3dmark03 scores with gfx 5900 128mb

[Neo19]

Before the patch i got 5098 after i get like 4676. this is at stock 400/850. what are you guys getting?

[bblqj78]

with 9700pro....before patch I was getting 5800....and after patch I waas getting 5800. Hmmm......I think the latest 3Dmark3003 was to stop cheating and getting higher scores while benchmarking.....doesnt this tell you that the Nvidia drivers you were using on your 5900 were Kinda 'cheating' to give you a higher score?

[Neo19]

im aware that nvidia was cheating but i just wanted to know what other ppl were getting and even though they were cheating it still doesnt change the fact the ATI is complete ****

[bblqj78]

im aware that nvidia was cheating but i just wanted to know what other ppl were getting and even though they were cheating it still doesnt change the fact the ATI is complete ****

Oh NO...:eek:

You dont wanna mention anything like that about here...its likely you will kick of another ATI Vs NVidia 1000post battle....hehehe:D

Everyone is entitled to their own opinion!:t

[BenQ]

i get 58xx something, what your computer Neo19?
btw did you guys know that the fx5900 non-ultra is the same speed as the 9700pro?! good to know i think:)

[bblqj78]

nearly the same speed...but really just dont look as good. In my opinion!:t

[BenQ]

people say the radeon cards look better, that's not true at all. i have both cards, the 9500pro and now the 5900 nu. and the nvidia card (from me looking at screen) image quality is better than atis. everything is sharper, i am not lying i have both!

[Neo19]

my computer is:

Amd athlon xp rev. b 2100 @2.2ghz
Soyo KT400 dragon ultra platinum Edition
1gb mushkin pc3200 2-2-2-1t timings
BFG Geforce 5900 128mb @ 500/900
52X24X52 liteon
16X DVD
maxtor 100GB primary
maxtor 120gb secondary
600 watt power supply
windows XP Pro
custom water cooling:
Hydor L30 pump
Maze 3 shd on cpu
Maze 4 gpu on videocard
swiftech RAD676 radiator with dual 120mm fans

and since i overclocked the video i now get almost
5000 on 3dmark03
13567 on 3dmark01

[Benssax]

Originally posted by Neo19
my computer is:

Amd athlon xp rev. b 2100 @2.2ghz
Soyo KT400 dragon ultra platinum Edition
1gb mushkin pc3200 2-2-2-1t timings
BFG Geforce 5900 128mb @ 500/900
52X24X52 liteon
16X DVD
maxtor 100GB primary
maxtor 120gb secondary
600 watt power supply
windows XP Pro
custom water cooling:
Hydor L30 pump
Maze 3 shd on cpu
Maze 4 gpu on videocard
swiftech RAD676 radiator with dual 120mm fans

and since i overclocked the video i now get almost
5000 on 3dmark03
13567 on 3dmark01

I think your 3dmark01 should be way better with a 5900 card. I got a Ti4200 and get over 14k's

[BenQ]

different technology maybe dx9? 01 was made for dx8...?

[The Lodge]

Different technology yes. Still should score better in DX8.1. Oh yeah, wasn’t this a thread for 3DMark2003 scores with a FX5900 128MB? Silly me, didn’t know the 9700pro became part of the Nvidia FX5900 family.

[BenQ]

it's all about drivers...

i heard once that new technology works better with newer software. a dx9 card is faster i think only when the game was made for dx9. playing a dx8 game with a dx9 card, dx8 is fsater?

[The Lodge]

A good DX9 card should perform DX8.1 better than a good DX8.1 card can. Now in the case of bottom of the barrel DX9 cards, a good DX8.1 card will mop the floor with it. In a DX8.1 game of course. And yes, drivers make a big deal also.

[jonwes]

I too have a BFG Asylum FX 5900 non-ultra and here's my score for 3DMark2001SE: 11,275. Let me know if my system should be getting better results, and if so, what could be causing this.

Athlon XP2000+ (not oc'd)
Epox 8K3A+ MB
1 GB PC2700 RAM
Samsung 160GB 2MB HDD
BFG Asylum FX5900 non-ultra (oc'd to 444/921)
Windows XP Pro SP1

Btw, in the detail report at the end of 3DMark, it indicates that my FSB is 133Mhz. Shouldn't it be showing 266, or am I missing something? My processor and MB both support 266.

[jonwes]

I should add though that 3DMark03 came in at 5,289 on my Athlon XP 2000 w/BFG Asylum FX 5900 (non-ultra) listed in previous post. . .

[Benssax]

Originally posted by jonwes
I too have a BFG Asylum FX 5900 non-ultra and here's my score for 3DMark2001SE: 11,275. Let me know if my system should be getting better results, and if so, what could be causing this.

Athlon XP2000+ (not oc'd)
Epox 8K3A+ MB
1 GB PC2700 RAM
Samsung 160GB 2MB HDD
BFG Asylum FX5900 non-ultra (oc'd to 444/921)
Windows XP Pro SP1

Btw, in the detail report at the end of 3DMark, it indicates that my FSB is 133Mhz. Shouldn't it be showing 266, or am I missing something? My processor and MB both support 266.

133 is right because its 133x2

[MadPistol]

on my 2.8ghz P4 w/hyperthreading, 512mb PC 3200 DDR, 800mhz fsb comp, I used just a regular Geforce FX 5900 128mb card and got a score of 5522 on 3DMark03. Nvidia isn't the ones cheating on anything either.

From what I hear, ATI is the one cheating. Their cards show consistently higher scores on every card model they have in comparison to the Nvidia "equivilent" card. Yet I have played games on both card models and found the Nvidia card to be more desirable for games every single time.

My point is that ATI is bragging rights. Nvidia is power and speed in their most desirable platform: gaming. Which one a person wants on their PC is up to them. I would go with the gaming benefits of Nvidia.

[Someone Stupid]

From what you hear to then what you've played, then why did you mention hearing if you had firsthand experience? I used to love nvidia's cards too, but I know when to cash my chips. The FX series was a signal to cash my chips and go play at ATI's table as they finally had and have a better product. I'm not crying about it. It's called competition, and that is why we are so far along today as we are.

I have a feeling Rugor is going to pop into this thread now and give out some edumacation on video cards and architecture now for some reason. :)

[Death To Mel]

im aware that nvidia was cheating but i just wanted to know what other ppl were getting and even though they were cheating it still doesnt change the fact the ATI is complete ****

Ok so I though I would just shoot that down right now:
Asus RADEON 9800XT MY BENCH IS: 5988

Not too shabby here's the details:
GT1 - wings of fury: 156.3
GT2 - Battle of proxycon: 45.0
GT3 - troll's lair: 38.0
GT4 - mother nature: 36.1
CPU TEST 1: 47.8
CPU TEST 2: 8.6 (LOL)
Fill Rate (single-texturing) 1828.1
Fill Rate (Multi-texturing) 2820.8
vertex shader: 19.8
pixel shader: 52.4
Ragtroll: 28.8
Sound: no sounds:30.8
24 sounds:27.8
60 sounds:25.6

3dmark03 setup:
All tests selected
Res: 1024*768
AA: none
Texture filtering: Optimal
Max Anisotropy: 4
Vertex shaders: optimal

MY COMPUTER
Abit NF7-S
Asus Radeon 9800XT
Soundblaster audigy gamer
512 stick of pc-2100
Athlon XP 2400+

NOTHING IN MY SYSTEM IS OVERCLOCKED ALL STOCK SPEEDS... hmmm nvidia or ATI... I'll let you decide.

-Sorry guys couldn't resist.

[ticktack]

i get 5000+ for my fx5800

http://sg.geocities.com/wangjiake/3dmark2003.bmp

[Djinn X]

hey butheads !!!............doesnt it seem stupid to brag scores pertaining to two compleatly different card manufactures.

I mean how can you even begin to assunme that your getting a "pound for pound " comparisin of performance ?!!!!

Nvidia for Nvidia..............and ATI for ATI.............


cross manufacture performace benchmarking is too messy ........................

though its not as fancy or satisfing ....the benchmarks should pertain to a much more raw power type of test than one that tests redering technologies built by "DIFFERENT" companies.


So if you realy whant to Brag show me
fx 5950 vs. fx 5950

or radeon 9800 xt vs. 9800 xt


apples for apples .............and oranges for oranges!!!!!
:-@ :-@

[mobo57]

Hey Djinn X: if a moderator hasn't, Welcom to Sysopt.

These folks always get into the ATI v. Nvidia and AMD v. Intel debate on almost every thread started, regardless of the original topic! Besides we havn't had a good flame session in a long time.

Me, I was an Nvidia man with my old TI4200. Then I "upgraded" to the FX 5200 and 5600. BAD choice. I've since upgraded to a ATI Radeon 9800 Pro, at the time the 5600 was tops for Nvidia. Like others, I am very happy with the 9800 performance over the FX cards. It will be hard for Nvidia to get me back. :t

[Djinn X]

Well sufficed to say I'am very suprized anyone didnt wig-out after that post!

Nice to see there is at least one good natured human being on this board!

Yeah my new card was a christmas present. I"ts ok..... But
it just barely squeaks by in 3dmark 2003.

I personally would never have bought that card ! I"am a realy particular Buyer when it comes to pc hardware.
But my father in law loves Nvidia and would never buy a ATI!
So I get this one.

God knows I would have never been able to decide on a card anyway!


Hope to discuss more of "ya-alls" opinions soon!

[Djinn X]

3dmark 2003 score
based on the following

vid card = geforce fx 5700 ultra core clock =475mhz , mem clock =950mhz

proc = northwood P4 A 2.0ghz overclocked to 2500mhz bus = 500mhz

Mobo = Chaintech 9CJS Zenith

using the default mode on the free version of 3dmark 2003

I get a total of only 4000 3dmarks

mind you this is with a little overclocking !

Not quite what I had hoped for! Maybee with some more overclocking we will see beter. I hope to get the mem clock to
1000mhz. But the core just wont budge without a blue screen of death.

So If your not Impressed ......buy anoter card !

Althogh for the money (about $220 ) off the shelf at a best buy (christmas present!) Its a **** decent card.

[mobo57]

The way I see it, if you look at the scores posted, you can see trends or patterns, basically when your cpu reaches a certain mgz, the larger the score is tied to the vid card. i.e., 1.2 amd with a ti 4600 card versus a 2.5 amd with the same ti 4600. Both will score within a somewhat narrow range. But put a fx 59** ultra or 9800 pro on the 2500 and watch the score shoot through the roof. And the 2500 will compete with a 3200 or (gawd forbid) a In*** 3.0 with those cards. This is not scientific research, just based on cruising boards and personal experience.

A good vid card can make a heck of a difference in your system, regardless of the make. Both ATI and Nvidia have made some **** cards in the past (I'll leave you to argue this on your own), and some real heros, such as the aforementioned 4600, 9800 pro and the latest fx 59++ series.

As I've said in the past, you drive a porsche, I drive a corvette, you beat me in the corners, I beat you in the straights, your's cost 80 g's, mine cost 45 g's.

Trade offs and cost..... Just avoid the Vega's and Gremlins (read FX 5200).

[grimfandango]

Both Nvidia and ATI optimize their drivers..(So called cheating)

My system
2.6
Intel 865gbf
128x2 Samsund ddr 2100 at 2-2-2
geforce fx 5600
Hard drive 60x2 7200rpm
Onboard Sound
Winxp Home Edition

ok there how it went with the latest beta drivers 53.30 or anything below 53xxx
3dmark 2003 score 1823

With 53.03
3dmark 2003 score 2790

Nothing is overclocked.

[mobo57]

Hey Grim, you may get a heck of a bump if you go to ddr 2700 or 3200 memory with that system. It looks like it could really crank out the scores, assuming it is not a dell or hp (generally no access to oc' parts of the bios).

Anyway, regarding drivers, I constantly stay on top of the latest bios and drivers for my system. From my experience, I have yet to have an upgrade on either give me more than a 2 to 5 % bump in scores. Sometimes my scores actually went down. Your bump was significant compared to what I have seen.

While we all know the vid card makers will try to maximize their drivers and hardware for certain situations, such as games or benchmark programs, eventually they can only go so far. Those "tweaks" will work good in certain situations, but will show their weakness in other situations. This is evident when the cards are tested by third parties, one manufacturer will score high in Aquamark or 3d03, where the other will beat them out in Sysmark or 3d01.

While some say the bottom line is are you happy with the performance of your system, there are those that are more interested in making their system go faster, kind of like the 18 year old kid with the 1989 Honda Prelude, first comes the ground effects, then new muffler, then new control chip ..... you get the idea.

Off the soap box for now. When I had my 5200 card in my system, (3200 XP, 1 gig Corsair 3200, etc.), I had 3d03 scores in the 3800 to 4000 range. You may want to check your setup and look for ways to increase the output.

And I will tell you flat out, my TI 4200 128 meg 8X card blew away my Asylum FX 5200 card in games such as Unreal II, by a VERY wide performance level.
:rolleyes:

[MadPistol]

I got a 5783 with no oc on a 2.8ghz P4 800mhz fsb, and 1 gig PC 3200 memory.