Post your 3DMark 2000 scores here

[geoblackwl]

Since I got the new card, I was wondering if others would post their 3DMark scores as a comparison. Just run the 3DMark 2000 at 640x480 and post your results.
If you don't have 3DMark, get it at madonion.com
Here are my results.. Your setup

CPU
Intel Pentium III 700 Mhz
3D Accelerator
3D Prophet SE
Chipset
Unknown
Resolution
640*480
Z-Buffer Depth
16-bit
Frame Buffer
Triple
Refresh Rate
V Sync.Off
CPU Optimization
D3D Hardware T&L

Your test results

Your 3DMark2000 Score was 5238 3D Marks.

From the table below you can see detailed results of all tests.

Test
Results

3DMark Result
5238 3D marks

CPU Speed
297 CPU 3D marks

Game 1 - Helicopter - Low Detail
107.2 FPS

Game 1 - Helicopter - Medium Detail
75.2 FPS

Game 1 - Helicopter - High Detail
32.0 FPS

Game 2 - Adventure - Low Detail
123.8 FPS

Game 2 - Adventure - Medium Detail
62.2 FPS

Game 2 - Adventure - High Detail
36.1 FPS

Fill Rate (Single-Texturing)
238.5 MTexels/s

Fill Rate (Multi-Texturing)
421.6 MTexels/s

High Polygon Count (1 Light)
7521 KTriangles/s

High Polygon Count (4 Lights)
3185 KTriangles/s

High Polygon Count (8 Lights)
1637 KTriangles/s

8MB Texture Rendering Speed
428.4 FPS

16MB Texture Rendering Speed
316.6 FPS

32MB Texture Rendering Speed
172.1 FPS

64MB Texture Rendering Speed
86.5 FPS

Bump Mapping (Emboss, 3-pass)
205.8 FPS

Bump Mapping (Emboss, 2-pass)
275.1 FPS

Bump Mapping (Emboss, 1-pass)
461.6 FPS

Bump Mapping (Environment)
Not supported

[Spencer]

CPU
Intel Pentium III 575 Mhz
3D Accelerator
NVIDIA GeForce DDR (CL Annihilator Pro)
Chipset
NVIDIA GeForce DDR
Resolution
640*480
Z-Buffer Depth
16-bit
Frame Buffer
Triple
Refresh Rate
V Sync.Off
CPU Optimization
D3D Hardware T&L

Test
Results

3DMark Result
4840 3D marks

CPU Speed
258 CPU 3D marks

Game 1 - Helicopter - Low Detail
82.9 FPS

Game 1 - Helicopter - Medium Detail
59.4 FPS

Game 1 - Helicopter - High Detail
28.9 FPS

Game 2 - Adventure - Low Detail
146.3 FPS

Game 2 - Adventure - Medium Detail
54.3 FPS

Game 2 - Adventure - High Detail
31.5 FPS

Fill Rate (Single-Texturing)
488.6 MTexels/s

Fill Rate (Multi-Texturing)
545.8 MTexels/s

High Polygon Count (1 Light)
9442 KTriangles/s

High Polygon Count (4 Lights)
4081 KTriangles/s

High Polygon Count (8 Lights)
2089 KTriangles/s

8MB Texture Rendering Speed
449.1 FPS

16MB Texture Rendering Speed
240.9 FPS

32MB Texture Rendering Speed
127.1 FPS

64MB Texture Rendering Speed
Not enough AGP memory

Bump Mapping (Emboss, 3-pass)
179.1 FPS

Bump Mapping (Emboss, 2-pass)
261.2 FPS

Bump Mapping (Emboss, 1-pass)
477.2 FPS

Bump Mapping (Environment)
Not supported

[grandslammer]

well, here goes...

Not real proud of this, but well.......

http://www.familyshoebox.com/family/627/FSLO-953221589-638627.jpg

Matter of fact, I'm pretty damned embarassed about it!

K6/2-475 (450 @475)
128MB Gen.PC100
CL TNT2 AGP32
1MB Motherboard Cache

anyway.......

Mike

Well, got 'em up to like 1428, but that's it. Can't understand this. I'm running at 500 right now (for right now, anyway...) with a TNT2 AGP, 128megs pc100, etc. And I'm like one quarter of the big boyz.

Oh well, it looks nice anyway...

Mike

[This message has been edited by grandslammer (edited 03-17-2000).]

[ironman]

Yikes!! What's wrong with mine?

Celeron 466
64MB SDRAM PC100
Voodoo3 2000PCI

RESULTS
Platform: Internal
3DMark Result: 949 3D marks
CPU Speed: 53 CPU 3D marks
Game 1 - Helicopter - Low Detail: 21.3 FPS
Game 1 - Helicopter - Medium Detail: 12.8 FPS
Game 1 - Helicopter - High Detail: 5.1 FPS
Game 2 - Adventure - Low Detail: 22.4 FPS
Game 2 - Adventure - Medium Detail: 11.2 FPS
Game 2 - Adventure - High Detail: 6.3 FPS
Fill Rate (Single-Texturing): 107.7 MTexels/s
Fill Rate (Multi-Texturing): 107.9 MTexels/s
High Polygon Count (1 Light): 694 KTriangles/s
High Polygon Count (4 Lights): 519 KTriangles/s
High Polygon Count (8 Lights): 397 KTriangles/s
8MB Texture Rendering Speed: 56.2 FPS
16MB Texture Rendering Speed: 54.7 FPS
32MB Texture Rendering Speed: 47.8 FPS
64MB Texture Rendering Speed: Not enough system memory FPS
Bump Mapping (Emboss, 3-pass): 55.9 FPS
Bump Mapping (Emboss, 2-pass): 56.1 FPS
Bump Mapping (Emboss, 1-pass): Not supported FPS
Bump Mapping (Environment): Not supported FPS

This score was in 800x600
Got all the way to 953 in 640x480. WOW! Not!


[This message has been edited by ironman (edited 03-16-2000).]

[This message has been edited by ironman (edited 03-16-2000).]

[ironman]

3DFX Voodoo3 2000. My games seem to look and play fine. Seeing the other scores makes me wonder what they could look like. I'm hoping there are some system adjustments I can make to improve the score/performance

[Spencer]

What video card are you using? When I swithed from my TNT2 to the geForce DDR, I gained about 1200-1400 3DMarks.

[Spencer]

I don't know if it makes any difference, but I also had my desktop display set to 640*480 and restarted Win98 before running 3DMark2k in 640*480.

[joe]

You're using a PCI card...it won't equal the scores of AGP 2X accelerators.

[Bonehead]

The Celeron has no SSE optimization so your 2000 score is lower, but that's about it. In real-life your programs basically run the same as on a PIII with the same clockspeed.

At this point I can't run 3Dmark 2000 due to a Microsoft Visual C+++ runtime error. Maybe some of you have a cure for this...

[RobRich]

The guys with the p3's can oofload most of 3dMark 2000 onto the SSE and MMX instruction units, as well as Athlon owners can with 3dnow!. The celeron and p2 must execute everything through floating point and MMX. Also, the k6-2/3 offer 3dnow!, which helps some, but the lack of a pipelined fpu really lags it behind as far as 3dMark is concerned. The GF256 owners also have anothor boost, hardware transform and lighting, which adds a significant boost to their scores. A p3 or Athlon with a GF256 DDR will fly through 3dMark with little effort.

I'll have to gather my latest info and post my scores in a little while. I might provide results with a few older cards also, to see the difference a couple of years in the graphics industry can make. My scores will most likely lag seriously, as I have a first-gen MVP3 based super7 board, which has an older AGP controller than the current VIA based boards.


------

First Results:

k6-2 450 @ 523 (95*5.5)
128meg IBM Cas2 SDRAM
AZZA pt-5vml MVP3 m/b (512kb l2 cache)
CL TNT-2 @ 150/183 (nVidia 3.77 drivers)

Results: 1236
Cpu speed: 67

All test with v-sync disabled at set to limit prerendered frames to 1. Mipmap level is set to 12, with mipmap quality to best image. Grandslammer, your scores are about on par. You probably have a newer AGP controler revision than me, plus have 1 meg of cache, which gives you a slight lead. I've tweaked the software level out to the max, so I know the limitations of my system are in hardware.

[This message has been edited by RobRich (edited 03-17-2000).]

[ironman]

Just did that and score went..ahhhhhh..down!

[UKLee]

Mine is pretty good at 1024x768. I got 4198 3D Marks with 16 bit colour. Later I'll post my full results in 32 bit and 16 bit 1024x768.

[end]

I am running a k6III-450@450 on a tyan S1598 C2 Via chipset getting 2200 3Dmarks 99 cpu marks I would like to try to overclock some day but these cpu's are getting hard to find so far this board is the fastest I have seen and tested.

[geoblackwl]

Was playing with 3DMark again and decided to overclock my card. The 3D Prophet SE is stock at 110mhz/143mhz...and I upped it to standard Prophet performance of 120mhz/150mhz.
My 3DMark went from 5238 in 640X480 to 5334...almost a hundred points! I have to say, go get the 3D Prophet SE from one of the advertisers on Pricewatch, cause now I'm sitting at regular Prophet performance for about 60 bucks less!
Feels pretty good when you beat the system!

[bigpig]

yaya

[johnman]

My results 03-19-00
This is on a Trinity 400 MB, 256MB RAM, 600MHz Intel Pentium III.

Intel Pentium III 600 Mhz
3D Accelerator
Diamond Viper II Z200 - Windows 98
Chipset
S3 Savage2000
Resolution
1024*768
Z-Buffer Depth
16-bit
Frame Buffer
Triple
Refresh Rate
V Sync.Off
CPU Optimization
Intel(R) Pentium(R) III

Your test results

Your 3DMark2000 Score was 2863 3D Marks.

From the table below you can see detailed results of all tests.

Test
Results

3DMark Result
2863 3D marks

CPU Speed
178 CPU 3D marks

Game 1 - Helicopter - Low Detail
58.4 FPS

Game 1 - Helicopter - Medium Detail
38.7 FPS

Game 1 - Helicopter - High Detail
17.3 FPS

Game 2 - Adventure - Low Detail
63.7 FPS

Game 2 - Adventure - Medium Detail
38.1 FPS

Game 2 - Adventure - High Detail
22.4 FPS

Fill Rate (Single-Texturing)
227.5 MTexels/s

Fill Rate (Multi-Texturing)
429.9 MTexels/s

High Polygon Count (1 Light)
3489 KTriangles/s

High Polygon Count (4 Lights)
3005 KTriangles/s

High Polygon Count (8 Lights)
2562 KTriangles/s

8MB Texture Rendering Speed
145.1 FPS

16MB Texture Rendering Speed
139.7 FPS

32MB Texture Rendering Speed
94.1 FPS

64MB Texture Rendering Speed
56.7 FPS

Bump Mapping (Emboss, 3-pass)
100.6 FPS

Bump Mapping (Emboss, 2-pass)
125.9 FPS

Bump Mapping (Emboss, 1-pass)
169.4 FPS

Bump Mapping (Environment)
Not supported

[johnman]

So that a comparison of oranges to oranges can be made, I am reposting my results with my resolution set to 640 x 480 x 16

Still using:
Tyan Trinity 400 (S1854)
600MHz Intel Pentium III (600B)
256MB RAM
Diamond Viper II


3D Accelerator
Diamond Viper II Z200 - Windows 98
Chipset
S3 Savage2000
Resolution
640*480
Z-Buffer Depth
16-bit
Frame Buffer
Triple
Refresh Rate
V Sync.Off
CPU Optimization
Intel(R) Pentium(R) III

Your test results

Your 3DMark2000 Score was 3034 3D Marks.

From the table below you can see detailed results of all tests.

Test
Results

3DMark Result
3034 3D marks

CPU Speed
178 CPU 3D marks

Game 1 - Helicopter - Low Detail
59.4 FPS

Game 1 - Helicopter - Medium Detail
38.4 FPS

Game 1 - Helicopter - High Detail
17.6 FPS

Game 2 - Adventure - Low Detail
78.3 FPS

Game 2 - Adventure - Medium Detail
37.2 FPS

Game 2 - Adventure - High Detail
21.9 FPS

Fill Rate (Single-Texturing)
224.2 MTexels/s

Fill Rate (Multi-Texturing)
420.1 MTexels/s

High Polygon Count (1 Light)
3399 KTriangles/s

High Polygon Count (4 Lights)
2855 KTriangles/s

High Polygon Count (8 Lights)
2503 KTriangles/s

8MB Texture Rendering Speed
352.7 FPS

16MB Texture Rendering Speed
277.7 FPS

32MB Texture Rendering Speed
139.4 FPS

64MB Texture Rendering Speed
53.4 FPS

Bump Mapping (Emboss, 3-pass)
126.7 FPS

Bump Mapping (Emboss, 2-pass)
184.4 FPS

Bump Mapping (Emboss, 1-pass)
348.8 FPS

Bump Mapping (Environment)
Not supported

[geoblackwl]

Anyone know of any good links to 3DMark scores? Couldn't imagine the dirt MadOnion has on every card manufacturer...everytime you run the test they get to peep at the data..hmmm Big Brother??

[nosferatu]

GREETINGS PPL
well kinda strange i'm running a ATI RAGE FURY MAXX 64mb on board and atholon 700 but the graphics are great and QUAKE III is a breeze but the 3D mark was kinda low 4358
strange !!
the 3d mark saw the video mem as 32mb but i have 64 on board !!

[rotax]

i hit 4909 with abit be6.2 celeron366@550 anihilator pro , 256meg pc-100 800x600 cpu319 game lo 87.8 med 66.3 hi 47.3 adventure lo 128.4 med 50.1 hi 29.1 fill single 405.2 multi 467.4 polygon 1:4782 4:3302 8:1738 8mb 405.5 16mb 228.4 32mb 128.3 64mb 66.8 bump 3:152.1 2:220.7 1:399.9 env:not supp not bad for a 89$can chip!!

[geoblackwl]

Not to question your results there Rotax, but I don't see anyway possible that a celery 366 OCed to 550 is getting a higher CPU mark than my 700 coppermine or these other high end athlons and P3's. My CPU mark was 293 and there is not enough ocean from property in Arizona to make me believe you got a 319. Granted the annihilator pro is a helluva card, but with the Celery not being able to support SSE optimization thats available on the P3.

Maybe some others on this post will agree with me, but It just seems inconcievable. Can you post your scores directly from the 3DMark 2000 prog and maybe some screenshots...cause if they are true, I need to get your setup and get about 1200 bucks back from all this **** I don't need.

Anyone else with insight please add your 2 cents.

[geoblackwl]

Nosferatu....what resoulution did you run the 3Dmark at?? I know from what I have seen in reviews, the GeForce (DDR and SDR) topped the ATI MAXX in the 3DMark scores even though it has 64MB of memory.

This is attributed to the MAXX actually being (2) 32MB ATI RAGE cards on one board.
http://www.tomshardware.com/graphic/99q4/991230/fury-14.html

I almost bought this card a couple of weeks ago, but saved a little and got a GeForce SDR and from the looks of the benchmarks, gained performance even against double the memory.

Can't wait to get a look at what the new Voodoo 4 and 5's and NV 11,15..(or whatever) can do. Being a closet ATI fan, hopefully their new Charisma chip will be a surprise as well.

[alan]

my system
Amd k6/2 450@500
128mb pc110 generic
maxtor 20gb
Iwill XA100plus mobo
Savage4 gt 16mb o/c to 150 mem 145 engine
engeneering bitflip driver date: 14.03.2000
16bit 640*480
3dmark2000 bench is ..... just above the
U-bend in the toilet.....
1471 paltry or what but saying that with S3TC
UT runs like stink @ 1024*768 faster than a
32mb tnt2 m64
alan http://www.sysopt.com/forum/frown.gif
also @ 1024*768 = 1271

[rotax]

geoblackwl, you dont give your e-mail adress in the user details so i only reply to you here. anyway the scores i posted are exact. i am experiencing problems with my computer, not sure what it is but as soon as it is back on track ill try to post a pic , i dont know how, and i dont have a scanner but ill try because it is true. these reading where written on a paper sheet along with other benches of 3d marks . one other benchmark gives me 311 cpu speed with a 4818 score . the best score i got was after a clean install of windows . back then all i did all day long was running 3d mark 2000 . ill try to go check if i exported a file of my scoring at madonion,anyway ill prove it to you anyhow soon ...thx

[rotax]

ok i ran 3d mark 2000 . its quite deceiving....but i still managed to hit 4814 with the forementioned probs and 308 cpu speed. i have backed up the score sheet, i just need to figure how to post it here. as soon i find out youll have the proof. thx

[geoblackwl]

Rotax...all you have to do to get a screenshot is press the print screen key on your keyboard (next to F12) and then assuming you are using Win95/98, open Paint (start->programs->accessories->Paint) then from the edit at the top, click paste. This will create a .bmp of the screenshot in paint.

Of course you could always just highlight the text that 3dmark produces and right click then copy. Then you can post it here.

Don't mean to start a controversy, but if you are getting CPU marks that high, then you are not running an overclocked celery...for those are 700mhz+ athlon and P3 scores.

[rotax]

geoblackwl, i have made a .bmp of my scoring i just dont know how to post it here. please give me your e-mail or icq # and ill send it to you. otherwise you will have to explain me very precisely how to post it here. thx

[rotax]

maybe that can help http://www.multimania.com/morphector/proof.jpg

[geoblackwl]

What can I say Rotax....you showed me. I still can't believe it...but you da man! http://www.sysopt.com/forum/smile.gif

I have seen other celery pc's with a DDR GeForce and they only pull half your scores...what ever you did, don't mess with it.

I see you have a software cooler running on the desktop, is that celery hot enough to light a cigar?

Ciao...Geo (put in his place)

[rotax]

what about that this is at 1024x 768

[This message has been edited by rotax (edited 03-25-2000).]

[rotax]

http://www.multimania.com/morphector/1024x768%201.jpg