Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Nazo said:BTW, mentok, if you'd like to put my card's clocks on there, they're 540 core, 590 memory. Don't know if you just didn't want to bother since I'm not overclocking or if it's just because you didn't know what stock for a X850XT-PE was. No big deal really. I plan to in the not so far future get better cooling and change those numbers anyway. ^_^
Nazo said:No real difference with 5.13 here. 6763 3DMark05. Heh, I got two more points on my previous score, yay. I'm guessing they fixed something or other that may be affecting you though. Most releases are a month or so apart, this one surprised me because I just found out that they had a 5.12 and installed it just the other day. Apparently it was just under two weeks for them to come out with 5.13.
Hmm, that reminds me. I was playing around with a utility called ATI Tray Tools (not to be confused with ATITool) and in the advanced tweaks I saw a second on multithreading. You might want to take a look at that, but, I see a warning attached that it's not considered 100% stable yet, so be careful if you do. Personally, I explicitely turned it off since I don't have HT or a dual core, but, I do wonder if it could actually help with systems that do.PWMK2 said:I don't know, they've been doing lots of dual-core optimizations lately and it in effect has been improving performance on hyperthreaded systems like mine as well. At least, I'd like to think so, because a 130-point jump in performance would otherwise be weird...
edit: Oh, BTW Mentok, I just noticed that 3DMark05 has been incorrectly displaying my core and memory as being stock speeds (540/587) the entire time when they're really 594/614. So you might want to update that.
what tweaks and stuff like that did you do?HeavyH20 said:Played a little more with my wife's PC:
6800 GS - XFX XXX Version - 6661
http://service.futuremark.com/compare?3dm05=1562293
hmmmm i think i can beat thatHeavyH20 said:Played a little more with my wife's PC:
6800 GS - XFX XXX Version - 6661
http://service.futuremark.com/compare?3dm05=1562293
54YW4T said:what tweaks and stuff like that did you do?
Er, what are we supposed to see? Sorry, I'm just not quite clear on what's extraordinary exactly. I'm guessing those model numbers aren't what they are supposed to be or something?aop said:http://koti.mbnet.fi/aop13/3dmark05_tulos.png
I can't publish my results because of my extraordinary CPU. Just look at the CPU-Z window and you will notice few strange things.
Since when did a 3000+ have a multiplier of 11?Nazo said:Er, what are we supposed to see? Sorry, I'm just not quite clear on what's extraordinary exactly. I'm guessing those model numbers aren't what they are supposed to be or something?
If he's the same person I read about a while ago... his CPU is detected with the 11x Multiplier and reads 3000+.Mr. K6 said:Since when did a 3000+ have a multiplier of 11?
What is it, an engineering sample?a messed up mobo? I'm interested
aop said:http://koti.mbnet.fi/aop13/3dmark05_tulos.png
I can't publish my results because of my extraordinary CPU. Just look at the CPU-Z window and you will notice few strange things.
Nazo said:Er, what are we supposed to see? Sorry, I'm just not quite clear on what's extraordinary exactly. I'm guessing those model numbers aren't what they are supposed to be or something?
It should. Generally you're supposed to use minimum quality settings for benchmarking. I mean, it's sometimes useful to benchmark with higher quality settings, but, for comparison's sake everyone needs to use the same thing.pancakes said:- In the control panel I put the quality to maximum up from the default. Would this affect my score alot?