3D Mark went down on OC

T

TFM

Gawd
Joined
Dec 9, 2003
Messages
724
First, here's my system:

E6700 w/stock HS/F
Abit IP35 Pro
2x1 GB Crucial Ballistix Tracers DDR2-800
x1800 Crossfire Card
Maxtor PATA 160gb HD
Tagan GuardianX 1000w PSU
CoolerMaster Mystique Case
The case has one intake 120mm on the front, 1 exhaust 120mm on the back, 1 80mm intake blowing onto the CPU HS/F on the side. Case has good airflow.


I was a little disappointed with my 3DMark 06 score of 4910 when i built this system. I didn't know exactly what to expect, but i did expect more than that. So if figured i'd try a little OC to see if i couldn't get it at least over 5k.

I followed the great guide that is stickied above as i am a complete newbie to overclocking and this is my first attempt. I tried bumping the FSB up to 333 to give a 10x333 multiplier (hope i'm getting the jargon right), and it posted but wouldn't go into windows. So i bumped it down to a modest 300 to give a 10x300 and figured 3.0ghz would be a nice mild overclock for my system.

The RAM is set at a 1:1 ratio. I set the RAM timings at 5-5-5-15 and ran prime 95 for a couple of hours and it worked great. So i put the RAM timings at 4-4-4-12 and ran Prime 95 blend test last night for about 6 hours and it worked great. So i decided that i had a good and stable overclock - so i decided it was time to benchmark again as surely, i was much closer to the 5k mark.

Instead - it came up with 4859 - a drop of 60 points. Needless to say, i'm very disappointed now. Am i doing something wrong? Should the RAM not be set to 1:1 as i think that dropped the speed of the RAM a little from the default the motherboard put it at?

Thanks guys,
Chris
 
Well did you record what your cpu score was before you overclock it? What you need to do is go back to stock settings and record all the scores then overclock again and see if the cpu is actually losing points... I think you're getting about the right score with that video card.
 
Look online to see what 3DMark your PC should get.
It would help us if you give us the results.

Matching the memory speed 1:1 may not give you better performance as you are now running the memory as DDR2-600 with a 300MHz bus.
Why not overclock the memory too and compare the difference with your 1:1 clock?

If you are very disappointed you will want a better graphic card.
 
Thanks for the replies guys

I upped the memory to a 1:1.25 ratio which yielded a 750mzh on the RAM (the next option in the BIOS would have pushed it to 900, beyond the 800 it's rated for)

I re-ran 3dMark06 and this time had 4872

Here are the results: (at least what i think you're wanting)

Main Test Results
3DMark Score 4872 3DMarks
SM 2.0 Score 1868 Marks
SM 3.0 Score 1852 Marks
CPU Score 2674 Marks

Detailed Test Results

Graphics Tests
1 - Return to Proxycon 14.349 FPS
2 - Firefly Forest 16.787 FPS

CPU Tests
CPU1 - Red Valley 0.846 FPS
CPU2 - Red Valley 1.353 FPS

HDR Tests
1 - Canyon Flight (SM 3.0) 18.452 FPS
2 - Deep Freeze (SM 3.0) 18.584 FPS


I'll put everything back to stock and run it one more time, as i didn't save it when i ran it the other day before i started tweaking.

More coming - thanks!
 
Wow - well - i put things back to stock - and here's what i came up with:

Main Test Results
3DMark Score 4792 3DMarks
SM 2.0 Score 1848 Marks
SM 3.0 Score 1850 Marks
CPU Score 2422 Marks

Detailed Test Results

Graphics Tests
1 - Return to Proxycon 14.242 FPS
2 - Firefly Forest 16.553 FPS

CPU Tests
CPU1 - Red Valley 0.765 FPS
CPU2 - Red Valley 1.227 FPS

HDR Tests
1 - Canyon Flight (SM 3.0) 18.439 FPS
2 - Deep Freeze (SM 3.0) 18.555 FPS



It actually dropped a significant amount. How in the world did i get 4910 (wish i would have saved those results now) before? Was it just luck?

Well - i can clearly see that this machine won't be breaking 5k until i do something about the video card - which considering how much money i just spent to put this together, that upgrade is a way off - but it should hold its own until them.

Thanks guys - i'm still confused though on how my score went from 4910 to 4792 - but time to go back and re-set the OCs.
 
TFM said:
. I tried bumping the FSB up to 333 to give a 10x333 multiplier (hope i'm getting the jargon right), and it posted but wouldn't go into windows. So i bumped it down to a modest 300 to give a 10x300 and figured 3.0ghz would be a nice mild overclock for my system.


Chris
Click to expand...


Correct me if I'm wrong, you can look it up to be certain, but doesn't the E6600 have a locked multiplier at 9? I don't think you can get a multiplier of 10 with that CPU. Anyway, you should verify because you might not be getting quite the OC you think.
 
Scores vary a bit in any benchmark, the difference you got from 4910 to 4792 equates to a 2.5% difference.
A lower score might be the result of your PC doing something in the background while running the test.
The difference isnt significant enough to be worth investigating.
 
Johnny78 said:
Correct me if I'm wrong, you can look it up to be certain, but doesn't the E6600 have a locked multiplier at 9? I don't think you can get a multiplier of 10 with that CPU. Anyway, you should verify because you might not be getting quite the OC you think.
Click to expand...


You are correct. The problem is that i'm actually running an E6700 (i just changed it). I originally was going to buy the 6600, but got a good deal on a 6700 - but in my head i still bought a 6600. Sorry about the confusion.

Thanks guys!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top