see how those results were obtained. Cutting up other mobo's and soldering adjustable resistors here and there. adding memory and alas liquid nitrogen. I'll just stay happy with my default score of 10.575 and refrain from the frankenstein monster experiments on my desktop. LOL

[gibsinep]

Goodness that is a lot. I wonder if that is the highest score to date?

[grimfandango]

very nice score!!:)

THE p4 at 2.5ghz is real nice!!
:t

[InnovaZero]

Originally posted by tricktx
mind you the radeon 9700 wasnt run with a 4GHZ processor. If it was then it would score muich more

Yeah that was running off an untweaked system and yet it hits 14-15k stock. I bet with a full fledged all out system with everything possible tweaked to max, the system could hit 19,000-21,000.

And if Toms is right, they had 10,000 running with 16x AF and 4x FSAA :eek: :eek: :eek: :eek:

[Bizkitkid2001]

MadOnion needs to come out with 3dMark2002 pretty soon:eek:

[grimfandango]

Originally posted by Bizkitkid2001
MadOnion needs to come out with 3dMark2002 pretty soon:eek:

Madonio wont be realising a 3dmark 2002.
However they will realise a 3dmark 2003

[Grentarc]

I saw that site too, and i think it is THE highest to date.... LN2 cooling and Vmodding the GF4 and Mobo... even LN2ing the RAM!

[Bizkitkid2001]

Originally posted by grimfandango


Madonio wont be realising a 3dmark 2002.
However they will realise a 3dmark 2003


I wonder if it will run like a little demo of doomIII?:p

[cusimar9]

I don't get it either - why the hell don't intel pull their finger out their a**es and start releasing these processors? If they can hit nearly 4GHz by o/c a (I would guess) 2.5Ghz processor, then they're selling us underclocked technology.

Don't give us none of that "3GHz will do ya for the next year or so" ****, if they've got the technology, then put it on the market. :r

Not that I wouldn't be happy with a 3GHz processor.... :D

[The_Shafer]

First of all, I want to say the Radeon video card (don't care what type), they all suck. Second of all, I want to say that is a good score, but I would expect someone who can manipulate and change system settings like that could get a much better score. :)

The Shafer :D

[gibsinep]

First of all, I want to say the Radeon video card (don't care what type), they all suck

yeah ok, :confused:

[hoodedrat]

also notice that it says "this test was not run using default settings" , so for all we know that could just be 640x480 res?

[hoodedrat]

First of all, I want to say the Radeon video card (don't care what type), they all suck

dude, for the insanely low price the radeon8500 is a great card, so it may not score massive amount of points in 3dmark... but when playing games it gets the job done

[Grentarc]

the non default settings was nothing but the game tests.. all the other crud was not tested coz u dont need to, to get a 3Dmark score... the test was done at 1024x768x32 in fact.

[SpaceBz]

You'd think that someone trying to get a high score in 3dmark wouldn't have winzip running in the background.

[Grentarc]

Compare your sys to his on the ORB... see how good ur sys compares!

[Grentarc]

dont worry about 17230, the 18000 point barrier has been broken. Using a P4 at 3.6GHz and a Radeon 9700, it got over 18000... i suppose that the 9700 wasnt overclocked much, as i didnt hare about any LN2 cooling being used
compare
Here (http://service.madonion.com/compare?2k1=4263880)
and look Here (http://www.rivastation.de/index_e.htm)

[gibsinep]

wow, thats alot of points. :eek:

[grimfandango]

Originally posted by gibsinep
wow, thats alot of points. :eek:

gib
it cause of some serious overclockin which normal people like me and you cant do..:)


am they must have overclockedthe video card my atleat 100mhz core and 200-250mhz mem

:t

[fluffycow]

The biggest problems with ati's cards are thier buggy drivers. Over the past year or two ive heard they've really improved them. Ive heard the the new catalyst drivers are a lot better. If ati can get thier drivers on track, they have a good chance against nvidia.

[gibsinep]

grimfandango- I could use Nitrogen cooling if I wanted to, and I could do that serious overclocking, really I just dont chose to. :cool: :t

[foxwolfen]

Gotta wonder... why go those lengths when you will be able to buy one off the shelf for 200 bucks in a year?:confused:

[$1500-P4 gamer]

To do it first.:p There will always be a bigger cpu coming out that beats your O'clocked one but that bigger cpu cost alot more too.;) More power/less cash= all good!:D

[Grentarc]

Well, you can now buy 3.06GHz P4 CPUs.. that is insane for air cooling....

[couch potato]

whoa:eek:

[Sark]

First of all, I want to say the Radeon video card (don't care what type), they all suck

Ill pretend I didnt hear that.:rolleyes: :rolleyes:

[nchan10111]

As you can clearly see above the score, it quotes "This benchmark was not run with default settings".

He could have ran the test with all the advanced settings off and on the lowest resolution.

There is a program out their that can fool cpuid to think a the processor is runung much higher then it is.




:p

[Grentarc]

If you read the whole of this thread, nchan10111 you would have seen that I have said the reason for this!
He ran the test with only the GAME TESTS (the only things needed to get a 3DMark score).
He did not run the theoretical tests, coz they are not needed for the score, and a waste time when looking to get a score quickly.
If you go to the results on the ORB, you will see that all graphics settings are at standard,( at 1024x768 32bit colour, and compressed textures, Pure HW T&L, double buffer.. ) all the normal stuff, none of that cheating way. BTW, I think one reason for not doing the theo. tests is that it would have used precious LN2 to keep the machine running, and they may have only had a limited supply of the stuff.

go and compare your results and look at the settings.. you will see that they are legit!

[NDD]

Actually, you'll get this message when your videocard is o/ced as well.

[Llew]

Well,that's a great score for any retail system that I've noticed lately...including the latest reviews of Alienware and FalconNW <averaging 12000 to 14000 right now> that I've seen in the last month or 2...

But I have to agree with the group...since you've obviously given your P4 an extreme overclock <3.9Gig>...this score may actually be abit low...something 19000-20000 wouldn't surprise me.

I'm sure you've taken adequate precautions to check your system against heat as a safety precaution vs. burnout...but what you may not have done is check for excess heat degrading performance characteristics,and causing slowdown...try running the test on a very cool day with excess ventilation,or clocking down a little...and you may see an even better score.

I'd be curious to ask what the rest of your system looks like? Ram,HD,Vid-card? My apologies if it's already printed here somewhere,I didn't read thru the entire thread,thanks.

Llew

PS,I recently installed a Thermaltake Volcano 7+...and it dropped 10 degrees C off my core heat,compared to the GoldenOrb I had been using. <at medium fan setting,high fan sounds like a Sony VCR on fast rewind> I have a PIII-800eb...now running great at 966.

[Grentarc]

Originally posted by ND
Actually, you'll get this message when your videocard is o/ced as well.

I read the article, and compared results... they didnt do the anything but games tests.. which is not default

[henry]

Originally posted by tricktx
just shows that the P4 is ****

Balatant. I like that.

Althought P4, strictly speaking, is a better gaming cpu, but I still support competition, thus AMD is the king!!

:D :D

[henry]

Originally posted by fluffycow
3.9Ghz????? but????how?????? wow.
Too bad that system will proly die after a few weeks(if kept at that speed) becuase of too much overclocking :(. I dont see why they don't make 3 ghz cpus already if its possible to clock these things to almost 4

There was 2 screenshots of P4 cpus hitting the 4G mark. Both used LN -- Liquid Nitrogen :eek: :p :eek:.

One is setup by finnish, another by a Jap.
The Jap hit around 4.5G mark, I think. Finnish's is lower.

[henry]

Originally posted by grimfandango
very nice score!!:)

THE p4 at 2.5ghz is real nice!!
:t

The P4 is running close to 4G.

;)

[grimfandango]

Originally posted by gibsinep
grimfandango- I could use Nitrogen cooling if I wanted to, and I could do that serious overclocking, really I just dont chose to. :cool: :t

you better not do that!!

if any accidents happen you could lose a finger or two...:eek: :p



its can be really dangerous if dont have the proper gear!

:) ;)

[NDD]

ND : "Actually, you'll get this message when your videocard is o/ced as well."

Grentarc : "I read the article, and compared results... they didnt do the anything but games tests.. which is not default"

Please note the "as well" in my post :)

[Grentarc]

yeah.. i saw it, but waht other people ar talking about is that the tests could have been run at 640x480x16 etc, when in fact the tests were run normal res, but only the games test.
ps. I dont get the message when I run my card overclocked:confused: ... lucky me i guess:( :confused:

[NDD]

I do :confused:
Latest 330 build, GF3Ti200/WXP.

[gibsinep]

grimfandango- not a problem. ;) :p

[SLaSheR1976]

what settings did you use for your 3dmark2001? it says that the default settings were not used? what does it score using default settings on a full run?

[OpK Chowdy]

Stop complaining about supposedly being shafted by getting "underclocked" technology. The market is all about money and intel is trying to milk you as long as it can. besides, i'd be happy to buy a 2.5ghz P4 that's " underclocked techonology" for cheap, rather than buy a 3ghz being the technology's limit, seeing as how i can just OVERCLOCK THE S*** TO 3GHZ. This so-called underclocked technology is why YOU CAN OVERCLOCK IN THE FIRST PLACE; HEADROOM IS GREAT, DON'T COMPLAIN.

[crapyking]

Are you f#@%&* kidding us!Thats an unbeleivably high score!Your just braggin right.How did you get the snapshot of your desk top?

[causticVapor]

Originally posted by cusimar9
I don't get it either - why the hell don't intel pull their finger out their a**es and start releasing these processors? If they can hit nearly 4GHz by o/c a (I would guess) 2.5Ghz processor, then they're selling us underclocked technology.

Don't give us none of that "3GHz will do ya for the next year or so" ****, if they've got the technology, then put it on the market. :r

Not that I wouldn't be happy with a 3GHz processor.... :D

Because then everybody would be buying the "low-speed" P4s. The 2.53GHz would be priced @ $90. The P4 is expensive to make. They release it according to how the market is going. The P4 can get up to 4.7GHz with air cooling mind you :rolleyes:

Besides intel doesn't want their disguistingly high profit margin to shrink. This way, every time AMD releases a CPU that's faster than the intel one, intel can immediately release one faster than that. A PR thing. An "intel is so great.... ah! Ah!" thing.

Intel already has a CPU running @ 5GHz in the testbed

Hammer will clobber the intel FUDboys

[causticVapor]

Originally posted by crapyking
Are you f#@%&* kidding us!Thats an unbeleivably high score!Your just braggin right.How did you get the snapshot of your desk top?

Seems quite reasonable for the clockrate the CPU and FSB are running at, the graphics card is the only bottleneck here