3dmark2001 Woes -- Why am I slow? (9800xt / A64 3200+)

bnason

n00b
Joined
Jan 26, 2004
Messages
44
Hi All,

I can't top 21000 in 3dmark2001. I've boosted my 9800xt to 432/756, but my CPU is running at stock. Memory timings are set std for my memory (Corsair PC-3200 Low Latency - 2-3-2-6). Bios settings are pretty standard (128mb AGP Ap, Memlocked for DDR400). I haven't really tweaked anything else. Any thoughts?


20725
http://service.futuremark.com/servlet/Index?pageid=/orb/projectmanager

Operating System Microsoft Windows XP

DirectX Version 9.0



Mobo Manufacturer ASUSTeK Computer Inc.

Mobo Model K8V

AGP Rates (Current/Available) 8x / 8x



CPU Unknown (AMD 64 3200+ 2014 MHz

FSB 200 MHz

Memory 1024 MB



Graphics Chipset ASUS ATI RADEON 9800 XT

Driver Name RADEON 9800 XT

Driver Version 6.14.10.6414

Video Memory 256 MB



Program Version 3DMark2001 SE

Resolution 1024x768 32bit

Texture Format Compressed

FSAA Disabled

Z-Buffer Depth 24bit

Frame Buffer Double

Rendering Pipeline D3D Pure Hardware T&L
 

Spidey329

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Dec 15, 2003
Messages
8,683
Slow? Be happy. That's not bad.

My 3.4ghz Pentium4 w/ a 9800XT gets only 19.6k in 3dM2k1.
 

OrionNT

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Apr 14, 2002
Messages
1,342
Originally posted by Spidey329
Slow? Be happy. That's not bad.
Yep, sounds about right to me. If thats not enough, oc the hell out of your cpu. Is 432mhz really your max core, because my 9800pro easly does 460mhz.
 

dylman

Limp Gawd
Joined
May 18, 2002
Messages
338
3DMark2001 is an antiquated synthetic benchmark with absolutely no relevance to modern PCs or gaming.
Spend more time enjoying your kick ass PC and less time worrying about pointless numbers, is my advice. :)
 

cornelious0_0

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Apr 6, 2003
Messages
12,783
Originally posted by dylman
3DMark2001 is an antiquated synthetic benchmark with absolutely no relevance to modern PCs or gaming.
Spend more time enjoying your kick ass PC and less time worrying about pointless numbers, is my advice. :)
but it can still be used be a person to compare system/video performance after an upgrade to see just what they gained. I don't give Futuremark a lot of creditibity nowadays but I still use 3dmark2001 for artifact/OC testing from time to time.

Is 432mhz really your max core, because my 9800pro easly does 460mhz.
Then you're fairly lucky. That, and I think my 9800XT just isn't that much of an overclocker. I just got my Vantec Fancard and I'm able to do 430/800 with little intake coming in the front of the case and no fan blowing any outside air onto the card, just the vantec recycling warm air onto the XT. I wish my card was a better overclocker but it'd be mostly just for show.....as you don't gain any NOTICEABLE fps increases (from video card overcloking) with a high end system/video card like a lot of us have today. Sure it makes a difference, but it's still MOSTLY just for show. :cool:
 

bnason

n00b
Joined
Jan 26, 2004
Messages
44
No sh*t. I didn't realize that oc'ing the VC wouldn't do anything for system performance. Anyway, ya' that's where mine topped out. I'm using the Asus SmartDoctor utility to boost up those settings.

Also - If I'm not mistaken, the 64/3200+ doesn't OC well. Hell... I tried just turning on the "Turbo" setting on my Asus K8V bios, and Windows wouldn't even boot! :p
 

MLF

Limp Gawd
Joined
Aug 25, 2001
Messages
208
I also tried the turbo setting on my k8v and it did not boot.
However when overclocking my 3000+ is running stable at 2400mhz. I think the turbo is broken
 

bnason

n00b
Joined
Jan 26, 2004
Messages
44
Who knows :p There's no documentation in the manual.

2400? Nice... what kind of HSF do you have? My CPU is idling at 40C with the stock HSF.
 

MLF

Limp Gawd
Joined
Aug 25, 2001
Messages
208
bnason It is the same Zalman you see in my system specs at the bottom of each post.
 

sKiTz0

Gawd
Joined
Apr 19, 2003
Messages
613
sounds about right. Overclocking the processor will help alot. Windows 2000 and DX 8.1 will get you some minimum gains. Id use 2000 either way, but thats just me.
 

cornelious0_0

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Apr 6, 2003
Messages
12,783
Originally posted by sKiTz0
sounds about right. Overclocking the processor will help alot. Windows 2000 and DX 8.1 will get you some minimum gains. Id use 2000 either way, but thats just me.
Weirdo. :rolleyes: ;)
 

cornelious0_0

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Apr 6, 2003
Messages
12,783
Originally posted by (S)lave
hmmmmm........could it be the fact you are running a 256MB Card at 128mb?
And where does it say that??? All I see if this:

Graphics Chipset ASUS ATI RADEON 9800 XT

Driver Name RADEON 9800 XT

Driver Version 6.14.10.6414

Video Memory 256 MB

Maybe I'm missing something but who knows. Even if the card WAS a 128MB you wouldn't be hurting your score.....I'd like to see someone explain how 3dmark2001 at stock settings uses more then 128MB of ram. ;) :p
 

topslop1

2[H]4U
Joined
Apr 15, 2002
Messages
3,185
cornelious what are you getting for 3dmark01 scores? And why did you go with the ocz 4000 ram as opposed to say mushkin 3500 with bh-5 chips in it? Wouldn't the timings be better?
 

isp

2[H]4U
Joined
Mar 15, 2002
Messages
3,061
Originally posted by Spidey329
Slow? Be happy. That's not bad.

My 3.4ghz Pentium4 w/ a 9800XT gets only 19.6k in 3dM2k1.
I guess you can be happy that my 5900u w/ a 2.4 at 3.3 beats you by about 500 points :(
 

bnason

n00b
Joined
Jan 26, 2004
Messages
44
Well, from everything I've read, the AGP Aperture size in the BIOS should never be set above 128, even if the vid. card has 256MB of ram (as mine does)... ???
 

cornelious0_0

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Apr 6, 2003
Messages
12,783
Originally posted by merlin704
Just goes to show the 9800XT and Athlon64 isnt all that.....J/K ;):D

Here is my 3DMark score with the PC in my sig.

http://service.futuremark.com/compare?2k1=7467438
Not to bash you or anything but I would expect much more then that out of a 3.8GHz setup.....

Even at 3.25GHz with some Corsair PC3200 running at stock speeds and my 9800XT (430/800) I'm able to pull off 20,457. I'd be curious to see what's being done differently so that you're only gaining 600 points over my score with a CPU clocked 600MHz faster and you ram also clocked up higher to boot. Please.....do tell.

I also don't understand the memory clock in your sig. It says P4 3.2C @ 3.8GHz but the ram is listed as 235MHz. To hit 3.8GHz with that chip you'd have to be at at least 238FSB. Using that bus speed you have two options. You can use the 5:4 dividor to clock to ram at 380MHz DDR.....or the 3:2 dividor to clock it at 317MHz DDR. You can see where I'm confused, I'm not sure how that 235MHz comes into play at all. It definitely isn't 235MHz x 2 'cus theirs no way in hell your PC2700 is running at 470MHz DDR.....that would put it at 117MHz x 2.........which is far to low in accordance to what your CPU is listed at.

I know I'm going way off track here but I tend to get concerned when people are having issues with their systems and this is something that isn't making any sense, both the score AND your sig. ;) :cool:

LMK
 

merlin704

The Great Procrastinator
Joined
Oct 4, 2001
Messages
11,910
Originally posted by cornelious0_0
Not to bash you or anything but I would expect much more then that out of a 3.8GHz setup.....

Even at 3.25GHz with some Corsair PC3200 running at stock speeds and my 9800XT (430/800) I'm able to pull off 20,457. I'd be curious to see what's being done differently so that you're only gaining 600 points over my score with a CPU clocked 600MHz faster and you ram also clocked up higher to boot. Please.....do tell.

I also don't understand the memory clock in your sig. It says P4 3.2C @ 3.8GHz but the ram is listed as 235MHz. To hit 3.8GHz with that chip you'd have to be at at least 238FSB. Using that bus speed you have two options. You can use the 5:4 dividor to clock to ram at 380MHz DDR.....or the 3:2 dividor to clock it at 317MHz DDR. You can see where I'm confused, I'm not sure how that 235MHz comes into play at all. It definitely isn't 235MHz x 2 'cus theirs no way in hell your PC2700 is running at 470MHz DDR.....that would put it at 117MHz x 2.........which is far to low in accordance to what your CPU is listed at.

I know I'm going way off track here but I tend to get concerned when people are having issues with their systems and this is something that isn't making any sense, both the score AND your sig. ;) :cool:

LMK
Actually I have the RAM at 236 and CPU-Z reads the CPU as 3.8 and so does my BIOS.

Now just to let you know, my RAM is PC2700 and it is running at 236Mhz with timings of 2-3-3-7 with a 1:1 ratio. And just to prove it to you, I will download Sisoft and post screens.
 

cornelious0_0

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Apr 6, 2003
Messages
12,783
Originally posted by merlin704
Actually I have the RAM at 236 and CPU-Z reads the CPU as 3.8 and so does my BIOS.

Now just to let you know, my RAM is PC2700 and it is running at 236Mhz with timings of 2-3-3-7 with a 1:1 ratio. And just to prove it to you, I will download Sisoft and post screens.
K, I never said you were lying or anything, I was just curious is all. It's really quite funny how both sources are reading 3.8GHz when it's actually 3.776, usually it won't round up THAT much. ;)

I'd actually like to see those pics if you dont mind. Again, I'm not calling you a lier but 236 @ 1:1 with PC2700 is even more insane then my PC2100 hitting 394MHz DDR and now I wanna see. :)

Still, if your ram is actually clocked at 472MHz DDR there's no way in hell you should be scoring that low. You'd think that a 600MHz boost on the CPU and a 72MHz boost on the ram would account for a little more then the 600 point lead you've got on me.....I'd expect 22k for sure.

Maybe I'm just crazy but it seems weird.
 

CaNNoN

Gawd
Joined
Dec 3, 2003
Messages
711
thats not bad. for an athlon 64 , and an XT your about right. i had an athlon 2500+ Oced at 2.4 ghz and my XT and i only hit 19k.
that was with OC on the video card too.

now with my P4 2.4c @ 3.6ghz and my XT at 460/810 i get 7300 mdmark 03 and 2490 2001 SE

athlon XP just dont measure up to a P4 overclocked.

just remember, even if you dont break 21000 be happy and have fun, you rig is still macho [H]ardcore pimp style!!

C
 

merlin704

The Great Procrastinator
Joined
Oct 4, 2001
Messages
11,910
Originally posted by cornelious0_0
K, I never said you were lying or anything, I was just curious is all. It's really quite funny how both sources are reading 3.8GHz when it's actually 3.776, usually it won't round up THAT much. ;)

I'd actually like to see those pics if you dont mind. Again, I'm not calling you a lier but 236 @ 1:1 with PC2700 is even more insane then my PC2100 hitting 394MHz DDR and now I wanna see. :)

Still, if your ram is actually clocked at 472MHz DDR there's no way in hell you should be scoring that low. You'd think that a 600MHz boost on the CPU and a 72MHz boost on the ram would account for a little more then the 600 point lead you've got on me.....I'd expect 22k for sure.

Maybe I'm just crazy but it seems weird.
See for yourself.

http://www.hardforum.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=725786
 

cornelious0_0

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Apr 6, 2003
Messages
12,783
Originally posted by IoWnZa
Set your Aperature size at 64 and see what happen's.

/IoWnZa
You guys do realise that changing the AGP aperature for 3dmark is going to do nothing for you right? You can think of the aperature as a kind of pagefile for your video card. 3dmark2001 (or 03 for that matter) is far from using up all the memory available on most of todays video cards.....especially on something like my beast of a 9800XT (and yours ;) ).

I have a stupid habbit of just setting the aperature to the same size of my video card ram but it really doesn't matter, 'cus you're not gonna end up needing it with today games anyways.

Just set it and forget it.

Your score is about right for a 3200+/9800XT.....people shouldn't always expect the world of their hardware, you just get let down harder. Stop worrying, it's fine.....just enjoy your rig. :cool:
 

IoWnZa

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Feb 7, 2001
Messages
10,203
Originally posted by cornelious0_0
You guys do realise that changing the AGP aperature for 3dmark is going to do nothing for you right? You can think of the aperature as a kind of pagefile for your video card. 3dmark2001 (or 03 for that matter) is far from using up all the memory available on most of todays video cards.....especially on something like my beast of a 9800XT (and yours ;) ).

I have a stupid habbit of just setting the aperature to the same size of my video card ram but it really doesn't matter, 'cus you're not gonna end up needing it with today games anyways.

Just set it and forget it.

Your score is about right for a 3200+/9800XT.....people shouldn't always expect the world of their hardware, you just get let down harder. Stop worrying, it's fine.....just enjoy your rig. :cool:
I never benchmark my System's, I just install them and go. but you're Aperture Size should be 64mb. There was a Thread a long time ago that we talked about it in. Anyways, that score is about right for his Setup. just have fun with it. I am getting my 3200+ in a few days and I can't wait.

/IoWnZa
 

Imp

Limp Gawd
Joined
Feb 6, 2004
Messages
190
256mb I heard is even lower in memory than 128...because nowadays nothing is on 256mb memory
 

cornelious0_0

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Apr 6, 2003
Messages
12,783
but you're Aperture Size should be 64mb.
But WHY is that? I guess I missed the thread or something then 'cus I've never heard it actually be factually proven that it's beneficial to have it one way or another for todays games/apps and your general day to day use.
 

IoWnZa

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Feb 7, 2001
Messages
10,203
Originally posted by cornelious0_0
But WHY is that? I guess I missed the thread or something then 'cus I've never heard it actually be factually proven that it's beneficial to have it one way or another for todays games/apps and your general day to day use.
Give it a shot, I am not sure, but that is what went down...

/IoWnZa
 

cornelious0_0

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Apr 6, 2003
Messages
12,783
Originally posted by IoWnZa
Give it a shot, I am not sure, but that is what went down...

/IoWnZa
aight, will do.....but I think I'll wait 'till the PC4000EL in my sig gets here so I'm not testing it out with my system running crippled. ;)
 

IoWnZa

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Feb 7, 2001
Messages
10,203
Originally posted by cornelious0_0
aight, will do.....but I think I'll wait 'till the PC4000EL in my sig gets here so I'm not testing it out with my system running crippled. ;)
only PC4000? that's a shame *point's to sig* ;)

/IoWnZa
 

cornelious0_0

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Apr 6, 2003
Messages
12,783
Originally posted by IoWnZa
Give it a shot, I am not sure, but that is what went down...

/IoWnZa
Hmm, what were you guys using to test when it was concluded that it should be at 64MB??? I just moved it from 256 down to 64 and I lost almost 100 points in 3dmark2001.

Let me know if your "theory" is wrong or if i should use something else to test.

only PC4000? that's a shame *point's to sig*
Yeah yeah, I know there's people with better, but this is gonna be a huge step forward for my system so I'm happy. One hell of a deal on this stuff too so yeah......
 

IoWnZa

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Feb 7, 2001
Messages
10,203
Originally posted by cornelious0_0
Hmm, what were you guys using to test when it was concluded that it should be at 64MB??? I just moved it from 256 down to 64 and I lost almost 100 points in 3dmark2001.

Let me know if your "theory" is wrong or if i should use something else to test.



Yeah yeah, I know there's people with better, but this is gonna be a huge step forward for my system so I'm happy. One hell of a deal on this stuff too so yeah......
Hmm, ya lost point's. I don't know, but everyone was saying that the lower the better, some ppl had their's set on 8mb..

Oh well, 256mb then, w/e flip's you're skirt :)

/IoWnZa
 

cornelious0_0

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Apr 6, 2003
Messages
12,783
Ha ha, very funny you guys.

You've gotta admit though, the $240 USD I laid down for this PC4000EL that's on the way is a pretty sick deal. 'Specially when I'm strapped for cash and only have X amount of dollars to work with.

I'll finally have my revenge this week. ;) 21k shall be mine. :D :cool:

22k If I'm lucky and this PC4000 turns out to be nicer then it sounds. ;)
 
Top