• 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.

X2 = lower 3dmark scores :(

S

ScArE2100

Limp Gawd
Joined
Jan 22, 2004
Messages
376
I upgraded from a newcaslte 3800+ to an X2 3800+ and I'd just like to point out that the 3dmark scores I'm getting now are a LOT lower. With the newcastle at stock (2.4ghz) I was getting about 7500 3dmarks while with the X2 at 2.6ghz (600mhz over stock and 200mhz faster than my newcastle) I only get 7000 3dmarks. All of the other settings are the same except ram timings which were 200mhz 2.5 3 2 5 and are now 216.7 3 3 8.

I'm using a BFG 7800gt clocked at 473 / 1.15 for all testing.

Summary:

Before:
CPU: Newcastle 3800+ at stock (2.4ghz)
DDR Timings: 200mhz 2.5 3 2 5
>7500 in 3dmark05
Click to expand...
After:
CPU: X2 Manchester 3800+ at 2.6ghz (600mhz overclock)
DDR Timings: 216.7mhz 3 3 3 8
~7000 in 3dmark05
Click to expand...

Can anyone explain this?
 
Your ram timings are pretty darn loose at Cas 3.

Try the 81.26 beta's if you haven't....purportedly increase dual core system scores quite bit.

When I stated the X2 was slower last night, I was tired and got it mixed up with a overclocked Venice. A overclocked Venice can pull ahead for sure, but stock, no, there shouldn't be much difference, if any. Check those ram tmings.
 
my 3dmarks went down a couple hundred too, going from a stock 3500 to a 4400 (dual 3700 equivalent)... but i couldn't care because games are much smoother with my winamp going :)

dual cores isn't really about clock speeds, it's about overall bandwidth... but yeh, the 8x.xx drivers should help at least in SLI
 
ShuttleLuv said:
Well...for one...the X2 is generally slower in gaming benches. Secondly, your ram timings are pretty darn loose at Cas 3.

Try the 81.26 beta's if you haven't....purportedly increase dual core system scores quite bit.
Click to expand...


That's mostly wrong. Given the same cpu speed, benches should be VERY close to each other if only the cpu has changed between an X2 and a single core. And the 81.26's suck. They either suffer from big graphical glitches or don't render shadows properly...(which would account for big speed increases if you don't mind shitty IQ).

And CERTAINLY if his X2 is running 200mhz higher than the old single core, it ain't a cpu problem. Don't comment on that unless you have run and set up an X2 system, I won't EVER be going back to a single core...
 
Zinn said:
my 3dmarks went down a couple hundred too, going from a stock 3500 to a 4400 (dual 3700 equivalent)... but i couldn't care because games are much smoother with my winamp going :)
Click to expand...

And 200pts lower in 3DFarce 2005 don't mean jack....
:p

Zinn hit the nail on the head.....smoooooooooooooooooooooooother............
 
happenned to me also when i went from 3700 sandy to the 3800 x2 runing at same speed (2850 ish) but the sandy was 1mb l2. anyway, there is a legend that nvidia will be making drivers optimized for x2, and the 81.26 drivers bumped me up 1200 pts (around 10%) in 3dmark05. some get probs in games with these drivers, i do not.
btw, you really dont want to worry about ram timings with any amd64, its all about htt and cpu core clock.


very truly yours,
politenessman


number 1, all cpus 3000mhz and under, all gpus(my core/mem class), all drivers, all os's
http://service.futuremark.com/compare?3dm05=1253354
 
TheRapture said:
That's mostly wrong. Given the same cpu speed, benches should be VERY close to each other if only the cpu has changed between an X2 and a single core. And the 81.26's suck. They either suffer from big graphical glitches or don't render shadows properly...(which would account for big speed increases if you don't mind shitty IQ).

And CERTAINLY if his X2 is running 200mhz higher than the old single core, it ain't a cpu problem. Don't comment on that unless you have run and set up an X2 system, I won't EVER be going back to a single core...
Click to expand...

I don't blame you. Once you do go dual core or in my case SMP, you'll never go back. I had dually systems much of my computing life, then I went to a Pentium 4 w/HT and that was ok, and now I am back with SMP.

An X2 and a single core A64 should benchmark very close. I don't know why it won't in your case. There is something going on there.
 
If you tightened your timings and lowered your OC enough to compensate, it would help your score alot.

~Adam
 
currently it doesnt matter to benchmark softwares whether its x2 or not, it seems to only see it as a single core, jus disable one of the cores and try it out. i havent tried 3dmark05 yet but in aquamark3 it didnt make any difference at all whether it was running on one or two cores. but hopefully future releases of 3dmark will be coded to take advantage of dual core cpus :)

for timings it seems amds hate anything higher than cas 2.5 :p
 
You shouldn't lose any thing when travelling from a Single core to dual core. I If you compare 3700+ benches to My 4400+ with the same speed GPU, you wil find I am at most only about a 100 points behind the leaders, and this probably has more to do with my memory timings then anything else.
 
Funny, I went from a FX53 to a X2 3800 (260x10) and couldn't be happier. Everything seems to run smoother. Don't look at your 3DMark05 results as that is artificial compared to how well your system is really running. You also need to learn how to move processes to different cores as that really helps.
 
In all the benchmarks the A64 3800+ is about equivalent in performance to an X2 4200+/4400+ for single threaded applications, like games, and 3dmark...

However...

In theory, in real world day to day use the X2s should offer better (smoother) performance where more than one thing is happening at once.

I'm thinking of getting a X2 4400+ to replace my A64 3800+, because I reckon the extra core will fix some problems I have with my non-accelerated external sound card hitting the cpu pretty hard.

Not to mention that Nvidias upcoming multi-threaded drivers can use both cores which should boost performance (when they actually work right), and I'd imagine ATI will follow suit.
 
Hey Perp you post this same Lame response about your 3dmark and its quite ammusing, the new Nvidia Drivers suck for games unless your playing hearts, And yes your E PENIS grows when you score more on 3dmark but who gives a fuck, if you were really hardcore you shoulda got 2 GTXs.
 
righty right....hardcore. i'm sorry, did i claim to be hardcore? anyway, speaking for myself only, i usually reserve the use of the term "hard core" for other things beside pc hardware. unfortunately, i guess that is about as "hard core" as you get. computer hardware, i mean. well, you know what i really mean, right?

ps what would i need 2 gtx'x for anyway? after all i am

number 1, all cpus 3000mhz and under, all gpus(my core/mem class) all drivers, all os's
http://service.futuremark.com/compare?3dm05=1253354


very truly yours,
politenessman


number 1, all cpus 3000mhz and under, all gpus(my core/mem class), all drivers, all os's
http://service.futuremark.com/compare?3dm05=1253354
 
dude just chill out with that link or sig it. you've been really obnoxious lately.
 
In my experience using a 4400+ I would get a better score than an equaly clocked single core. At 3100mhz I would compare to an FX-57 @ 3200.

I mean wouldn't it be logical that on an x2 during a benchmark 100% cpu usage is being delivered to the application. Where as on a single core it would be less due to o/s and backgroup applications stealing cycles?
 
btf said:
I mean wouldn't it be logical that on an x2 during a benchmark 100% cpu usage is being delivered to the application. Where as on a single core it would be less due to o/s and backgroup applications stealing cycles?
Click to expand...


And you have found the real reason the X2's do so well...one cpu is basically freed up 100% for the single threaded game, while the other does most everything else.... :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top