AMD 64 3400 v 3000 Socket 754

Azza

About 2 weeks back I sold my old Gigabyte GA K8NNXP nforce 150 motherboard to a mate of mine who had recently purchased a AMD 64 3000 (believe its a clawhammer cpu-z 1.23 said it was although it only has 512k L2 cache 2.0ghz clock). He also obtained a Ati made 9800xt 256mb graphics card. When he throw this all together he obtained a benchmark score of over 14,000 in 3D Mark 2001 at stock speed. I believe he was using the Catalyst 4.6 Drivers. If you check my machine specs below I scored over 20,000 stock speed using default asus graphics driver. But why is the gap so big. Okay I have better quailty ram but that can only count for at max 1,500 point but he's appears to have lower timings!. A higher hypertranport speed probably buy me a few more marks from the motherboard. But surely the 200 extra mhz and the double cache size can't be worth 4,000+ marks. I would of been sure the ATI card would of been the fastest of any 9800xt after all they made the chipset?

Anyone got any suggestions why the gulf is so big? That should be at least near 16,000 if not 17,000-18,000

tuxy

with a p4 2.88ghz(533 fsb) and a radeon 9800 pro 128mb and 1 gb of cheap ddr333 ram i get 17,000 marks in 3d mark 2001
so somethings isnt right

Azza

WOW nice score I'm starting to think my 3D Mark score sucks. But that AMD 3000 should be on par if not slightly ahead of your cpu not to mention he has pc 3200 ram and a better graphics. Any ideas what it could be?

tuxy

ah im a little bit wrong just checked again its realy 16,700 still not bad and its only a small shuttle system

Dutchboy

i have nearly the same setup hasn't been overclock yet doesn't have the latest drivers yet either and my card isn't as good but i still got a score of 17700
Amd 64 3000, ati 9800pro 128, 512mb level one mushkin.

Cows With Guns

oooo, sweet pc Azza!

Azza

I have 2 spare roles of toliet paper! how could you forget that!

Col_Loki

Azza banned for confusing me............lol .

Em on teh 3dmark thing, he should be getting 18k atleast with that system. I was getting 17.5k with an Xp2500+ and a 9700pro (both overclocked) . Try 3dmark '03 to see if its the GFX or the System thats falling down.

If it gets ~6k in '03 then the GFX card is fine and he should make sure his chip is running ok. Ohh and timings shouldnt be looser than 3-3-3 unless its dreadfull memory .

With your system Azza you could pull in scores in the 22k range........... (ive seen 24k with a simular CPU overclock and a 9800pro)

silverside

Just for comparison, I have just got 3dmark 2001 scores of

17800 odd using catalyst 4.6
16000 odd using catalyst 4.7

on an amd3000/64, 9800pro, 1gb cas3 3200 RAM, not overclocked.

Should I go back to catalyst 4.6 ?

tuxy

i dono 4.7 might be better for directx 9 games
try 3d mark 2003

and of course real life tests (in games fps)
are far more important then your 3d mark score

Col_Loki

For benching you should use the older cats and older OS.......... thats the way most of the people with really high benchmarks do it (not me btw). Think windows 98 is the prefered OS, some people even know the best way to setup the tests on 3dmark to get about 100points more.........

I think the newer cat has something for better quality, i read about but i forget the details :rolleyes:

Azza

My 3D Marks scores on the lastset asus driver 8.02 where.

3D Mark 2003 7,342
3d Mark 2001 22,660

Felt if I really wanted I could get a little more out of my components but just not arsed. I could probably break the 23,000 3d Mark in 2001.

BKtje

Hmmz i dunno. Seems a low alright but how much ram has he got. What is it and how much?
At stock speeds my machine gave me just over 18,000 which is a little more than he should be getting i guess.

An amd64 3000 clawhammer will run at 2.8 not 2ghz. A amd 63 3200 clawhammer will run at 2ghz and so forth. He has a newcastle.

As a side note iI really should get around to finish overclocking this system.

silverside

ah i am not bothered about benchmarks. I guess if 4.7 really was slower than 4.6 I would have heard it by now.

tuxy

Originally posted by B-K-DzR

An amd64 3000 clawhammer will run at 2.8 not 2ghz. A amd 63 3200 clawhammer will run at 2ghz and so forth. He has a newcastle.
.

i could be wrong as i dont know much about a64's but dosnt the 3000 run at 2 ghz but has half the cache of the 3200?

Azza

Firstly to sliverside. Changing from default asus driver to 4.6 catalyst caused me a signifcant drop in 3d mark scores. The lastest Asus drivers dropped the score down slightly from that.

Tuxy I'm not sure. Is there more than type of 3200 one perhaps at 2.0 ghz with 1mb l2 cache and the other at 2.2ghz with 512k l2 cahce. I'm farily certain the 3000 is clock at 2.0ghz and has 512k cache. So leaves me to believe if there is only 1 its at 2.2ghz with 512 cache

B-K you should be getting higher with a vapor chill at least 2.6ghz. Perhaps you should try the bios 1.2 revision. If your running sata drives make sure there in sata socket 3 and 4. I had difficulty overclocking my system. The raid setup was undetectable at 215 fsb but switched to the other socket and that let me go has high as I want. I think your ram will be limiting your overclocking. How much voltage you throwing at the ram and the cpu?

tuxy

im guessing this is what he has
http://www.xbitlabs.com/images/cpu/athlon64-3000/cpuz.png

then there is a 3200 with the same clock speed but 1 mb cache

Azza

Yes thats the one he has.

tuxy

k so he has one of the old clawhammer 3000+ with the l2 cache cut to 512k
these have now been replaced by the newcastle core
but performance should be the same

BloodBath

Hmmm I bet he has AA and AF turned on on the graphics card. Happened to me the first time I benched.

Tell him to set all his graphics card settings to performance and turn off AA and AF and any other settings like truform.


BloodBath

Woden

i thought i read somewhere that 3dmark01 over rides all that jazz however it seems a reasonable explanation

i push out 17500 with older cats a 3200+ and 9800pro in 01.

however a driver change once dropped that down to 11000 so i'm thinking drivers as well

data

Azza

Actually I will have to try setting my card to performance rather than quailty and disable truform. Does it improve the benchmarks much. That happened to me before with AA and AF on.

astrofool

i get 20,000 with an A64 3000+ and 9800XT (gig of ram), so probably just configured badly.

Azza

I reckon my system ain't preform to its true potential you overclock astro fool?

astrofool

no, actually have it slightly underclocked for an abit (put it to 200fsb instead of default 204). I wouldn't care too much about canned benchmark scores these days however.