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 » Processors » Overclocking AMD Processors
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Weak 3dmark 2k3



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old September 26th 03, 02:00 PM
Aussie
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

I cant believe u dickheads r still exchanging mobile!!!!!! numbers.Anyone of
u read the latest HL2 benchmark.........OK........Got a news 4 u ....nVidia
(5600,5800,5900 Ultra)been kicked in the ass so bad .five days after the
test they still jumping around...
So called 5900Ultra :-))) cant even keep up with the 9600 Pro,even its ass
kicked by PowerColor 9600 Pro Bravo Edition..............(In TRUE DX-9
environment)

Have Nice Day From Down Under




"Steve Vai" wrote in message
...
finally upgraded my vid card to a ti4200, but it's pretty damn weak!
either something is seriously amiss with my system or the card blows,
i'd like to think it's my system.

system: T-bred A @ 1800mhz
768meg ram on 150mhz fsb
soyo dragon platinum kt333
WD 80 gig, 200 gig
MSI Geforce4 TI4200 64meg not OC'd yet (was running geforce2 mx400
64meg)
sb live value
using onboard nic
-------------------
3Dmark 2003
sco 1757
wings of fury: 116.6 FPS
battle of proxycon: 10.8FPS (wtf?)
trolls lair: 10.8FPS (again wtf?)
cpu test 1: 41.4 fps
cpu test 2: 8.0 fps
fill rate single texturing: 674.3 m/texels
multi-texturing: 1736 m/texels
vertex shader: 5.1 fps
ragtroll: 5.9 fps (triple wtf?)

didnt run sound tests... is this about right? i'm starting to wonder
what the fx5900 ultra would run.

after oc'ing it to 300/590 i got 1965, this is all at 800x600.
hopefully the barton will kick it in the ass



  #2  
Old September 26th 03, 02:02 PM
Aussie
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

So u R...........
"Steve Vai" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 27 Sep 2003 01:38:33 GMT, "Dave" wrote:

"Steve Vai" wrote in message
.. .
finally upgraded my vid card to a ti4200, but it's pretty damn weak!
either something is seriously amiss with my system or the card blows,
i'd like to think it's my system.

system: T-bred A @ 1800mhz
768meg ram on 150mhz fsb
soyo dragon platinum kt333
WD 80 gig, 200 gig
MSI Geforce4 TI4200 64meg not OC'd yet (was running geforce2 mx400
64meg)
sb live value
using onboard nic
-------------------
3Dmark 2003
sco 1757
wings of fury: 116.6 FPS
battle of proxycon: 10.8FPS (wtf?)
trolls lair: 10.8FPS (again wtf?)
cpu test 1: 41.4 fps
cpu test 2: 8.0 fps
fill rate single texturing: 674.3 m/texels
multi-texturing: 1736 m/texels
vertex shader: 5.1 fps
ragtroll: 5.9 fps (triple wtf?)

didnt run sound tests... is this about right? i'm starting to wonder
what the fx5900 ultra would run.

after oc'ing it to 300/590 i got 1965, this is all at 800x600.
hopefully the barton will kick it in the ass


are you stupid?


if you and i are joined at the head then yes, otherwise no.



  #3  
Old September 26th 03, 02:09 PM
Aussie
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Yeah ,,keep trying DICKHEAD... One of these days u'll ****ing learn..But
it'll be toooo late...And u will pay $300 if u lucky to get one of , u know
what....Little knowladge is always been dangerous , to me you r a blazing
****ing gun...


"Steve Vai" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 27 Sep 2003 02:50:28 GMT, "LeeB18509"
wrote:


"Steve Vai" wrote in message
.. .
finally upgraded my vid card to a ti4200, but it's pretty damn weak!
either something is seriously amiss with my system or the card blows,
i'd like to think it's my system.


It's the card.

system: T-bred A @ 1800mhz
768meg ram on 150mhz fsb
soyo dragon platinum kt333
WD 80 gig, 200 gig
MSI Geforce4 TI4200 64meg not OC'd yet (was running geforce2 mx400
64meg)
sb live value
using onboard nic
-------------------
3Dmark 2003
sco 1757
wings of fury: 116.6 FPS
battle of proxycon: 10.8FPS (wtf?)
trolls lair: 10.8FPS (again wtf?)
cpu test 1: 41.4 fps
cpu test 2: 8.0 fps
fill rate single texturing: 674.3 m/texels
multi-texturing: 1736 m/texels
vertex shader: 5.1 fps
ragtroll: 5.9 fps (triple wtf?)

didnt run sound tests... is this about right? i'm starting to wonder
what the fx5900 ultra would run.


It'll run you about $500...and not much else.


exacly.


after oc'ing it to 300/590 i got 1965, this is all at 800x600.
hopefully the barton will kick it in the ass


Not likely. Instead you should derail your one track mind and come on

over
to the dark (light) side.


yeah, when those $300 9800 pro's drop to $100 ....or $76 like this
card was, i'm not going to spend 300 bucks to game all day online...
anyhow ill have to run the benchmark again, as i've got it clocked now
close to TI4800 levels... and stable in madden 2k4, nba live 2k3,
THPS4



  #4  
Old September 26th 03, 02:13 PM
Aussie
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Now.....Mr.DICKHEAD....Read and LEARN.............And go and get f....
ooops, I mean ATI............


"Morgan" wrote in message
...
I think that you have got the idea that the 'issue' is the card / Direct X
9.
If it is any consolation the list is not long and endless of games that
require Direct X9 to run or use it for enhanced graphics.
3D Mark 2003 does, as yet, seems to be the only consolation that the top

end
cards of ATI and NVidia have got for themselves, apart from the

Aquathingy,
to really push the hardware. And now that it seems HL2 has been delayed
there postones some peoples gratification for upgrading their machines

with
those powerful cards.

Don't place as much emphasis on just a benchmark that really is weighted
towards you 'needing' a new card - go to 3D Mark 2001 which tends to be
representative of todays games. Or better still just play the games that

you
have got and enjoy them

--
Regards

Morgan




  #5  
Old September 27th 03, 01:25 AM
Steve Vai
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Weak 3dmark 2k3

finally upgraded my vid card to a ti4200, but it's pretty damn weak!
either something is seriously amiss with my system or the card blows,
i'd like to think it's my system.

system: T-bred A @ 1800mhz
768meg ram on 150mhz fsb
soyo dragon platinum kt333
WD 80 gig, 200 gig
MSI Geforce4 TI4200 64meg not OC'd yet (was running geforce2 mx400
64meg)
sb live value
using onboard nic
-------------------
3Dmark 2003
sco 1757
wings of fury: 116.6 FPS
battle of proxycon: 10.8FPS (wtf?)
trolls lair: 10.8FPS (again wtf?)
cpu test 1: 41.4 fps
cpu test 2: 8.0 fps
fill rate single texturing: 674.3 m/texels
multi-texturing: 1736 m/texels
vertex shader: 5.1 fps
ragtroll: 5.9 fps (triple wtf?)

didnt run sound tests... is this about right? i'm starting to wonder
what the fx5900 ultra would run.

after oc'ing it to 300/590 i got 1965, this is all at 800x600.
hopefully the barton will kick it in the ass
  #6  
Old September 27th 03, 01:35 AM
Frank Weston
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

I get about 5900 with my 9800 Pro, and if I overclock the video by about 10%
I can get close to 7000. Maybe you should think about ATI.


"Steve Vai" wrote in message
...
finally upgraded my vid card to a ti4200, but it's pretty damn weak!
either something is seriously amiss with my system or the card blows,
i'd like to think it's my system.

system: T-bred A @ 1800mhz
768meg ram on 150mhz fsb
soyo dragon platinum kt333
WD 80 gig, 200 gig
MSI Geforce4 TI4200 64meg not OC'd yet (was running geforce2 mx400
64meg)
sb live value
using onboard nic
-------------------
3Dmark 2003
sco 1757
wings of fury: 116.6 FPS
battle of proxycon: 10.8FPS (wtf?)
trolls lair: 10.8FPS (again wtf?)
cpu test 1: 41.4 fps
cpu test 2: 8.0 fps
fill rate single texturing: 674.3 m/texels
multi-texturing: 1736 m/texels
vertex shader: 5.1 fps
ragtroll: 5.9 fps (triple wtf?)

didnt run sound tests... is this about right? i'm starting to wonder
what the fx5900 ultra would run.

after oc'ing it to 300/590 i got 1965, this is all at 800x600.
hopefully the barton will kick it in the ass



  #7  
Old September 27th 03, 02:21 AM
We Live For The One We Die For The One
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


Sounds about right.

No DX9 Vid card and pretty slow.

Slow CPU.


On Fri, 26 Sep 2003 17:25:26 -0700, Steve Vai
wrote:

finally upgraded my vid card to a ti4200, but it's pretty damn weak!
either something is seriously amiss with my system or the card blows,
i'd like to think it's my system.

system: T-bred A @ 1800mhz
768meg ram on 150mhz fsb
soyo dragon platinum kt333
WD 80 gig, 200 gig
MSI Geforce4 TI4200 64meg not OC'd yet (was running geforce2 mx400
64meg)
sb live value
using onboard nic
-------------------
3Dmark 2003
sco 1757
wings of fury: 116.6 FPS
battle of proxycon: 10.8FPS (wtf?)
trolls lair: 10.8FPS (again wtf?)
cpu test 1: 41.4 fps
cpu test 2: 8.0 fps
fill rate single texturing: 674.3 m/texels
multi-texturing: 1736 m/texels
vertex shader: 5.1 fps
ragtroll: 5.9 fps (triple wtf?)

didnt run sound tests... is this about right? i'm starting to wonder
what the fx5900 ultra would run.

after oc'ing it to 300/590 i got 1965, this is all at 800x600.
hopefully the barton will kick it in the ass


  #8  
Old September 27th 03, 02:38 AM
Dave
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

"Steve Vai" wrote in message
...
finally upgraded my vid card to a ti4200, but it's pretty damn weak!
either something is seriously amiss with my system or the card blows,
i'd like to think it's my system.

system: T-bred A @ 1800mhz
768meg ram on 150mhz fsb
soyo dragon platinum kt333
WD 80 gig, 200 gig
MSI Geforce4 TI4200 64meg not OC'd yet (was running geforce2 mx400
64meg)
sb live value
using onboard nic
-------------------
3Dmark 2003
sco 1757
wings of fury: 116.6 FPS
battle of proxycon: 10.8FPS (wtf?)
trolls lair: 10.8FPS (again wtf?)
cpu test 1: 41.4 fps
cpu test 2: 8.0 fps
fill rate single texturing: 674.3 m/texels
multi-texturing: 1736 m/texels
vertex shader: 5.1 fps
ragtroll: 5.9 fps (triple wtf?)

didnt run sound tests... is this about right? i'm starting to wonder
what the fx5900 ultra would run.

after oc'ing it to 300/590 i got 1965, this is all at 800x600.
hopefully the barton will kick it in the ass


are you stupid?


  #9  
Old September 27th 03, 03:50 AM
LeeB18509
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"Steve Vai" wrote in message
...
finally upgraded my vid card to a ti4200, but it's pretty damn weak!
either something is seriously amiss with my system or the card blows,
i'd like to think it's my system.


It's the card.

system: T-bred A @ 1800mhz
768meg ram on 150mhz fsb
soyo dragon platinum kt333
WD 80 gig, 200 gig
MSI Geforce4 TI4200 64meg not OC'd yet (was running geforce2 mx400
64meg)
sb live value
using onboard nic
-------------------
3Dmark 2003
sco 1757
wings of fury: 116.6 FPS
battle of proxycon: 10.8FPS (wtf?)
trolls lair: 10.8FPS (again wtf?)
cpu test 1: 41.4 fps
cpu test 2: 8.0 fps
fill rate single texturing: 674.3 m/texels
multi-texturing: 1736 m/texels
vertex shader: 5.1 fps
ragtroll: 5.9 fps (triple wtf?)

didnt run sound tests... is this about right? i'm starting to wonder
what the fx5900 ultra would run.


It'll run you about $500...and not much else.

after oc'ing it to 300/590 i got 1965, this is all at 800x600.
hopefully the barton will kick it in the ass


Not likely. Instead you should derail your one track mind and come on over
to the dark (light) side.




  #10  
Old September 27th 03, 09:07 AM
Steve Vai
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Sat, 27 Sep 2003 01:38:33 GMT, "Dave" wrote:

"Steve Vai" wrote in message
.. .
finally upgraded my vid card to a ti4200, but it's pretty damn weak!
either something is seriously amiss with my system or the card blows,
i'd like to think it's my system.

system: T-bred A @ 1800mhz
768meg ram on 150mhz fsb
soyo dragon platinum kt333
WD 80 gig, 200 gig
MSI Geforce4 TI4200 64meg not OC'd yet (was running geforce2 mx400
64meg)
sb live value
using onboard nic
-------------------
3Dmark 2003
sco 1757
wings of fury: 116.6 FPS
battle of proxycon: 10.8FPS (wtf?)
trolls lair: 10.8FPS (again wtf?)
cpu test 1: 41.4 fps
cpu test 2: 8.0 fps
fill rate single texturing: 674.3 m/texels
multi-texturing: 1736 m/texels
vertex shader: 5.1 fps
ragtroll: 5.9 fps (triple wtf?)

didnt run sound tests... is this about right? i'm starting to wonder
what the fx5900 ultra would run.

after oc'ing it to 300/590 i got 1965, this is all at 800x600.
hopefully the barton will kick it in the ass


are you stupid?


if you and i are joined at the head then yes, otherwise no.
 




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
strange harddisk behaviour due to weak power supply ? jyrgen General 1 October 6th 04 09:01 PM
3dmark benchmarking O/C's ferdelance Overclocking 1 August 26th 04 06:14 AM
Socket 939 being reported by 3DMark 2001 version 200 Wayne @ W. AMD x86-64 Processors 1 May 13th 04 02:08 AM
3dmark scores pathetically low? rms Overclocking 8 November 19th 03 11:38 PM
3dmark 2001se scores in Win98 vs xp DrWho Overclocking AMD Processors 1 June 22nd 03 07:13 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 03:18 PM.


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