• 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.

Doom 3 Benchmark Challenge Thread - What u got!?

B

Brian2k1

n00b
Joined
Oct 10, 2004
Messages
42
Tired of synthetic benchmarks with meaningless scores..Let's get some real world benchies in here.

Test must be performed at 1280x1024 High Quality Settings with stock driver profiles overclock all you want.

To perform the test:

Hit cntrl + alt + ~ to load console
then to start demo type: timedemo demo1

My result first

doom3.gif


Specs:

Athlon XP-M 2500 OC @ 2.51ghz
XFX 6600GT AGP Core 570mhz / Memory 1170mhz
NF7-S rev2 436 mhz FSB
1Gig Kingston HyperX TCCD 2-3-3-6 @ 218mhz
Nvidia 67.03 drivers
 
fps8jr.jpg


That is at only 400/1100.

I followed all the rules but I stetched the screenshot to make it easier to read.
 
You made me finally load up D3 on my new rig!!! Not sure if you are wanting first time through results or second.

1st pass 70fps (lots of hard drive activity for textures)
2nd pass 87fps

My specs (stock except for video card):

A64 3400+ NC @stock 2.4
2x512 Mushkin TCCD 2-2-2-10-1t @200MHz
eVGA 6800GT 400/1100
control panel set to application controlled AA/AF, High quality, Best Image Quality mipmaps
Doom3 1280x1024 High Quality
Drivers 67.03
 
wicked are running the game at 1280x1024 and high settings? Your score is really high.
 
Brian, that scores pretty high and are setup is pretty similar with the exception of my video card being a 6800 but you still get about 20 frames more than I do? Whats the dealeo? Does that overclock really help that much?
 
Odd, I thought X800 weren't that great at Doom yet Tet5uo has the highest score yet...
 
mentok1982 said:
wicked are running the game at 1280x1024 and high settings? Your score is really high.
Click to expand...

Double checked it....yeah. I can send you my screenshot that I made in paint if you'd like?
 
wickedld9 Got 87 FPS, actually...

If I had OCe'd my CPU I may get more... I just ran with stock CPU and the Card Oc'ed to 540/560
 
Tet5uo said:
wickedld9 Got 87 FPS, actually...

If I had OCe'd my CPU I may get more... I just ran with stock CPU and the Card Oc'ed to 540/560
Click to expand...


That's a very nice score on the ATI. I still want an X8xx series...... :D I got the 68 since they were the only thing I could find for MSRP in June.

Re-ran with the GT at 425/1.15 and scored 89.9.
Going to reboot and run at 2.5Ghz.

edit:
CPU- 209x12 = 2508MHz
GPU- 425/1.15

91.5FPS
I know this will be destroyed by the time I get to work in the morning but I'm just very happy to see such a difference between this new system and my old mobile 2500+@2.4.
 
I ran the demo like I play the game. 1280x1024, High details, all eye candy options on cept vertical sync, and 4xAA. Best run below.

2148 Frames Rendered in 42.5 Seconds
Seconds = 50.5 FPS

A second run with no AA got me:

2148 Frames Rendered in 31.1 Seconds
Seconds = 69.0 FPS
 
Try running it with timedemo demo1 usecache and there should be no need for a second run.

I get 87fps with the system in my sig. Increasing the GPU core to 445 gives me an extra 2 fps. Increasing the memory from 1100 to 1200 doesn't seem to provide any boost at all. Think I need a quicker CPU to get these 3-figure scores.
 
Wow this benchmark is so riding on the morality of the participants....and we know how THAT goes during anything competitive :p

*looks around and wonders why the bench'd pics are all different sizes when they should all be the same size from running the same resolution* :rolleyes:
 
tsuehpsyde said:
Wow this benchmark is so riding on the morality of the participants....and we know how THAT goes during anything competitive :p

*looks around and wonders why the bench'd pics are all different sizes when they should all be the same size from running the same resolution* :rolleyes:
Click to expand...
They could have shunk them?
 
I think I'm cpu bound more than anything else, I got 66 FPS at 1280x1024, and I get 62FPS at 1600x1200... oh well.

Damn 3.3ghz...

Is this test with shadows on?
 
Sykil said:
They could have shunk them?
Click to expand...

Not really...when I'm running 1280x1024 desktop res and some of these images like boostieboy and pashonic2nd are HUGE pics in comparison to my res, means they probably ran a lower res. Lower res = menu's taking more of the screen . Meh, flame me all you want, but without some sort of proof of configuration or resolution the only real post u can believe is the thread starter. Decent comparison for people if ur honest I guess.
 
tsuehpsyde said:
Not really...when I'm running 1280x1024 desktop res and some of these images like boostieboy and pashonic2nd are HUGE pics in comparison to my res, means they probably ran a lower res. Lower res = menu's taking more of the screen . Meh, flame me all you want, but without some sort of proof of configuration or resolution the only real post u can believe is the thread starter. Decent comparison for people if ur honest I guess.
Click to expand...
check out the [H]ard ORB then come talk to me
 
tsuehpsyde said:
Not really...when I'm running 1280x1024 desktop res and some of these images like boostieboy and pashonic2nd are HUGE pics in comparison to my res, means they probably ran a lower res. Lower res = menu's taking more of the screen . Meh, flame me all you want, but without some sort of proof of configuration or resolution the only real post u can believe is the thread starter. Decent comparison for people if ur honest I guess.
Click to expand...

I can promise you I scaled mine down a tad to ease the bandwidth on my server, as im sure a lot of us did; but if your so bent on it i'd gladly grab another screen shot and avoid scaling it down but drop the quality enormously...
 
Mine was also scaled down because I have very limited bandwidth. And to inotocracy my score is roughly 20% higher but my core cpu overclock is also roughly 20% higher than yours as-well as my FSB. Other factors that easily contribute including whether you have fast write enabled and a large frame-buffer set in your bios, proper refresh rates, system tweaks etc..but I don't think its too far off from what you could expect with a higher system / videocard overclock.
 
All game options enabled except vert sync. No AA. 16xAF forced in driver tab which is otherwise set to default. Using 71.22 drivers.

100.1 FPS.

with 2xAA: 84FPS
 
tsuehpsyde said:
Not really...when I'm running 1280x1024 desktop res and some of these images like boostieboy and pashonic2nd are HUGE pics in comparison to my res, means they probably ran a lower res. Lower res = menu's taking more of the screen . Meh, flame me all you want, but without some sort of proof of configuration or resolution the only real post u can believe is the thread starter. Decent comparison for people if ur honest I guess.
Click to expand...
I was talking about manually . . .

And the menus probably seem bigger on smaller resolutions because there are less pixels total.
 
come on you guys... everyone use the same AA and AF and settings..and resolution...!!
I would run it on my comp.. but it is down until i get back my mobo..heheh
 
Rig:

p4 1.8a@2.3
1gb ddr2700
BFG 6800 OC stock speeds, 16x6, 6vp(unlocked)

Doom settings:1280x1024
Ulta settings
All settings on
VS set to yes
AA set to 2x

Score: 31.6


Same setting as above except:
VS set to no

Score: 39.9


Same setting as above except:
VS set to no
AA off

Score: 48

At least now I can actually play it.

When I set the AA to 8x with vs on, it stops being usable, getting like 6.3 fps. Is that the card bottoming out or my processor?
 
Problem I see with this whole thing is that the settings are not clearly defined in the initial post. IE stating High quality is to be used, but where, in game or in driver or both, it's necessary to know this simply because if you want "Default" driver settings then no bilinear or trilinear filtering is used (not sure if the game will force it or not) If you set the driver to High Quality it forces full Trilinear filtering and shuts off all the optimizations.

Going to have to set down and think your benchmark through a bit more. ;)

Just FYI.

Using the default Nvidia driver settings in the 71.20 drivers would read as follows.

Antialasing settings: Application Controled
Anisotropic filtering: Application Controled
Image settings: Quality
Color Profile: Not Available
Vertical Sync: Application Controled
Force mipmaps: None
Conformant texture clamp: On
Extention Limit: Off
Hardware acceleration: Single-display mode (unless your running SLI setup)
Trilinear Optimization: On
Anisotropic mip filter optimization: Off
Anisotropic sample optimization: On
Negative LOD bias: Allow

Edit: (again)

My Bad, there is a profile for Doom 3 allready in the drivers that uses same settings as above but doesnt necessarly have them selected. Running the test as above I get. 71 FPS. In game settings were 1280x1024 AA off High Quality.

At the settings I played through the entire game at are:

Nvidia Control Panel

Antialasing settings: Application Controled
Anisotropic filtering: Application Controled
Image settings: Quality
Color Profile: Sniper
Vertical Sync: Application Controled
Force mipmaps: Trilinear
Conformant texture clamp: On
Extention Limit: Off
Hardware acceleration: Single-display mode (unless your running SLI setup)
Trilinear Optimization: On
Anisotropic mip filter optimization: On
Anisotropic sample optimization: On
Negative LOD bias: Allow

In Game Settings

1600x1200
High Quality
4x AA

And I get 44.8 FPS

http://s91019022.onlinehome.us/remotes/doom3/d3_test1.jpg 1280 test
http://s91019022.onlinehome.us/remotes/doom3/d3_test2.jpg 1600 test

And a partridge in a pear treeeeeeeeeee. :D
 
Safooma said:
When I set the AA to 8x with vs on, it stops being usable, getting like 6.3 fps. Is that the card bottoming out or my processor?
Click to expand...

8xSAA shafts your frame rates completely. It's the GPU, not the CPU.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top