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

3dMark05: 5843
3dMark03: 12844

These scores are with hardware configurations exactly as the sig shows without any overclocking to the video card but, just the cpu which is slightly overclocked by just 400mhz.

DandyBear: What score did you get when you ran your videocard at stock 520/560 speed?

Long live the P4!!!!!
 
aZn_plyR 20 MINUTES AFTER THE LIST WAS POSTED! :(
I will update it again this afternoon. It will be the special 250 scores and over edition!

DandyBear, Thank You. No not thank you..........aww shucks twern't nuthin.
 
I installed the new beta forceware drivers and enabled Dual channel. My new updated score with 400/801mhz + 16x, 6vp is:

3997


Not too shabby! My old previous was 3786 with older drivers and dual channel not enabled. By changing these two things, that's a pretty good increase, IMO.

Recap: Stock 6800NU, 2.4Ghz Athlon Mobile XP (200 x 12), 1 gig Kingston value ram (not in dual channel) was 3289

Enabling dual channel, opening up the extra pipes and shader, overclocking the video card to 400/801, and installing 70.90 drivers scored: 3997

Operating system is Windows XP Professional with SP2. I had McAfee open but disabled and i'm not sure what else would be running in the background.
 
doogz, that's WAY too close to 4K to stop now! Do a 1MHz core/mem boost, reboot, and claim the four-grand prize.
 
3331

with
BFG 6800OC (16/6)
AXP ~ 2201 MHz
1GB RAM.

I somehow think that this is quite low for my system? what do you think?
 
Thanks, mentok. This thread's fun.

My latest for 5062. I know this card has more in it, I just haven't had the time to tweak on it.
 
DaLurker said:
System in Sig,

3990
CPU Mark: 3480

Btw 6800nu unlocked and oc'ed to 400/800
Click to expand...

That's reassuring that my system is running on par with yours. Very similar setups we have with almost identical scores. Awesome!
 
scout007 said:
hmmm to overclock and get a few more points..... or just keep my 107 ranking?
Click to expand...

*glances at the name of this website* I think we both know the answer ;) I spent 30 minutes last night trying different settings and got 6588 instead of 6580 in 3D05 :p (4 Mhz memory OC! :p)
 
Dallows said:
something's wrong with my sys. I just put it together... again, formatted and all. 4678 with system in sig. nvidia drivers: 70.90 or something, the newest beta I believe
Click to expand...


Try overclocking, I remember being very disappointed with my original 3Dmark 2005 scores. Now I am a happy man with my 5262 score. I could ask for more but ...
 
Isaacav2 said:
Try overclocking, I remember being very disappointed with my original 3Dmark 2005 scores. Now I am a happy man with my 5262 score. I could ask for more but ...
Click to expand...

Bah! Never settle man. I'm not even happy with my system, it's just not enough for me. Stock settings I was getting aruond 5800 or so in 3D05, and now am at 6588 as my highest run, and it still isn't enough. I want 7K, and you should wnat 6K ;)

"The world is not enough" has never been more true in my past 2 months experience of overclocking. It's just never, ever enough :)
 
We have 502 posts in the thread and over 255 scores in the list!

Soon we will dominate all other threads in the video card section! Buw ha ha ha!


No that will never happen. :(

But we can dream. :D
 
mine was only like 3950 or something :mad:
Any ideas why its so low?
Here is my setup

p4 [email protected]
2gigs DDR400
X800Pro stock speeds
74 gig raptor
onboard sound at the time

What can I do to get it higher???
 
joecuddles said:
Overclock.
Click to expand...

Amen! If you're running at stock clocks, I'd be willing to bet that most everything else is running at default as well. Tweak BIOS, driver settings/versions, and clocks. When you're done, tweak some more.
 
Noooooooooooo!!!!! I just done a few cleanups etc drivers etc and got a new score :(!!!!!

it would take me to 30th!!! arghhhh please add me :D
Was hoping for 6k but no 18 short lol!

some you win some you loose! :p

3d05woot5cd.jpg


Cheers Pug!
 
ok so get this

I go from 3950
I re-install winXP
Use Omegas and not cats/aticrap apps

SAME EXACT parts,

4971

can anyone explain the over 1000 point jump?? :confused:
 
Davenow said:
ok so get this

I go from 3950
I re-install winXP
Use Omegas and not cats/aticrap apps

SAME EXACT parts,

4971

can anyone explain the over 1000 point jump?? :confused:
Click to expand...

SOOO what you're saying is when I get my IC7-G and install my SATA hard drive o/c my 2.8c and re-install windows and fresh new 4.12 drivers I will get 5300 --> 6300 ... :D ... I can't wait ...

I know this doesn't always happen .. but dammit it would be nice if it does ...
 
mohammedtaha said:
SOOO what you're saying is when I get my IC7-G and install my SATA hard drive o/c my 2.8c and re-install windows and fresh new 4.12 drivers I will get 5300 --> 6300 ... :D ... I can't wait ...

I know this doesn't always happen .. but dammit it would be nice if it does ...
Click to expand...


I think it was more of a driver issue or something that must have been hogging system resources or something. I dont see what else could net an over 1000 point jump

BTW this is using 4.11 IIRC, not the newest. The newest drivers hosed my machine and are what caused the re-install, as it wouldnt boot if it wasnt in safe mode.
 
Attention!

I sent a private message to Steve about possibly posting this thread in an edition of Hardforum Happenings and he agreed! :D Here is his reply he sent me.

"Good idea ;) Once we start linking the forum again, I will give you a shout bro!"

So prepare for our little thread's popularity to skyrocket soon!

Hopefully I will have the list updated by then.
 
GRAFiZ said:
Just finally broke 6K...

Link: http://service.futuremark.com/compare?3dm05=399545

Specs:

Abit IC7-MAX3
[email protected]
2x256 OCZ PC4000 267mhz 1:1 8/3/3/3
BFG 6800 Ultra 450/1200

Great thread! Thanks!
Click to expand...

To me this post highlights the problem of not only synthetic benchmarks, but the methods of ensuring accuracy. The CPU score alone cuffs my P4 3.0 Northwood by a huge margin (greater than 40%) even using 2x512 Corsair 3200LLPT RAM on an Abit IC7-G Max2, despite the math working out to no more than 20%ish.

I'd love to see a benchmark that can confirm every driver is truly untweaked so as to provide some degree of legitimacy to the scores gathered.
 
Melons said:
To me this post highlights the problem of not only synthetic benchmarks, but the methods of ensuring accuracy. The CPU score alone cuffs my P4 3.0 Northwood by a huge margin (greater than 40%) even using 2x512 Corsair 3200LLPT RAM on an Abit IC7-G Max2, despite the math working out to no more than 20%ish.

I'd love to see a benchmark that can confirm every driver is truly untweaked so as to provide some degree of legitimacy to the scores gathered.
Click to expand...

Some good points, but...

A few things to note... one, you dont mention how your system is setup. If you are running a stock P3 at 3ghz then that's some of the big difference.

I'm running a 2.4c @ 3.2ghz... mind you, only 200mhz more then your CPU, however, your FSB is 200mhz where mine is 267mhz. I'm running my ram at 1:1. Some have measured what eqautes to as much as a 3mhz (cpu) gain for every 1mhz (fsb) increase.

You also dont mention how your ram is setup, if you're using double sided ram then performance mode is automatically disabled by the 875 chipset. I'm running two single sided sticks, allowed performance mode.

Also, with your post there is no way to know if or what your system is running in the backround. Any little program doing anything in the backround could steal precious cycles from your CPU.

Basically I see a few major difference:

Your cpu, 3ghz, mine, 3.2ghz, your fsb, 200mhz, mine, 267mhz, your ram, ???, mine, 1:1 performance mode enabled.

Also, I'm running my video card at 460/1200, what's your's at?

I've been overclocking computers now for 7 years, starting way back with a 200mhz Cryix M2. I know how to tweak, what I dont know, I find out during my testing. I'll ask whoever is willing to tell.

My machine right now is built for one thing, 3d mark, thats it, it's free of anything else that might bog it down. Eventually, when I'm done testing I'll actually use it for games, etc.

I agree with you on many levels, 3d mark is a terrible performance indicator, but, look at the people with the top scores, they're manipulating ANYTHING they can get their hands on for one thing and one thing only, to get a good 3d mark score.

Right now, it's all we really have.
 
GRAFiZ said:
Some good points, but...

<snipped>
I agree with you on many levels, 3d mark is a terrible performance indicator, but, look at the people with the top scores, they're manipulating ANYTHING they can get their hands on for one thing and one thing only, to get a good 3d mark score.

Right now, it's all we really have.
Click to expand...

I hope you didn't feel my post was a personal dig - it wasn't. :D It's just that when I see a score that is well outside expected results on comparible hardware (even allowing for modifications/tweaks) then doubts obvioisly creep in.

You are right, 3D Mark is (despite the efforts of Futuremark) a poor indicator of true performance.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top