Anyone else seen had this problem in 3dmark06?

P

PhxGuy520

Weaksauce
Joined
Feb 13, 2006
Messages
64
Last night I downloaded 3dmark06. I have never used this program, but I just made some upgrades to my machine and wanted to get a benchmark.

The programs seems to be doing its thing, but when I get to the CPU test I get 0 fps and it just seems to completly bog down. I dont seem to have any symptoms of a bad CPU. I can play BF2 and dont get any general errors when using my computer. I have never had a CPU go bad on me before, but I would guess it would be more obvious then this. Any thoughts?

System Specs

2GB OCZ plat. DDR Ram
Intel P4 3.0
6800GT AGP Video Card
500W Power Supply
 
Thats totally normal. Most people get an average on the CPU tests around 5 or less. Mine tends to be about 2-3 FPS.
 
no it doesnt ^^

3dmark06 is capped at 2fps, and even people with dual dualcore opterons arent getting that full 2 fps yet in both tests. maybe you get .3 to .4
 
^^ true.dat

Even my dual core A64 @ 2.55GHz only gets 0.938 fps in the second test and 0.585 fps in the first test.

The highest CPU score in the ORB is 3824 and that is with 1.844 fps in the second test and 1.269 fps in the first test using 2 Opteron 275 CPUs (4 cores total).

No one is getting 2-3 fps in those CPU tests. :p
 
Wow good to know my CPU may not be F*&#ed. It took forever to download and I didn't have a whole lot of time to mess with it last night. So when I stopped get any frames at all for about 30 seconds I aborted the test (which is really right off the bad I get 0 fps). It does not seem me like my computer is freezing up it just seemed like to could not handle the load.

So are you guys sees 0 fps, and the screen not changing for 30+ seconds? I should just leave it alone and let it try to finish.

Also this may explain my other concern. During the video test my FPS topping out at like 12 fps, which I thought was really bad considering I get anywhere from 30 - 80 during BF2. Is that "normal" as well for 3dmark?

This site is awesome. I actually get people who answer me! :)
 
PhxGuy520 said:
So are you guys sees 0 fps, and the screen not changing for 30+ seconds? I should just leave it alone and let it try to finish.

Also this may explain my other concern. During the video test my FPS topping out at like 12 fps, which I thought was really bad considering I get anywhere from 30 - 80 during BF2. Is that "normal" as well for 3dmark?
Click to expand...


Yeh my Opteron 165 at 2.8 will only do 0-1 on the harder CPU test. However, in the space of 30 seconds the screen does change way more times than once.

At this point Phx you should post you specs, put them in your signature :)
 
Thanks for the reply. They are posted in my orginal thread, but I also just added them to my sig.

I have my girl at home running the 3dmark test again. She is gonna call me when it finishes.

But yes it would basically load the CPU test and then not really refresh the screen for 30 seconds. I would also abort it after about 15 seconds becuase I thought something was messed up.
 
You're fine :). That p4 is gonna get a horrible CPU score in 3dmark, im seeing 400 max for the cpu score, maybe less.

Dont worry, your system is fine, 3dmark is intended to stress the latest and greatest
 
On a side note, you should score about 2400-2500 as a total with that specout
 
Ok my girl called me and told me it finished and I scored 2212. :rolleyes: She said the CPU was 654. From what I have read that CPU score is pretty bad. Is a P4 3.0 that outdated?

Oh well I never needed the best machine, just wanted to make sure my machine was not under performing for some reason.
 
The cpu tests in 06 make use of the Ageia PhysX libraries, so expect scores to jump quite insanely when PhysX ppu's first hit.
 
jbrukardt said:
You're fine :). That p4 is gonna get a horrible CPU score in 3dmark, im seeing 400 max for the cpu score, maybe less.

Dont worry, your system is fine, 3dmark is intended to stress the latest and greatest
Click to expand...

Well, considering my 3 GHz Pentium 4 got 889 for the CPU score, somebody's wrong... :rolleyes:

Take a look:
http://service.futuremark.com/compare?3dm06=108565

I can see maybe getting 400 if you're running like a 2.1 GHz Celeron D, but really... the P4 is not a horrible processor. It's not a A64 FX-60, but it's performance is at least as good as something like a 3200+.
 
I dunno, I got a 717 CPUmark on my laptop which has a 3.4 Ghz P4, but it's an older one with 512K L2 cache and based on 0.13 micron technology... pretty outdated. :p

I bet the newer ones with 1-2MB L2 cache based on 65-90nm tech score better.

Which do you have PWMK2?
 
PhxGuy520 said:
Wow good to know my CPU may not be F*&#ed. It took forever to download and I didn't have a whole lot of time to mess with it last night. So when I stopped get any frames at all for about 30 seconds I aborted the test (which is really right off the bad I get 0 fps). It does not seem me like my computer is freezing up it just seemed like to could not handle the load.

So are you guys sees 0 fps, and the screen not changing for 30+ seconds? I should just leave it alone and let it try to finish.

Also this may explain my other concern. During the video test my FPS topping out at like 12 fps, which I thought was really bad considering I get anywhere from 30 - 80 during BF2. Is that "normal" as well for 3dmark?

This site is awesome. I actually get people who answer me! :)
Click to expand...

My Opty 175 gets up to 2 FPS a few times but mostly stays below 1 fps, but I do actually see action, slide show action...but it's there none the less. I think your cpu score is ok, but a dual core really make a difference, even at stock speed:

cat6.2.jpg


The CPU score is video card dependant though,...strange as it sounds. With the 6800 GT I was running, the CPU score was1986, higher than it is with my X1900XTX (yes,the total 3dmark was still low 2520ish).
 
vexeus said:
I dunno, I got a 717 CPUmark on my laptop which has a 3.4 Ghz P4, but it's an older one with 512K L2 cache and based on 0.13 micron technology... pretty outdated. :p

I bet the newer ones with 1-2MB L2 cache based on 65-90nm tech score better.

Which do you have PWMK2?
Click to expand...
i got 663 on my athlon xp 2400. i guess my cpu isnt as bad as i thought. i got a total score of 1102 with my 6600 @340/590. :(
 
vexeus said:
I dunno, I got a 717 CPUmark on my laptop which has a 3.4 Ghz P4, but it's an older one with 512K L2 cache and based on 0.13 micron technology... pretty outdated. :p

I bet the newer ones with 1-2MB L2 cache based on 65-90nm tech score better.

Which do you have PWMK2?
Click to expand...

Yeah, I have a Prescott w/ a 1MB L2 cache. That might have influenced things a bit...
 
Would anybody like to tell me if my score is on average or not? :p

Specs:

-AMD Athlon 2600+ XP
-1GB (2x512MB) Kingston HyperX DDR400 PC3200 RAM
-BFG 6800GS OC AGP

I scored 1992 total, forgot the other scores but I'll retake tomorrow.
 
SLiGuy said:
Would anybody like to tell me if my score is on average or not? :p

Specs:

-AMD Athlon 2600+ XP
-1GB (2x512MB) Kingston HyperX DDR400 PC3200 RAM
-BFG 6800GS OC AGP

I scored 1992 total, forgot the other scores but I'll retake tomorrow.
Click to expand...

That score seems about right. :)
 
vanilla_guerilla said:
i get 2157 with my crappy 3800 x2. i guess that rule about "opteron is better/ 1mb l2" is just a legend. or maybe its "just 3dmark. doesnt mean anything"

http://service.futuremark.com/compare?3dm06=13816
Click to expand...

I dont know, video card effects cpu score as well as overclocking, I am not overclocked at all, you are (but I have the option to go up IF I want.)
 
You know, a CPU score of 2157 is not crappy, nor is the 3800+ X2. It's just not crazy like an Opteron, or an FX-60.

The CPU scores and GPU scores aren't supposed to be the same. Your GPU score is usually a good bit higher than your CPU...
 
SLiGuy said:
Would anybody like to tell me if my score is on average or not? :p

Specs:

-AMD Athlon 2600+ XP
-1GB (2x512MB) Kingston HyperX DDR400 PC3200 RAM
-BFG 6800GS OC AGP

I scored 1992 total, forgot the other scores but I'll retake tomorrow.
Click to expand...

I scored in the low 2000's and i have the same exact card as you. :) In fact you recommended it for me. That score seems on par.
 
PWMK2 said:
Well, considering my 3 GHz Pentium 4 got 889 for the CPU score, somebody's wrong... :rolleyes:

Take a look:
http://service.futuremark.com/compare?3dm06=108565

I can see maybe getting 400 if you're running like a 2.1 GHz Celeron D, but really... the P4 is not a horrible processor. It's not a A64 FX-60, but it's performance is at least as good as something like a 3200+.
Click to expand...

A 3.0 ghz P4 is more comparable to a Athlon 64 2800+ in gaming.
 
m3ta1head said:
My Opteron 148 @ 2.8 did 1800 on the cpu test.
Click to expand...

That got to me one special opty then. My old opteron 148 at 3080 only scored near 1200...most benchmarks out there with the fx-57 (2400Mhz) score in the 1050s...My opteron 170 dual core at 2900 score 2150+...so for a single core 148 to score that high, got to be special....
got any screens to back it up?

Here are mine:
Opteron 148 CABNE core at 3092Mhz
Opteron 170 dual core at 2903Mhz
 
magnuspah said:
That got to me one special opty then. My old opteron 148 at 3080 only scored near 1200...most benchmarks out there with the fx-60 (2600Mhz) score in the 1050s...My opteron 170 dual core at 2900 score 2150+...so for a single core 148 to score that high, got to be special....
got any screens to back it up?
Click to expand...
I find it hard to believe that an FX-60 would only get a 1050 in the proc test in 3dmark06. My X2-4800+ stock speed gets a 1800 proc score. I just reran a new test this morning before work and I scored a 5316. I dont really know how good of a score that is but my system is all stock. I havent done any overclocking to it. Specs are in the sig.
 
Oops sorry, meant the fx-57...Fx-60 is dual core and so is taken advantaged by the 3dmark06 version...
Was comparing his single core to other single cores...in 3dmark06, the single cores get slammed...
 
magnuspah said:
Oops sorry, meant the fx-57...Fx-60 is dual core and so is taken advantaged by the 3dmark06 version...
Was comparing his single core to other single cores...in 3dmark06, the single cores get slammed...
Click to expand...

It's not so much that they get slammed, but that the dual-core CPUs are used to their full potential.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top