• 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.

x800xtpe scores doesnt seem right

A

AznAnarchy99

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jan 18, 2005
Messages
1,187
In 3Dmark03

first test i ran when i got my card i got 11818. I compared some of my scores to others and most of them got 12000 to mid 12500s.

In 3Dmark05

first test i did on this i got 5492. All of the others in my system specs, alot of people had 5700 +.

My specs are:
Intel Pentium 4 3.2E
Corsair XMS 512mb DDR-400 CAS 3
BBA x800XT PE
Sound Blaster Audigy 2 ZS
 
AznAnarchy99 said:
In 3Dmark03

first test i ran when i got my card i got 11818. I compared some of my scores to others and most of them got 12000 to mid 12500s.

In 3Dmark05

first test i did on this i got 5492. All of the others in my system specs, alot of people had 5700 +.

My specs are:
Intel Pentium 4 3.2E
Corsair XMS 512mb DDR-400 CAS 3
BBA x800XT PE
Sound Blaster Audigy 2 ZS
Click to expand...

You are not far enough behind for it to be because of a serious problem. Chances are there is just some weakness in your hardware, driver setup, or settings, that is at fault.

The place I would suggest you start is by posting your Motherboard specs and AGP settings so people can give advice on tweaking those.
 
your score is fine
1- u only have 512 MB RAM
2- ur cpu is a pentium 4
3- most pl that got a score of 5700+ on 3dmark05 had a gig of uber ram and AMD processor that was clocked

so don't worry there is nothing wrong with ur score
 
Your CPU isnt that grewat for gaming, most of the people who did get that score, had AMD 64 cpus, you only have 512mb ram. For your system its fine

get another 512mb of ram, 1 gig is minimum at the moment.
 
i filtered it so the only cpus that would show were 3.2 intels. Im thinking about getting a gig of ram soon but ram would cost me as much as my card (300). i was also running 2 moniters at the time of these benchmarks, would that affect it?
 
The Dual monitors would to some extent I think and what ram are you getting?
 
Good thats a solid choice from what Ive heard, but then agian Im not the expert when it comes to ram.
 
AznAnarchy99 said:
i filtered it so the only cpus that would show were 3.2 intels. Im thinking about getting a gig of ram soon but ram would cost me as much as my card (300). i was also running 2 moniters at the time of these benchmarks, would that affect it?
Click to expand...

Running 2 monitors would affect it a teeny bit. Also if you have your AGP aperature set to 256mb instead of 128mb or 64mb that would affect it as well. Particularly with only 512mb of system RAM.
 
i have the aperature set at 64mb and its been that ever since i got my 9800 pro 2 years ago.
 
AznAnarchy99 said:
i filtered it so the only cpus that would show were 3.2 intels. Im thinking about getting a gig of ram soon but ram would cost me as much as my card (300). i was also running 2 moniters at the time of these benchmarks, would that affect it?
Click to expand...

A gig of ram won't boost your 3dmark 2003 score. It might do 2005 by a couple hundred at most. You'd be luck to get that. You could try to overclock your processor. That would be your best bet. Those scores look fine though. I'd be willing to bet that most of those people who had those scores lowered their mipmap/texture quality and boosted it up another 200-500 points. They could also have had some performance drivers like the omegas or DNA drivers.
 
Azn

Your scores are fine. '03 is a little bit low but not much. Your CPU is fine for gaming. Check your drivers and graphic settings and maybe try overclocking a bit.

My overclocked (569/569) scores are:

22,100 - '01
13,000 - '03
5,930 - '05

My rig is very similar to yours.
 
And if you are looking to get a higher score, don't get 2.5 ram, get the good stuff. Something Cas2 that overclocks well. I'm very pleased with my ballistix. Works great in Intel Mobos and overclocks very well. Plus its cheap.
 
im debating wheter to spend 200 on this ram that has CAS 2 or spend 100 to get another one of the same stick of ram that i have CAS 3
 
gigantorebirdie said:
And if you are looking to get a higher score, don't get 2.5 ram, get the good stuff. Something Cas2 that overclocks well. I'm very pleased with my ballistix. Works great in Intel Mobos and overclocks very well. Plus its cheap.
Click to expand...

Actual testing has shown the actual benchmark and in game frame rate gain from going from CAS3 to CAS2.5 is usually between 1% and 2%, with benchmarks showing the greatest gain. Meanwhile going from CAS2.5 to CAS2 only nets you between 0.2% and 0.4% in games and benchmarks. So why pay extra money for CAS2 unless you just want it for bragging rights?
 
I get 6000 on my sweet Rig, not bragging but i just wanted to point out that you need more RAM like everyone is saying and OC that Prescott ;) :D
 
5200 3dmark 05 score here.

My rig, nothing is overclocked:

Sapphire radeon x800XT PE
athlon XP 2500+ Barton
1GB (2x512) generic DDR333 memory
DFI NFII ultra Lan-party motherboard (rev a)
WinXP SP2.

I have no idea why my score is what it is, I just got the card today, plugged it in, played some EQ2, then benched it...beats me.
 
mustang_steve said:
5200 3dmark 05 score here.

My rig, nothing is overclocked:

Sapphire radeon x800XT PE
athlon XP 2500+ Barton
1GB (2x512) generic DDR333 memory
DFI NFII ultra Lan-party motherboard (rev a)
WinXP SP2.

I have no idea why my score is what it is, I just got the card today, plugged it in, played some EQ2, then benched it...beats me.
Click to expand...

What drivers? and have you cleaned off the old drivers and reinstalled? you may have to install windows again, i did when i got my card just because i did not want to not have full proformace or have issues
 
arentol said:
Actual testing has shown the actual benchmark and in game frame rate gain from going from CAS3 to CAS2.5 is usually between 1% and 2%, with benchmarks showing the greatest gain. Meanwhile going from CAS2.5 to CAS2 only nets you between 0.2% and 0.4% in games and benchmarks. So why pay extra money for CAS2 unless you just want it for bragging rights?
Click to expand...

I believe this man is correct. And as i've said before, adding more ram will not boost your 3dmark score. Anyone seem to grasp this concept?
 
R!P13y said:
What drivers? and have you cleaned off the old drivers and reinstalled? you may have to install windows again, i did when i got my card just because i did not want to not have full proformace or have issues
Click to expand...

Yeah I plan on reinstalling once I get my athlon 64 motherboard as next month's upgrade....I blew all my blowable cash for this month.
 
mustang_steve said:
Yeah I plan on reinstalling once I get my athlon 64 motherboard as next month's upgrade....I blew all my blowable cash for this month.
Click to expand...

that is cool but still what drivers and you can get a driver cleaner that will clean all the video drivers off your computer and you can install fresh ones... google it
 
R!P13y said:
that is cool but still what drivers and you can get a driver cleaner that will clean all the video drivers off your computer and you can install fresh ones... google it
Click to expand...

FYI

catalyst 05.3

2d version 6.14.10.6157

Basically I just run the latest provided, if they work well with EQ2 (the game is a effing hog...needs 512mb+ of video ram for full textures....jesus!)


I didn't have to worry about drivercleaner..I'm pretty good at doing that manually.
 
timeless said:
your score is fine
1- u only have 512 MB RAM
2- ur cpu is a pentium 4
3- most pl that got a score of 5700+ on 3dmark05 had a gig of uber ram and AMD processor that was clocked

so don't worry there is nothing wrong with ur score
Click to expand...


Whats wrong with a P4?
 
AznAnarchy99 said:
i was planning on the Corsair TwinX PC-4400 ram CAS 2.5
Click to expand...

I use to live and die by Corsair XMS stuff.

but I just recently was talked into trying out some of that G.Skill PC4400 (Samsung TCCD equipped) memory and boy oh boy... lets just say that I have since then sold my Corsair BH-5 equipped memory and I havent regretted it one bit.

that G.Skill TCCD memory is some very nice stuff. ;)
 
bboynitrous said:
And as i've said before, adding more ram will not boost your 3dmark score. Anyone seem to grasp this concept?
Click to expand...

I don't know why people think more RAM = higher benchies. It's the SPEED of the RAM that matters. In some games, having 1gb over 512mb will net a nice boost in FPS. But that's highend games like Doom3 and HL2.
 
well all i do play is source. im gettin about 200 bucks soon. should i get some low latency ram and replace my cas 3 ram?, or get another stick of cas 3? or get some cas 2.5 ddr550 ram?
 
arentol said:
Actual testing has shown the actual benchmark and in game frame rate gain from going from CAS3 to CAS2.5 is usually between 1% and 2%, with benchmarks showing the greatest gain. Meanwhile going from CAS2.5 to CAS2 only nets you between 0.2% and 0.4% in games and benchmarks. So why pay extra money for CAS2 unless you just want it for bragging rights?
Click to expand...

If you are here at the [H] and preach using value shit ram, then rethink what you are doing here. Overclock that p4, use high quality ram to get a high fsb with low timings and Arentol; pick up your panties on your way out.
 
gigantorebirdie said:
If you are here at the [H] and preach using value shit ram, then rethink what you are doing here. Overclock that p4, use high quality ram to get a high fsb with low timings and Arentol; pick up your panties on your way out.
Click to expand...

/signed
 
gigantorebirdie said:
If you are here at the [H] and preach using value shit ram, then rethink what you are doing here. Overclock that p4, use high quality ram to get a high fsb with low timings and Arentol; pick up your panties on your way out.
Click to expand...

What I am preaching is that if you have absolutely no concern about cost then, by all means, get the best damn RAM in the world. However, if you do have a budget then buying really friggin expensive RAM should not be at the top of your list, and DAMN SURE isn't going to raise your 3dmark05 numbers all that much. Why spend $100+ more (than brand-name value RAM costs) for RAM that will, at best, net you a 3% Framerate boost when you can spend that extra $100+ on a better videocard that will net you a 10%+ framerate boost, or on a better CPU that will get you a 5%+ framerate boost?

As for getting high fsb timings... If you think it takes expensive RAM to do that then you clearly don't know what you are talking about. I've been running a PC for the last 9 months with a 25% FSB overclock using the cheapest no-name PC3200 I could find at the local computer store (running it at CAS2.5 too!).

Now, I am not saying that a serious enthusiast shouldn't get high end RAM, but when they do so it is ultimately for bragging rights (High 3dmark-05 scores for instance), and it is completely not necessary for most of us.

The reason I am pretty adamant on this is because I keep seeing people (claiming to be gamers) who spend $250+ on RAM, $175+ on a PSU, $175+ on their motherboard, $400+ on their CPU, $175+ on 10k RPM harddrives, and then they buy some crappy $200 or less videocard.

What does each of these parts give them over stuff that literally costs half as much? The RAM we discussed, upto 3% faster... Sometimes. PSU, lower chance of it being a lemon (from like 1% to 0.2%), slightly quieter, and it can handle (correctly) a slighly heavier load. MOBO, perhaps a 1% improvement over a $125 board from a good manufacturer. CPU, 5% faster. 10k harddrives, a few seconds to a couple minutes of time saved per hour, but 99% of us dont use the programs that provide that get the big time benefits anyway. So overall they get roughly 9% faster gaming for getting all that fancy stuff.. Unfortunately that is a 9% is being applied to their "half as fast as it could have been" $200 videocard. So, 50% as fast *1.09 = 54.5% as fast as the videocard they could have gotten if they had settled for hardware that didn't give them that 9% bonus.

It just makes me sad when I see someone who spent $2000 on their "gaming" PC and yet their getting 1000 to 2000 points lower on 3dmark-05 than I am getting on my $1250 PC.... Especially when I can trace every bit of performance and cost difference back to my buying a few pieces of "value" equipment so I could get a kick-ass videocard.



Oh, and BTW, my PC is the 20th highest of all X800XT-PE PC's in the 3dmark-05 thread (out of 65) (59th PC overall) and I beat a number of people on that list who had higher average clockspeed settings on their cards than I do on mine, and nobody who beat me had lower settings than mine are. This with $135 RAM, $90 PSU, $120 Mobo, $80(x2) Hitachi 160GB harddrives, $225 CPU. Darn, and to think, if I had just spent $125 more on RAM I could have been 58th overall right now!

Oh, and one more thing.... Where was your PC on that list again?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top