9b works fine for me i allso installed the patch for 2001se it all works now and i got a score of 13710 not bad i guess, thx mate
9b works fine for me i allso installed the patch for 2001se it all works now and i got a score of 13710 not bad i guess, thx mate
No problems, decent score that, could probably be quite a bit higher with the CPU and Vid card overclocked
hehe well im still kind off new to overclocking dont i need to solder my l1 cachi or something? what can i do to my vid card i instlled this patch mod i found ati2mtag it seems to giv me better scores, and at the moment im to scared to play around with the volts of the ram and cpu i dont really know what im doing some advice would be great :) cheers
Critical flaw in the most secure windows yet? oh sorry, in ALL windows ever made, even Coldseal ones.:D
Can't actually be sure it was 9.0b cos I installed half a dozen other securtity issues at the same time, but system restore did get me back to useable state again, bl**dy microshaft.
That will show you what version of direct x you are running.
So far so good with the new direct x. Have not tested everything yet, as have a lot of programs. -RH-
after messing around with some drivers, got the new omega drivers. overclocked a bit and scored a 6091. What's the highest anyone has heard of as of late?
That is a killer score. You will have to sort through the posts here, but if I remember, there were just a hand full of people that make it in the 6,000 range, so you may not be the fastest, but you are in real good company--RH--
Post your setup, I would like to know all the tasty details. :r
asus A7N8X mobo, 400 fsb ready, 2 intake 2 exhaust fans
ATI 9800 Pro 128 version, Omega driver/ 3.6 catalyst based
VGA memory clock 365 MHz
VGA Core clock 425 MHz
direct x 9
1 gig of gueel ram (sp?) dual chaneled two-512 sticks
Lite-on cdr-cdrw 52x24x52
2500+ amd processor with the barton core attached is a slk-800
heat sink with a tornado fan attached
logitech z 560 speakers.
80 gig western digital HD
bench mark was run with default settings.
03 score 6091.
Next i'm going to work on overclocking my processor. out of the box i had it at the 3200+ speeds, have let it have some burn time, so i'll be cranking it up pretty soon. hope you like the taste Roadhog. :)
1377 = stock xp2000, ddr333, video card ti4200@250/513 (stock)
1421 = xp2000 @10x173, ddr333@346, video card ti4200@250/513 (stock)
1580 =xp2000 @10x173, ddr333 @346, video card ti4200 @315/623
I am pretty happy with my scores but right now I am helping my brother put together a computer with a barton 2500+ wich will probably blow my score out of the water.:rolleyes:
6072, compare link H E R E.
impossible for some. My newest score on 3dmark 2003 is 6211[B]Quote:
Originally posted by Benssax
You must be using 3dmark 2001 not 2003 :rolleyes:
thats an impossible score.
Care to share a Futuremark compare link with us? We'd like to see the ins and outs ;) .
I figured you had a 9800, those things are beats lol. How do you like the slk800 and volcano?? I have been looking around at heatsink/fan combos. I am running a 2.4 intel with a Spark-7. What I want may be impossible, but I want a heatsink/fan combo that can cool, but do it silently(air cooled). I can o/c this 2.4 to over 3.2 and very stable(and cool) at around 3.0 or 3.1 with the spark-7, but it does go above 4,000 rpm (under heavy load)which can be heard(it can go to 6,000 if needed). I have it sensor controled, so only takes what is needed. The slk900 will fit an Itel if I remember correctly. I was thinking about a 92mm fan(this spark-7 has a 70mm). I would even go with a bigger fan with adaptor with this spark-7, but information on adaptors and smart fans seem hard to come by, as I have been looking around on the net for days. Any one have any good suggestions, please post. (I want air cooled only). --RH--
i have no idea about the volcano and the slk, i use tornado fans. but i've heard good things about them. if they mount onto an slk I believe you would be in good shape. My tornado fan keeps everything nice and cold but it is fairly loud, sounds like a blow dyer. but my temps never get above 37-38 C. even under a heavy load. maybe one day a water cooler will be a fairly simple feature to add on. but at the moment i'm not going to go through some of the trouble that people do to run a water cooling system. besides my rig tears up anything i throw at it anyways:)
I want to avoid the blow dryer effect. I do not feel I have a temp problem as is now(36-38 idle, 45-47 under normal gaming conditions, but will reach 49-50 running 3dmark03 at some points, but it seems the smart fan kicks in and cools it down, but I can hear the fan then). I was just wondering what some of you guys are using, and if any one is running what I call the perfect setup(cool and silent w/o water cooled). With the spark-7 I still have plenty of extra room for both a bigger heat sink, and a larger fan. It seems this topic is not talked about much for some reason?? (BTW, I have good case cooling, large Antec case, 2 intake, with another side intake, and 2 exit fans plus the two in p/s). If any one has played around with this issue, please post what you tried, and what you are using now.--RH--
I have a PIII 1Ghz, 512Mb Ram, Intel D815EPFV motherboard, Albatron FX5600 Turbo 128MB.
I have this score in 3DMark2003: 2060
I've set quality in detonator and my system is not tweaked nor overclocked.
Is that right?
This FX5600 seems to be great for DX9 games, but it has no power with DX8 games :(
Should I overclock my GFX card? I don't want to waste it because it's too expensive for me. Will I have a big difference if I overclock it? I saw that this card overclocked could do much better job, near the FX5900 (when I say near I mean 20 less than FX5900).
Thanks for your help.
My 3DMark2003 Score was 7749. Oh and this isn't a impossible score like someone said above for a 5k mark I believe. http://service.futuremark.com/servle.../projectsearch I've seen some hit 9k almost
Radeon 9800Pro stock speed (modded from 9800 np)
XP2400+@ 2.322ghz (172x13.5)
512mb PC2700 5-2-2-2.5 @ 172
EDIT: Taken on Cat 3.4's
2.6c overclocked to 2.8
80 gig wester digital
1024 pc 3500 hyper x (2stix)
geforce ti 4400 128 mb
slk 900 heatsink
Any one know how to tweak it to raise it, i see you guys are saying around 6000 or 5000 somone please tell me how the heck you did that
is it time for a new video card?????
Correct, its all in the video card, you need a card with direct X hardware support to get a decent score in 2003. Bear in mind any old DX9 card would be a bad investment though as they would lack spee din ever day usage. Ideally you want to be looking at the Radeon 9500 Pro/9700/9800 and Gf Fx5900Quote:
i see you guys are saying around 6000 or 5000 somone please tell me how the heck you did that
are u saying by just getting a new video card it will make it run like 2 to 3 thousand points higher?!?!?!?!?!?!?!:eek:
In a word, yes, try not to think of 3dmark2003 as an indicator of your cards speed like 3dmark2001 was, think of it more as an indicator of speed for cards with Direct X 9.0 hardware support only and an ego-bashing for those who dont own one
My Best 2003 score was 7729. A easy way to raise it alittle was someone told me to unplug monitor while it's running 3D Mark, I guess it helped because I got a better score the next time I ran it. Also you should check your graphics cards setting, goto Control Panel -- Display/Settings Tab/Advanced Button -- Check the tabs for settings on performance for me theres a Open GL and Direct 3D tab where you can set it to quality or performance, put everything on performance. I had it all on quality when I ran 3D Mark 2001 SE and I got 22.3k then when I set it to all performance I went up to 23.25k. I have a ATI 9800 Pro, for NVIDIA I know it's almost the same.
what do you recomend a 9800 or a 5900 and dose the 256 mb cards make that significant of a diffrence??
ya right now im overclocking my video card which i noticed it made a sizable diffrence from 2053 to my 2200 bu thats so small of a diffrence compared to all of yours, maby ill go to the store and buy a new card what do u all recomend
also in maximum pc it says that the new cards like the nvidias and ati have drivers that are tweaked for benchmarking software to make them look faster than they realy are, i just wanted to put that into consideration
9800 Pro is better than the 5900 and yes 256 makes a difference. I have a overclocked 9800 Pro 256 and it runs VERY well. I have a friend with a similar set up as me and he has a overclocked 9800 pro 128 and I get much better fps on high quality games, such as PlanetSide. The FX series is 'okay' but check out www.futuremark.com and compair, the 9800 pro out performs the 5900's, I compaired my score with someone with almost the exact same set up except for g-cards, where he had a 256 5900 and I have a 9800 I did atleast 1.6k+ better.
I recommed the 9800 Pro 128mb over the FX5900 or the 256mb cards. For me the FX5900 is far too expensive and looks to have no real upperhand in real world performance over the 9800 Pro, running equal to in most cases and faster/slower than it in a few instances.
As fir 256mb cards, it doesnt really make that much of a difference on the 9800 Pro as ive read it, it doesnt seem theres enough bandwith to the additional ram to really make use of it, besides most games are only just exceedign 64mb of Vram needed, nevermind 128mb. The only real area 256mb seems to add any is when playing in realy high resoultion with Antialiasing and Anisotropic Filtering on and usually in these circumstances, most games are so slow that the marginal performance boost gained is still not enough
Thats probably right, although I had a 128 on my system and it didn't seem to run as well as the 256, also when I overclocked my 256 I was able to get about 15MHz more out of it than the 128, I could probably get more but I'd hate to damage it; editing cards bios.Quote:
Originally posted by Bigjakkstaffa
The only real area 256mb seems to add any is when playing in realy high resoultion with Antialiasing and Anisotropic Filtering on and usually in these circumstances, most games are so slow that the marginal performance boost gained is still not enough
ok so you recomend i get the 9800 pro 128mb? thanks for all of your help
Yup, my 128mb 9800 Pro was actually bought (today) as a Sapphire 9800 for 220quid. Got it home and flashed the BIOS for the regular 9800 Pro onto it and voila, ive got myself a fully fledged 'pro' and a saving of 100 quid ;)
Apparently this process has a very good success rate on all cards equipped with Samsung 2.0/2.8/3.0/3.3ns RAM, and you get the overclocking headroom of the regular 9800 Pro as well, where normally the 9800 wont even overclock to pro level
ok thx ill try to round up some money and buy myself one
thanks for all of your help, if i get one ill tell you how it goes
Congrats on the new card, Bigjakkstaffa! Yeah baby, yeah.
Its the shiznit, im well pleased considering the money ive saved and i think ive timed it nicely as ive got a month at least now in which to earn some money to replenish my bank accoutn before
Hi, I'm an Nvidia fan... but I live in a real world.
I must tell you that FX5900 Ultra has the crown right now.
Look at this:
Higher frame rates
Highest Price ever =)
To be honest... if you can waste money... buy the newest Nvidia. I wish there were more ATI in my country cause I want to test those video cards at reasonable prices, but I still love NVIDIA :p
Good Luck with your new ATI
I use whats best for me, i have no alliegance to any one company, especially not Ati given their past record, but they truly are slappign nvidia sensless ATM, so may as well give em a try, and thus far everything loosk to have greatly improved since the dark old days :D
hey bigjakk...have you benchmarked that new card of urs yet..?
Whats the results?
Yeah, ironic isn't it. Nvidia has a PAST good reputation (GeForce2, GeForce3 and especially GeForce4's), but their FX cards reek. And ATI has an iffy PAST reputation, but their current cards are king. Just goes to show that reputation alone will not do it. Oh, and btw: Nvidia FX5900 Ultra the crown right now?? Yeah, sure. The crown of the most over-priced, under-achiever and corner-cutter.
EDIT: Those words, as off-the-cuff they seem, aren't meant to be flames or any other type of agitation.
Yeah, but only with the older CAT 3.4'S was 5700 odd in 3dmark 2003 and about 17,000 in 2001
Don't forget ATI cheating with Quake 3... I'm not defending Nvidia, but I don't think this two companies are too different from each other. Tested without drivers 44.03 the 5900 Ultra does a very good job over the 9800 Pro... not a GREAT job, but it has a little increased performance...
I really don't care which card is fastest... this is benchmark´s fault. Tell me something... what are you going to do with your new video card??? Do you want to beat everybody in 3DMark2003 or you want to play any new game for the next 2 years?
As an Nvidia fan... I think ATI has a point right now. The fastest ATI card is not overpriced like FX5900 Ultra. I would like to try ATI, I really mean it, but I didn't find a good place in my country to buy one of them. Also, I can say that the FX series that you will want to buy is the 5800 or 5900... not the other ones. We must wait for Nvidia to give us a new series and if they screw up this new series... they will be in big trouble.