A computer components & hardware forum. HardwareBanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » HardwareBanter forum » Video Cards » Nvidia Videocards
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Squeezing every last point out of 3DMark2001SE



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11  
Old February 13th 04, 10:57 PM
Kai Robinson
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"chris" wrote in message
...

"Kai Robinson" wrote in message
...
Dont you have a bridge to go and live under?

By replying to my post with an insult - it just proves that you're a

******.

just send the header to with a complaint

if you feel like it




Nah - dealing with ******* like that isnt worth it - waste of time really. I
shouldnt have even graced that ****er with a response, but i was bored....

Kai



  #12  
Old February 14th 04, 12:35 AM
~misfit~
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

cowboyz wrote:
"~misfit~" wrote in message
...


My GF4 ti4200 with a CPU running at 2.1 GHz gets 12,000.

My g/f's FX5200 with a CPU at 2.2 GHz and twice the L2 of mine gets
2,500.

While the CPU does have an influence on the 3DMark score it isn't
anywhere near as significant as the GPU.
--
~misfit~



surely these figures are a typo. 2500? or is that 12500?


Sorry, it was a mistake. The 2,500 (2,433 actually) was what she got with
her old GF2MX400/64. With the FX5200/128 she still only gets 5,585 though. I
must read my records more carefully. :-). That's on a 2500+ Barton clocked
to 3200+ speed (200MHz FSB) with 512MB RAM.

(I'm a bit 'anal' I guess the Americans would say, I rigorously benchmark
and record every build or change I make for future reference).

The FX5200/128 (non-ultra, Gigabyte) sucks quite a bit but it was only
around $NZ120. Anything half-way decent was around $NZ300 (I bought it for
her christmas present and didn't/don't have that sort of money). Although it
benchmarks quite badly it seems to run better than the benchmark indicates.
All our games are playable on it. It even plays the Far Cry demo with only
slight hesitation (Thanks BTW) *Far* better than the GF2 that is now in our
mp3 machine (and gets 1,937 marks on a celly 600 at 900MHz, 256MB SD-RAM).

All using XP Pro.
--
~misfit~


  #13  
Old February 14th 04, 12:36 AM
~misfit~
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Clock´n Roll wrote:
"cowboyz" skrev i en meddelelse
...

"~misfit~" wrote in message
...
My g/f's FX5200 with a CPU at 2.2 GHz and twice the L2 of mine gets
2,500.


Right.... :-D


Sorry, made a mistake on that figure, see my reply to cowboyz.
--
~misfit~


  #14  
Old February 14th 04, 02:43 AM
Darthy
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Fri, 13 Feb 2004 09:28:38 +0100, "Clock´n Roll"
wrote:

Anyone else managed to get a score this high with one of these cards?


You should ask:"Anyone else managed to get a score this high with a 1.6Ghz
CPU?"
3Dmark2001 in my oppinion is more a CPU test than a GPU test.



Nope. While CPU does effect performance, its the GPU the matters.

But like a race car, every part can effect performance. The shocks,
tires, suspension, engine, transmission, motor oil... oh, driver.

If your CPU is SLOW, the GPU will not get as fast as IT could go...
but the faster the CPU is, the faster it can feed data into the GPU.

Hence, with today's CPUs around 2600~3200, the performance difference
is very minmal... a top end GPU matters.

People buy 3000Mhz P4 CPUs to open email... ;(


--
Remember when real men used Real computers!?
When 512K of video RAM was a lot!

Death to Palladium & WPA!!
  #15  
Old February 14th 04, 02:45 AM
Darthy
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Sat, 14 Feb 2004 00:57:15 +1300, "~misfit~"
wrote:

You should ask:"Anyone else managed to get a score this high with a
1.6Ghz CPU?"
3Dmark2001 in my oppinion is more a CPU test than a GPU test.


My GF4 ti4200 with a CPU running at 2.1 GHz gets 12,000.

My g/f's FX5200 with a CPU at 2.2 GHz and twice the L2 of mine gets 2,500.

While the CPU does have an influence on the 3DMark score it isn't anywhere
near as significant as the GPU.


That is WAY horrible for a 5200... there should be MORE issues than
just the crappy 5200... thats SLOWER than the GF3... about the same as
a GF2mx400 ... which on paper is what a 64bit 5200 can perform at...
roughly.

A $75 Ti4200 would get her up to at least 9000.


--
Remember when real men used Real computers!?
When 512K of video RAM was a lot!

Death to Palladium & WPA!!
  #16  
Old February 14th 04, 05:52 AM
Darthy
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Sat, 14 Feb 2004 12:35:19 +1300, "~misfit~"
wrote:

cowboyz wrote:
"~misfit~" wrote in message
...


My GF4 ti4200 with a CPU running at 2.1 GHz gets 12,000.

My g/f's FX5200 with a CPU at 2.2 GHz and twice the L2 of mine gets
2,500.

While the CPU does have an influence on the 3DMark score it isn't
anywhere near as significant as the GPU.
--
~misfit~



surely these figures are a typo. 2500? or is that 12500?


Sorry, it was a mistake. The 2,500 (2,433 actually) was what she got with
her old GF2MX400/64. With the FX5200/128 she still only gets 5,585 though. I
must read my records more carefully. :-). That's on a 2500+ Barton clocked
to 3200+ speed (200MHz FSB) with 512MB RAM.


Thats about right...

GF2s are in the 2500 range... GF3s are in the 5000~7000s...

(I'm a bit 'anal' I guess the Americans would say, I rigorously benchmark
and record every build or change I make for future reference).


Many of us do and should... so we know what were getting.


--
Remember when real men used Real computers!?
When 512K of video RAM was a lot!

Death to Palladium & WPA!!
  #17  
Old February 14th 04, 08:32 AM
raj
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

i get 11600 defult everything on my geforce 4 ti 4200 using omega
drivers
"Darthy" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 14 Feb 2004 12:35:19 +1300, "~misfit~"
wrote:

cowboyz wrote:
"~misfit~" wrote in message
...


My GF4 ti4200 with a CPU running at 2.1 GHz gets 12,000.

My g/f's FX5200 with a CPU at 2.2 GHz and twice the L2 of mine gets
2,500.

While the CPU does have an influence on the 3DMark score it isn't
anywhere near as significant as the GPU.
--
~misfit~



surely these figures are a typo. 2500? or is that 12500?


Sorry, it was a mistake. The 2,500 (2,433 actually) was what she got with
her old GF2MX400/64. With the FX5200/128 she still only gets 5,585

though. I
must read my records more carefully. :-). That's on a 2500+ Barton

clocked
to 3200+ speed (200MHz FSB) with 512MB RAM.


Thats about right...

GF2s are in the 2500 range... GF3s are in the 5000~7000s...

(I'm a bit 'anal' I guess the Americans would say, I rigorously benchmark
and record every build or change I make for future reference).


Many of us do and should... so we know what were getting.


--
Remember when real men used Real computers!?
When 512K of video RAM was a lot!

Death to Palladium & WPA!!



  #18  
Old February 14th 04, 10:00 AM
~misfit~
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Darthy wrote:
On Sat, 14 Feb 2004 00:57:15 +1300, "~misfit~"
wrote:

You should ask:"Anyone else managed to get a score this high with a
1.6Ghz CPU?"
3Dmark2001 in my oppinion is more a CPU test than a GPU test.


My GF4 ti4200 with a CPU running at 2.1 GHz gets 12,000.

My g/f's FX5200 with a CPU at 2.2 GHz and twice the L2 of mine gets
2,500.

While the CPU does have an influence on the 3DMark score it isn't
anywhere near as significant as the GPU.


That is WAY horrible for a 5200... there should be MORE issues than
just the crappy 5200... thats SLOWER than the GF3... about the same as
a GF2mx400 ... which on paper is what a 64bit 5200 can perform at...
roughly.

A $75 Ti4200 would get her up to at least 9000.


Except I can't buy one new here in NZ. Tried for a week.
--
~misfit~


  #19  
Old February 14th 04, 11:16 AM
Darthy
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Sat, 14 Feb 2004 22:00:01 +1300, "~misfit~"
wrote:

Darthy wrote:
On Sat, 14 Feb 2004 00:57:15 +1300, "~misfit~"
wrote:

You should ask:"Anyone else managed to get a score this high with a
1.6Ghz CPU?"
3Dmark2001 in my oppinion is more a CPU test than a GPU test.

My GF4 ti4200 with a CPU running at 2.1 GHz gets 12,000.

My g/f's FX5200 with a CPU at 2.2 GHz and twice the L2 of mine gets
2,500.

While the CPU does have an influence on the 3DMark score it isn't
anywhere near as significant as the GPU.


That is WAY horrible for a 5200... there should be MORE issues than
just the crappy 5200... thats SLOWER than the GF3... about the same as
a GF2mx400 ... which on paper is what a 64bit 5200 can perform at...
roughly.

A $75 Ti4200 would get her up to at least 9000.


Except I can't buy one new here in NZ. Tried for a week.



then a 5600Ultra is the lowest end- but usable video card.


--
Remember when real men used Real computers!?
When 512K of video RAM was a lot!

Death to Palladium & WPA!!
  #20  
Old February 14th 04, 11:27 AM
Clock´n Roll
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

In my oppinion 3Dmark2003 is the way better test, as 3Dmark2001 is more
dependeable on your CPU.
All I wanted to say. ;-)



 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Balance Point, AGP Overclocking David B. Overclocking 6 April 19th 05 01:42 PM
Passmark Performance Test, Division, Floating Point Division, 2DShapes @(none) General 0 August 19th 04 11:57 PM
Wireless LAN - access point required? Erik Hegeman General 3 June 2nd 04 10:10 AM
Any point in using PC4000 memory? Barend Overclocking 9 January 21st 04 12:01 AM
Have A7A266; any point installing Zalman north bridge heat sink rstlne Asus Motherboards 0 July 28th 03 02:56 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 08:49 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 HardwareBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.