• Some users have recently had their accounts hijacked. It seems that the now defunct EVGA forums might have compromised your password there and seems many are using the same PW here. We would suggest you UPDATE YOUR PASSWORD and TURN ON 2FA for your account here to further secure it. None of the compromised accounts had 2FA turned on.
    Once you have enabled 2FA, your account will be updated soon to show a badge, letting other members know that you use 2FA to protect your account. This should be beneficial for everyone that uses FSFT.

6800GT, 3DMark2003 score baseline

CIWS said:
Shouldn't the Nvidia product score a little better in 3DMark 03 than the ATI ? I'm mean honestly one company had a some inside "help" with the benchmark and one did not. So the fact that under similar circumstances Nvidia is coming out ahead is no real suprise. Now how much ahead may be more a factor of Nvidia design and drivers. But the initial premise seems to be what one would expect.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure on that, but it's interesting. I beleive that the stock x800xt-pe scores higher the stock 6800Ultra in 3dmark03 but im not 100% sure on that either.
 
theelviscerator said:
at 260 fsb huh? so what is your point again..

all you boyz answer is my cpu is so fast the card just along for the ride..well thanks i guess...


(Doors Blown OFF!!!!)

sorry about your luck
Click to expand...


The combination of high cpu clock speed and more importantly , increased memory bandwidth has resulted in a very good score. I supect that if I clock to 3.9 I will achieve close to 14k
 
theelviscerator said:
12478 on a X800pro

http://service.futuremark.com/compare?2k3=2668858

seems the performance difference between cards is not so great as the fanboys want to admit....
Click to expand...
This thread was perfectly civil till you had to crap on it.
Very childish, while were being childish and talking of fanboys here's something i havent said since i was a kid:

"Takes one to know one"
or how bout:

"I know you are but what am I"

or an oldschool classic:

"Im rubber your glue, whatever you say bounces off me and sticks to you"

Someone needs to potty train the fanboys.

EDIT :If you dont think your CPU makes much of a difference, try clocking it back to stock for a quick run of 3dmark, im sure it wouldnt kill you but it might just kill your score :rolleyes:
One more:
"Put up or shut up"

Oh and ill be running some benchies of my GT this weekend (so long 9800 its been real)
 
theelviscerator said:
check this linky..

shows ati beating nvidia in far cry on AVERAGE at most websites doing testing...


http://www.rage3d.com/board/showthread.php?t=33768218


can we all just admit for once that both cards are great products with slight differences....
Click to expand...

I freely admit both are great cards. You just jumped in with a "check my shiznit out mines faster than yours" attitude, when this thread is mostly about NVIDIA 6800GT and not your ATI card. You only have a faster score with your X800 because of your extremely high FSB and cpu speed, which DO affect the scores more than you think. Please, don't be such an ass. We are all talking intelligently here, no flaming needed. And if you want to prove how badass your rig is, clock it down to about 3.1 to 3.4ghz and see your score drop alot. That will prove how much speed and fsb still affect 3DMark03.
 
Vermicious Knid said:
snip
Click to expand...

We also do not need other people making comments like that. It only adds to the problem. If you see a post that you feel is someone crapping on a thread then use this
report.gif
link in the lower left corner and report the post, don't come into the thread and post something that only adds gas into the fire.Bypass the comment and report it.
 
Maybe it's just me, but I"m so sick of hearing about Far Cry benchies and how ATI has the edge there, I mean, i just don't care about that game and Nvidia and ATI are for all intent and purposes tied if you weigh all the varioius viewpoints on what settings and in game qualities you want to judge as the most important--considering each cards strenghts (eg., AA/AF for ATI and PS3.0 optimization and HDR for nvidia).

Anyway, I guess It's a moot point since when DOOM3 comes out I'll be trumpeting my DOOM3 scores to all the world, lol--and I think I know how those will stack vs. our friends who have ATI cards. Oh ya, by then HL2 will be out and I'm really curious to see if ATI has a similar advantage now that Nvidia has got the ball rolling with their drivers (aren't we still waiting for a driver release with the 30% performance increase, or was that 61.71? See my driver thread).
 
I've got a 3.4 that will do 3.9/4.0 or so, and a 6800 GT arriving today.... I'll post some benches and he'll have to find a different thread to crap on.
 
With the SM3.0 patch, GT beats the pro on average in far cry. But this thread was not about FarCry it was about 3dmark :)
 
OH JOY OF JOYS! My evga 6800GT arrived finally :cool:

Running the memory at 1.1 produced some noticable glitches so i had to ease her back a few mhz :(

12460 with rig in sig, more then double what my 9800 got :eek:
http://service.futuremark.com/compare?2k3=2756932

im gonna rip it apart and apply some thermal grease insead of whatever that gum crap is they use, i have Arctic Silver 3 and Arctic Alumina would one of these be better then the other?
 
oozish said:
Moving from 'quality' to 'performance' netted me a 12645 from 12489 'Quality' settings in the driver tab.

Anyway, these GT's are pretty tough to beat. If you bought a x800...well, I'm just glad I went with Nvidia this time around.
Click to expand...

Anyone know what changing that setting actually does?
does it use lower quality textures or something?

oh and ditto on the NV lovin this round :)
 
tranCendenZ said:
With the SM3.0 patch, GT beats the pro on average in far cry. But this thread was not about FarCry it was about 3dmark :)
Click to expand...


Did the 1.1 patch include any of those SM improvements? Original install of FC for me was horribly slow and had tons of graphical glitches. I tried different drivers, settings, etc., it was crap.

After applying the 1.1 patch it ROCKS....



PS-my 3DMark03 score is up to 11565 points. Now consider I am only running my cpu and ram at 166fsb (333ddr) and "only" 2.3ghz on my Athlon-M. If I had better ram I could up the synchronous bus speeds quite a bit as my cpu easily runs at 210+ fsb...but I find I get better benches keeping the cpu in synch with my ram.

Sounds like I could use some good PC3500 ;)
 
Vermicious Knid said:
Anyone know what changing that setting actually does?
does it use lower quality textures or something?

oh and ditto on the NV lovin this round :)
Click to expand...

By default its like this:
High Quality - Full Trilinear filtering - Best quality
Quality - Brilinear filtering - Trilinear/Bilinear mix (similar to X800's "Trilinear") - Best quality/performance tradeoff
Performance - Bilinear filtering - highest performance
 
tranCendenZ said:
http://service.futuremark.com/compare?2k3=2747113

This is what I'm getting:
11236 - 61.36 whql
I have a P4 3.2ghz at stock speed with a 6800GT at stock speed (370/1000)
Click to expand...

hey tranCendenZ...I too am using the 61.36 drivers....have you tried the 61.71's? I read alot are having better speeds, but I wonder, is it better speed in GAMES, or just synthetic benches...

Anyone that has tried both please chime in....
 
I've tried them both, I just installed the same ones' transc. used for my last bench. BTW, my score wasn't all the way left to performance, but one click to the right from far left. Somewhere inbetween pure performance and quality. It looked just as good to me as quality, i could NOT tell the difference, except for higher framerates in game4.

I'm sticking with whql. I like stability, it rules out alot of hardware possible problems, especially when your testing things to the limit. So I'm sticking with these.
 
waiting for my BFG 6800 Ultra OC to arrive ..in the meantime ,thought I'd give you GT owners some more references from the other side ..lol .. I just ran 3dmark2k1 and '03 on my setup (first time in about a year I believe , lol) and got 24557 and 12093

setup:
A64 2800+ @ 2.51ghz @ 1.6v
1gig bh-5 pc3700
VisionTek X800pro @ 563/570

..6800 ultra should put up some nicer scores when it arrives.
 
ThreeDee said:
waiting for my BFG 6800 Ultra OC to arrive ..in the meantime ,thought I'd give you GT owners some more references from the other side ..lol .. I just ran 3dmark2k1 and '03 on my setup (first time in about a year I believe , lol) and got 24557 and 12093

setup:
A64 2800+ @ 2.51ghz @ 1.6v
1gig bh-5 pc3700
VisionTek X800pro @ 563/570

..6800 ultra should put up some nicer scores when it arrives.
Click to expand...

Great scores! :)
 
ThreeDee said:
waiting for my BFG 6800 Ultra OC to arrive ..in the meantime ,thought I'd give you GT owners some more references from the other side ..lol .. I just ran 3dmark2k1 and '03 on my setup (first time in about a year I believe , lol) and got 24557 and 12093

setup:
A64 2800+ @ 2.51ghz @ 1.6v
1gig bh-5 pc3700
VisionTek X800pro @ 563/570

..6800 ultra should put up some nicer scores when it arrives.
Click to expand...


Very nice, I wish I had that cpu.....the A64 won't fit a normal Socket A mobo?
 
theelviscerator said:
12478 on a X800pro
http://service.futuremark.com/compare?2k3=2668858
Click to expand...

Ok so I went to compare my 'race horse' against yours, how come it shows that you only ran 5 out of the 16 tests?

Changing the 'Image settings' setting from the default Quality to High Performance raised my marks from 12460 to 12530, think I'll leave it turned to quality for actual gaming, as the card has plenty of performance to spare :)
 
TheRapture said:
Very nice, I wish I had that cpu.....the A64 won't fit a normal Socket A mobo?
Click to expand...
thanks ...and no ..you need a socket 754 mobo
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top