Post your 3dMark 2005 scores here. (Link to list in 1st post)

Harp on me if you will but. . . .

I'm requesting venturi's score be removed without proof by the posting of a project on the futuremark ORB. I totally do not believe, espically after seeing the review of SLI'd FX4400's on an FX-55. Although no 3dmark 05 score, it totally shows the cards posting scores below SLI'd Ultras. There's no way he hit almost 13k with non-oc'd cards.

Game PC Review
 
LittleMe said:
it totally shows the cards posting scores well below SLI'd Ultras.
Click to expand...
I don't see that. The only SLI benchmark score with a significant difference is Doom3 (OpenGL), about 12% slower. The Quadro uses different OpenGL precision, so that's understandable.

All the DirectX benchmarks are off by 1-4fps (Halo had the biggest difference) and SLI QuadroFXs beat the SLI 6800 Ultras in a couple of DX benchmarks.

I'm not saying that 13K in 3DMark05 is possible with stock QuadroFX SLI, but that gamepc link does nothing to disprove it either.
 
pxc said:
I don't see that. The only SLI benchmark score with a significant difference is Doom3 (OpenGL), about 12% slower. The Quadro uses different OpenGL precision, so that's understandable.

All the DirectX benchmarks are off by 1-4fps (Halo had the biggest difference) and SLI QuadroFXs beat the SLI 6800 Ultras in a couple of DX benchmarks.

I'm not saying that 13K in 3DMark05 is possible with stock QuadroFX SLI, but that gamepc link does nothing to disprove it either.
Click to expand...


I know there isn't a huge difference, thats my point. If those cards could hit almost 13k, don't you think they would show a MUCH bigger difference in that review than the ultra's beating them out a few fps almost every time!? I just don't believe those cards nailed that score stock, and we have NO proof of the score execpt everybody being like "OMG!! a 10,000 dollar computer, it MUST have got that score if he says so" He's not even in the top 10 3dmark 05 SLI list here on the board because there is no proof.
 
With the new 71.89's and no overclocking; default settings.

8906_with_7189.jpg
 
1883

1883 3DMarks

Maybe I can sit in the top spot for 9600xt's with only overdrive..... That's the excitement of my week, at least my crappy hardware beats out other crappy hardware....
 
odd nimrod said:
1883

1883 3DMarks

Maybe I can sit in the top spot for 9600xt's with only overdrive..... That's the excitement of my week, at least my crappy hardware beats out other crappy hardware....
Click to expand...

Its still a good feeling getting the most out of crappy hardware. :p
 
Yes I am still using my old motherboard and old processor, but soon that will change.

I think I am doing buying used computer parts from citizens now.
I need like 10 more new scores and then I will repost the list.

However at some point I will reach the wall, the point will I will not get enough new scores fast enough to post the list every 25 new scores.

I don't think we are quite there yet though.

761 scores right now, last list had 742 and was posted 9 days ago.
 
steveng said:
4013 with 3200+(non oc), 1gig ram, x800xl(425/520)
4250 with x800xl@(429/532) 2AA, 4AF
Click to expand...

No. Bad noobie.

You have to run 3DMark on default settings otherwise you can't compare your score with anyone else.
That is why this whole thing works.

Your first score could go on the list if you ran it at default settings though.
Let me know.
 
man - that's a great scrore for your hardware. wow. color me impressed. :)

so you don't have any issues running SLI with those 76.10s??
 
I'm rather new at this and I don't quite know how this thread work so if someone could put me right it would be appreciated. :)

So if I want to put up my 3dMark-05 score here, can I just write down the score and specs or do I need to post the score at futurmarks site?
 
revenant said:
man - that's a great scrore for your hardware. wow. color me impressed. :)

so you don't have any issues running SLI with those 76.10s??
Click to expand...

I'm gonna have to see if there i any problems I havn't been playing game yet lately but I'm gonna play doom3 ARENA map to test it...
 
Wolfkin said:
I'm rather new at this and I don't quite know how this thread work so if someone could put me right it would be appreciated. :)

So if I want to put up my 3dMark-05 score here, can I just write down the score and specs or do I need to post the score at futurmarks site?
Click to expand...

pretty much... run the test at default res and settings, then when it's done, there will be a button under the score which will upload it to the futuremark orb site, then make sure that score is active and published (by checking the boxes that apply to this in the profile manager for that score) and copy the "compare URL" in the profile manager for that score into this thread along with the score.. I hope that all makes sense... I am all hopped up on Bawls now and typing like a mile a minute here... lol
 
revenant said:
pretty much... run the test at default res and settings, then when it's done, there will be a button under the score which will upload it to the futuremark orb site, then make sure that score is active and published (by checking the boxes that apply to this in the profile manager for that score) and copy the "compare URL" in the profile manager for that score into this thread along with the score.. I hope that all makes sense... I am all hopped up on Bawls now and typing like a mile a minute here... lol
Click to expand...

Thanks, that covers it pretty much. Will have a go at it later. :)
 
3921 cpu score 4053

A64 2800+ CH @ 220 FSB Stock cooling
Albatron K8Ultra-V Pro
XFX 6600GT with a CoolerMaster CoolViva heatpipe cooler @ 579/1154
2x512 OCZ PC3700EL Gold Rev.3
300W Sparkle FSP300-60PN (Rock Solid!)
71.89 drivers
Seagate 120gb 7200rpm 2mb cache ATA 100!
 
mentok1982 said:
Your link does not work. Do something quick!
Click to expand...
It won't let me publish the score because the integrated video shows as "generic VGA". I guess the links that can't be published aren't viewable by others. It works for me.

Like i wrote above, it's GMA900 (915G integrated graphics) and the score is 354. The core runs at 333MHz and memory is shared.

System Configuration
General Information
Operating System Microsoft Windows XP
DirectX Version 9.0c
Mobo Manufacturer Dell Inc.
Mobo Model 0C5706
AGP Rates (Current/Available) N/A / N/A
CPU Intel Pentium 4 3192 MHz
FSB 800 MHz
Memory 1014 MB

Display Information
Graphics Chipset Generic VGA
Driver Name Intel(R) 82915G/GV/910GL Express Chipset Family
Driver Version 6.14.10.4020
Driver Status WHQL - Not FM Approved
Video Memory 128 MB
Core Clock N/A
Memory Clock N/A

Benchmark Settings
Program Version 3DMark05 Revision 2 Build 0
Resolution 1024x768@32 bit
Anti-Aliasing None
Texture Filtering Optimal
Vertex Shader Profile 2_a
Pixel Shader Profile 2_0
Force Full Precision Off
Disable DST Off
Disable Post-processing Off
Force Software Vertex Shaders On
Color Mipmaps Off
Repeat Count Off

Main Test Results
3DMark Score 354 3DMarks
CPU Score 2975 CPUMarks

Detailed Test Results
Game Tests
GT1 - Return To Proxycon 1.5 fps
GT2 - Firefly Forest 1.1 fps
GT3 - Canyon Flight 1.7 fps

CPU Tests
CPU Test 1 1.7 fps
CPU Test 2 2.3 fps

Feature Tests
Fill Rate - Single-Texturing N/A
Fill Rate - Multi-Texturing N/A
Pixel Shader N/A
Vertex Shader - Simple N/A
Vertex Shader - Complex N/A

Batch Size Tests
8 Triangles N/A
32 Triangles N/A
128 Triangles N/A
512 Triangles N/A
2048 Triangles N/A
32768 Triangles N/A
 
revenant said:
I think you grabbed the URL out of the location bar on your browser, rather than the "compare URL" which it lists within the project itself. check on that and re-post, please. :)
Click to expand...
As I mentioned above, the project can't be published because the integrated video is not recognized (generic VGA). And as you can see below, FM won't let me publish the project, so of course there's not going to be a compare URL.

I posted the link to the project the same way I posted the other 7 scores in this thread before. :p No one seemed to have problems with those previous ones since mentok1982 grabbed info (driver version) from the same type of link. I know some people still won't believe it, so here:
http://www.notveryserio.us/pix/hovering.png hovering mouse on details button
http://www.notveryserio.us/pix/clicked.png and this is where it goes

The funny thing is that even after I log out, it still works when I click my link for this score in this thread. I have no idea why it's not working for you guys. Maybe i'll kill the ORB cookie(s) and see if that does it.

Tell me if any of these others work for you:
http://service.futuremark.com/servl...projectdetails&projectType=12&projectId=10362
http://service.futuremark.com/servl...rojectdetails&projectType=12&projectId=338875
http://service.futuremark.com/servl...rojectdetails&projectType=12&projectId=660458
http://service.futuremark.com/servl...rojectdetails&projectType=12&projectId=772771

they all also work for me. Notice the identical URL parameter names.
 
Wolfkin said:
@pxc

In your last post I got the two first links to work but not the last four. :)
Click to expand...
I guess direct detail links no longer work. :mad:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top