3DMARK Scores!?

Bigchrome

23252 in 05:
http://service.futuremark.com/compare?3dm05=3641637

Pretty aight if you ask me.;)

Bigchrome

I'm now 2nd in everything bar 06 and 03:D

gline

cant believe im still no 1 on 3dmark 06 on http://benchmarkcentral.net/

that was ages ago and there have been the 8800ultra's since then :eek:

PogMoThoin

gline wrote: »

that was ages ago and there have been the 8800ultra's since then :eek:

:rolleyes: ya, but who's been daft enough to pay for them, waaaay overpriced

awhir

PogMoThoin wrote: »

:rolleyes: ya, but who's been daft enough to pay for them, waaaay overpriced

Fallcus and Gline

Grim.

PogMoThoin wrote: »

:rolleyes: ya, but who's been daft enough to pay for them, waaaay overpriced

me

dazftw

Run 3DMARK grim see what you get!?

I just did it again and got a proud 14805 Going go for 15000 overclock the cpu a bit more not so much graphics see what it gets me.

http://service.futuremark.com/orb/resultanalyzer.jsp?UID=12353092&projectType=14&XLID=0

Grim.

proc at 3ghz 333x9 no tweaks to gfx card on vista x64

06
http://service.futuremark.com/orb/resultanalyzer.jsp?projectType=14&XLID=0&UID=12355400

05
http://service.futuremark.com/orb/resultanalyzer.jsp?projectType=12&XLID=0&UID=12354242

my card http://www.dabs.ie/productview.aspx?Quicklinx=4JP0&CategorySelectedId=11137&PageMode=1&NavigationKey=11137,48070000,50544

John mac

5294 is this any good?


E6600
ATI RADEON X1950 PRO256 MB
abit awd9 max
2 gb ram

Grim.

John mac wrote: »

5294 is this any good?


E6600
ATI RADEON X1950 PRO256 MB
abit awd9 max
2 gb ram

its your gfx card thats letting you down there mate

Chosen

10 pages on the thread, and people keep posting invalid links...

This is an invalid link:

http://service.futuremark.com/orb/resultanalyzer.jsp?UID=12353092&projectType=14&XLID=0

Clicking on an invalid link, the system thinks that you are trying to re-submit the other person's result and you get a nice "Project submission failed" message.

This is a valid link:

http://service.futuremark.com/compare?3dm06=3901558

And this is where you can find it:

Grim.

suppose itll stay invalid then

dazftw

wahey thanks for that Chosen

http://service.futuremark.com/compare?3dm06=3936006

Bigchrome

gline wrote: »

cant believe im still no 1 on 3dmark 06 on http://benchmarkcentral.net/

that was ages ago and there have been the 8800ultra's since then :eek:

06 is a money spending competition.... you have a quad AND SLI...how could you lose?? wheras 05 actually requires skill.... try and beat me in that;)

gline

Bigchrome wrote: »

06 is a money spending competition.... you have a quad AND SLI...how could you lose?? wheras 05 actually requires skill.... try and beat me in that;)

i could easily lose, its all about overclocking cpu+memory+gfx

dont have the rig anymore anyway, sold it ages ago.

dont see how 05 takes more "skill" tbh

Bigchrome

05 responds well to tweaking, optimising the OS, tigh lats and subs and high frequencies.... also there is skill to using LOD tweaks.... As you said it's all about "overclocking cpu+memory+gfx" which takes some skill to do right.


06 LOD has very little effect, tweaks don't matter much...any latencies go as long as the frequency is high and easiest way to up the score is buying a quad for CPU test which is really girly tbh... SLI/CF also makes a massive improvment so really you just have to have the money to buy two card and a quad and that's it....oh and you have to be able to push "run":D

Chosen

Bigchrome wrote: »

06 is a money spending competition.... you have a quad AND SLI...how could you lose?? wheras 05 actually requires skill.... try and beat me in that;)

3dMark is a money competition overall. Show me real benchmarks: games.

It's not a secret that the DX10 ATI cards are optimised for 3dMark, and perform like poo in games

I mean, look how fast the 2900XT is (in 3dMark)! Almost as fast as the 8800 Ultra!


But what happens in games?


Nah! This must be a DX9 issue! Show us the DX10/Vista game results!


OMG! Can't be that bad, can it?


Oh well, at least I get unrealistically high 3dMark scores, so I guess I can brag about that...

awhir

Bigchrome wrote: »

05 responds well to tweaking, optimising the OS, tigh lats and subs and high frequencies.... also there is skill to using LOD tweaks.... As you said it's all about "overclocking cpu+memory+gfx" which takes some skill to do right.


06 LOD has very little effect, tweaks don't matter much...any latencies go as long as the frequency is high and easiest way to up the score is buying a quad for CPU test which is really girly tbh... SLI/CF also makes a massive improvment so really you just have to have the money to buy two card and a quad and that's it....oh and you have to be able to push "run":D

btw where are those Es chips you were talking about.pics ?

Bigchrome

Lost planet? what a joke.... worst game and engine ever.... But yes this card sucks for games in general.... I don't play games so I could give a **** less;)

If you want to talk about who's optimising for what though....Just look at how crap nvidia's IQ is in 3D marks AND games.
That bioshock test is also wrong.. I get 60fps avg at 1920x1200 max settings and AA.


Awhir...it seems intel don't really care about the irish like they do those from countires where there are more overclockers...I'm still waiting..

yoyo

10515 Score in 3dmark06 here

Nick

WellyJ

Having gotten SLI up and running with a second 8800GTX i get 12600 in 06,

Current setup,

AMD X2 6400+, at stock.

2x 8800GTX 768mb, at stock.

4 x Corsair 6400 DDR2 1GB

Is this score about right for this setup?

Conar

Seems low to me but I'm certainly no expert.
Is that in Vista or XP?
Moving to Vista lost me about 1200 if I remember correctly.

WellyJ

Conar wrote: »

Seems low to me but I'm certainly no expert.
Is that in Vista or XP?
Moving to Vista lost me about 1200 if I remember correctly.

XP 64, though it is an old install, like over a year old.

Obviously using a fresh install on a nicely defragged drive would help the score?

Conar

A fresh install might help a bit but nothing huge I wouldn't think.
Have you tried a different version of the drivers?

Comparing your score to others posted on http://benchmarkcentral.net/ it definitely seems low for GTX's in SLI but then they're aren't many AMD setups to compare it to.

Bigchrome

It's normal for an AMD setup.... E6600 would prob get around 15k with that setup.

TerrorFirmer

An x2 6400+ is faster then a 6600 though...

Gonzo

3d mark 2006

setup:
Intell Quad Core Q6700 2.67ghz, 4GB Corsair pc-6400, WD 750gig HD, nvidia 8800 GTX, Windows Vista 64bit

Score: 12214

WellyJ

Bigchrome wrote: »

It's normal for an AMD setup.... E6600 would prob get around 15k with that setup.

The x2 6400+ outperforms the 6600 in benchmarks though???

WellyJ

Gonzo wrote: »

3d mark 2006

setup:
Intell Quad Core Q6700 2.67ghz, 4GB Corsair pc-6400, WD 750gig HD, nvidia 8800 GTX, Windows Vista 64bit

Score: 12214

Thats with one GTX??

Surely with 2 I should be seeing a better score then. Plus im running from a 10,000 rpm raptor

Gonzo

yeah its a standard single 8800gtx, no overclocking