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

How to boost Aquamark score



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old December 20th 03, 10:05 PM
Scooter
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default How to boost Aquamark score

For the first time I have run this benchmark tool. Its the first benchmark I
have ever done and I find my score really low compared to others on the web
(almost 9000 points). I am getting 15568points and my system is as follows.

Computer
Operating System Microsoft Windows XP Home Edition
OS Service Pack Service Pack 1

Motherboard
CPU Type AMD Athlon XP, 2100 MHz (6.25 x 336) 2600+
Motherboard Name MSI KT4V (MS-6712) (6 PCI, 1 AGP, 3 DIMM, Audio)
Motherboard Chipset VIA VT8377 Apollo KT400
System Memory 1024 MB (DDR SDRAM)
BIOS Type AMI (02/11/03)

Display
Video Adapter NVIDIA GeForce4 Ti 4200 (128 MB)
3D Accelerator nVIDIA GeForce4 Ti 4200
Monitor Samsung SyncMaster 950p(T) (H2JK903118)
Same score using 52.16, 53.03drivers
all video settings at defaults
Direct X 9b

Multimedia
Audio Adapter Creative SB Live! Sound Card

Partitions
C: (FAT32) 150282 MB (136228 MB free)
G: (FAT32) 39987 MB (12857 MB free)
H: (FAT32) 36333 MB (4381 MB free)

I also notice My CPU doesnt score as much either.




  #2  
Old December 20th 03, 10:36 PM
Biz
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Overclock the heck out of your system or buy a faster system
"Scooter" wrote in message
...
For the first time I have run this benchmark tool. Its the first benchmark

I
have ever done and I find my score really low compared to others on the

web
(almost 9000 points). I am getting 15568points and my system is as

follows.

Computer
Operating System Microsoft Windows XP Home Edition
OS Service Pack Service Pack 1

Motherboard
CPU Type AMD Athlon XP, 2100 MHz (6.25 x 336) 2600+
Motherboard Name MSI KT4V (MS-6712) (6 PCI, 1 AGP, 3 DIMM, Audio)
Motherboard Chipset VIA VT8377 Apollo KT400
System Memory 1024 MB (DDR SDRAM)
BIOS Type AMI (02/11/03)

Display
Video Adapter NVIDIA GeForce4 Ti 4200 (128 MB)
3D Accelerator nVIDIA GeForce4 Ti 4200
Monitor Samsung SyncMaster 950p(T) (H2JK903118)
Same score using 52.16, 53.03drivers
all video settings at defaults
Direct X 9b

Multimedia
Audio Adapter Creative SB Live! Sound Card

Partitions
C: (FAT32) 150282 MB (136228 MB free)
G: (FAT32) 39987 MB (12857 MB free)
H: (FAT32) 36333 MB (4381 MB free)

I also notice My CPU doesnt score as much either.






  #3  
Old December 21st 03, 03:16 AM
Dark Avenger
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

"Scooter" wrote in message ...
For the first time I have run this benchmark tool. Its the first benchmark I
have ever done and I find my score really low compared to others on the web
(almost 9000 points). I am getting 15568points and my system is as follows.

Computer
Operating System Microsoft Windows XP Home Edition
OS Service Pack Service Pack 1

Motherboard
CPU Type AMD Athlon XP, 2100 MHz (6.25 x 336) 2600+
Motherboard Name MSI KT4V (MS-6712) (6 PCI, 1 AGP, 3 DIMM, Audio)
Motherboard Chipset VIA VT8377 Apollo KT400
System Memory 1024 MB (DDR SDRAM)
BIOS Type AMI (02/11/03)

Display
Video Adapter NVIDIA GeForce4 Ti 4200 (128 MB)
3D Accelerator nVIDIA GeForce4 Ti 4200
Monitor Samsung SyncMaster 950p(T) (H2JK903118)
Same score using 52.16, 53.03drivers
all video settings at defaults
Direct X 9b

Multimedia
Audio Adapter Creative SB Live! Sound Card

Partitions
C: (FAT32) 150282 MB (136228 MB free)
G: (FAT32) 39987 MB (12857 MB free)
H: (FAT32) 36333 MB (4381 MB free)

I also notice My CPU doesnt score as much either.


Is it me or is your memory slow.... you know that if you have slow
memory your CPU probably is running on lower speeds then it can run.
I'm sure your AMD 2600 should be able to run at 166Mhz FSB... if you
just had the memory to support that.

Very probably it's your slow memory!
  #4  
Old December 21st 03, 07:22 PM
cowboyz
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Dark Avenger wrote:
"Scooter" wrote in message
...
For the first time I have run this benchmark tool. Its the first
benchmark I have ever done and I find my score really low compared
to others on the web (almost 9000 points). I am getting 15568points
and my system is as follows.

Computer
Operating System Microsoft Windows XP Home Edition
OS Service Pack Service Pack 1

Motherboard
CPU Type AMD Athlon XP, 2100 MHz (6.25 x 336) 2600+
Motherboard Name MSI KT4V (MS-6712) (6 PCI, 1 AGP, 3 DIMM, Audio)
Motherboard Chipset VIA VT8377 Apollo KT400
System Memory 1024 MB (DDR SDRAM)
BIOS Type AMI (02/11/03)

Display
Video Adapter NVIDIA GeForce4 Ti 4200 (128 MB)
3D Accelerator nVIDIA GeForce4 Ti 4200
Monitor Samsung SyncMaster 950p(T) (H2JK903118)
Same score using 52.16, 53.03drivers
all video settings at defaults
Direct X 9b

Multimedia
Audio Adapter Creative SB Live! Sound Card

Partitions
C: (FAT32) 150282 MB (136228 MB free)
G: (FAT32) 39987 MB (12857 MB free)
H: (FAT32) 36333 MB (4381 MB free)

I also notice My CPU doesnt score as much either.


Is it me or is your memory slow.... you know that if you have slow
memory your CPU probably is running on lower speeds then it can run.
I'm sure your AMD 2600 should be able to run at 166Mhz FSB... if you
just had the memory to support that.

Very probably it's your slow memory!


What makes you think his memory is slow? I must be missing something your
not. His front side is at 333 so without any info on ram speed (which I
can't see above) one would assume his ram is at 333 or even 400 considering
he has a KT400 board sitting under it.


  #5  
Old December 21st 03, 09:19 PM
Scooter
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

What makes you think his memory is slow? I must be missing something your
not. His front side is at 333 so without any info on ram speed (which I
can't see above) one would assume his ram is at 333 or even 400

considering
he has a KT400 board sitting under it.

My Memory is running at 333


  #6  
Old December 21st 03, 10:09 PM
Dark Avenger
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

"cowboyz" wrote in message ...
Dark Avenger wrote:
"Scooter" wrote in message
...
For the first time I have run this benchmark tool. Its the first
benchmark I have ever done and I find my score really low compared
to others on the web (almost 9000 points). I am getting 15568points
and my system is as follows.

Computer
Operating System Microsoft Windows XP Home Edition
OS Service Pack Service Pack 1

Motherboard
CPU Type AMD Athlon XP, 2100 MHz (6.25 x 336) 2600+
Motherboard Name MSI KT4V (MS-6712) (6 PCI, 1 AGP, 3 DIMM, Audio)
Motherboard Chipset VIA VT8377 Apollo KT400
System Memory 1024 MB (DDR SDRAM)
BIOS Type AMI (02/11/03)

Display
Video Adapter NVIDIA GeForce4 Ti 4200 (128 MB)
3D Accelerator nVIDIA GeForce4 Ti 4200
Monitor Samsung SyncMaster 950p(T) (H2JK903118)
Same score using 52.16, 53.03drivers
all video settings at defaults
Direct X 9b

Multimedia
Audio Adapter Creative SB Live! Sound Card

Partitions
C: (FAT32) 150282 MB (136228 MB free)
G: (FAT32) 39987 MB (12857 MB free)
H: (FAT32) 36333 MB (4381 MB free)

I also notice My CPU doesnt score as much either.


Is it me or is your memory slow.... you know that if you have slow
memory your CPU probably is running on lower speeds then it can run.
I'm sure your AMD 2600 should be able to run at 166Mhz FSB... if you
just had the memory to support that.

Very probably it's your slow memory!


What makes you think his memory is slow? I must be missing something your
not. His front side is at 333 so without any info on ram speed (which I
can't see above) one would assume his ram is at 333 or even 400 considering
he has a KT400 board sitting under it.


action: me reads again.....

Mmm, it indeed seems i'm wrong on that one. it does run at atleast
333Mhz. So that won't be a bottleneck!
  #7  
Old December 22nd 03, 05:25 AM
Alpine
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Your scores are about in line (maybe just a bit lower) than a friend that
has a 2600+ running a Ti 4400. Problem is likely due to the fact that
Aquamark 3d uses a lot of DX9 instructions. Since your TI 4200 doesn't have
them built in to hardware, it has to run them in a software mode which
severely slows down the results. He switched out his TI 4400 for a 5600
Ultra and saw his scores go from around 17k to 22K. On DX8 stuff thought he
performance was nearly identical. I think to get high marks in Aquamark you
will need a card that has DX9 instructions built in to the hardware such as
an Nvidia FX series card or ATI 9600 series and up.

As a side note, my 2400 + running at 200x10.5 scores 38800 with my 128 MB
FX5900. Memory isn't going to make a bit of difference. Initially I was
running 512 MB of PC2100 RAM and when I put in my 1G of PC3200 RAM (removing
the PC2100 RAM) my scores didn't change a bit. I attributed it do to
Aquamark loading all of the textures in to memory at the start of each test
and not benchmarking how long it took to load them since it isn't a memory
benchmark. Now on PCMark 2002 my memory score went from around 3700 up to
5200.

--
================================================== ==========================
==================
Due to an excessive amount of spam, if you want to send me an e-mail put
eniplA in the subject if you want me to see it.
================================================== ==========================
==================


"Scooter" wrote in message
...
For the first time I have run this benchmark tool. Its the first benchmark

I
have ever done and I find my score really low compared to others on the

web
(almost 9000 points). I am getting 15568points and my system is as

follows.

Computer
Operating System Microsoft Windows XP Home Edition
OS Service Pack Service Pack 1

Motherboard
CPU Type AMD Athlon XP, 2100 MHz (6.25 x 336) 2600+
Motherboard Name MSI KT4V (MS-6712) (6 PCI, 1 AGP, 3 DIMM, Audio)
Motherboard Chipset VIA VT8377 Apollo KT400
System Memory 1024 MB (DDR SDRAM)
BIOS Type AMI (02/11/03)

Display
Video Adapter NVIDIA GeForce4 Ti 4200 (128 MB)
3D Accelerator nVIDIA GeForce4 Ti 4200
Monitor Samsung SyncMaster 950p(T) (H2JK903118)
Same score using 52.16, 53.03drivers
all video settings at defaults
Direct X 9b

Multimedia
Audio Adapter Creative SB Live! Sound Card

Partitions
C: (FAT32) 150282 MB (136228 MB free)
G: (FAT32) 39987 MB (12857 MB free)
H: (FAT32) 36333 MB (4381 MB free)

I also notice My CPU doesnt score as much either.






  #8  
Old December 22nd 03, 10:22 PM
Scooter
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"Alpine" wrote in message
news:[email protected]
Your scores are about in line (maybe just a bit lower) than a friend that
has a 2600+ running a Ti 4400. Problem is likely due to the fact that
Aquamark 3d uses a lot of DX9 instructions. Since your TI 4200 doesn't

have
them built in to hardware, it has to run them in a software mode which
severely slows down the results. He switched out his TI 4400 for a 5600
Ultra and saw his scores go from around 17k to 22K. On DX8 stuff thought

he
performance was nearly identical. I think to get high marks in Aquamark

you
will need a card that has DX9 instructions built in to the hardware such

as
an Nvidia FX series card or ATI 9600 series and up.

As a side note, my 2400 + running at 200x10.5 scores 38800 with my 128 MB
FX5900. Memory isn't going to make a bit of difference. Initially I was
running 512 MB of PC2100 RAM and when I put in my 1G of PC3200 RAM

(removing
the PC2100 RAM) my scores didn't change a bit. I attributed it do to
Aquamark loading all of the textures in to memory at the start of each

test
and not benchmarking how long it took to load them since it isn't a memory
benchmark. Now on PCMark 2002 my memory score went from around 3700 up to
5200.

Thanks for that. I just wanted to make sure there wasnt any seriuos
problems. I am looking to get a new cheap card (prob 5900XT) just making
sure everything else is ok.


 




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
9600XT: how's this 3DMark score? LRW Ati Videocards 7 January 22nd 04 08:24 AM
Aquamark score for FX5200 Stan Linder Nvidia Videocards 17 September 21st 03 05:44 PM
My system with a 5900 vs another's with an ATI 9800 (Aquamark scores) not me Nvidia Videocards 24 September 18th 03 04:05 AM
Aquamark score so far... not me Nvidia Videocards 4 September 16th 03 05:28 AM
Good or Bad Score Dragon Nvidia Videocards 7 September 10th 03 08:15 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 05:32 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2022, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2004-2022 HardwareBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.