The official benchmarking thread

Discussions about what to spend that hard fought for tax refund on
User avatar
Mort
Alpha-Forum Whore
Alpha-Forum Whore
Posts: 4232
Joined: Thu Dec 01, 2005 10:40 pm

Postby Mort » Sun Nov 12, 2006 7:59 am

I played a quick game on the 2142 PAus server last night.

1024x768 - Max detail for everything and 2x AA

It sat on about 95-98 fps outside, and dropped to around 65 fps on the titan. However there wasn't a *lot* of close action on the titan, only about 3 or 4 people at once, but even a drop to 50fps would have to acceptable.
Image

User avatar
Mort
Alpha-Forum Whore
Alpha-Forum Whore
Posts: 4232
Joined: Thu Dec 01, 2005 10:40 pm

Postby Mort » Sun Nov 12, 2006 5:33 pm

The stats for my own machine :(

03 - 11124
05 - 4913
06 - 2336
Image

User avatar
Brad
Comfortable with my sexuality
Comfortable with my sexuality
Posts: 1195
Joined: Fri Dec 02, 2005 7:49 am
Location: planting RDX on your tank

Postby Brad » Sun Nov 12, 2006 6:25 pm

3dmark 2006 = 5984
I'm quite surprised how much difference the CPU makes in 3dmark06. I should have keith's measure in graphics, but his CPU will leave mine behind. Damn, now I'll have to go looking at overclocking at bit further.

B
Last edited by Brad on Sun Nov 12, 2006 9:39 pm, edited 1 time in total.
I thought I had an appetite for destruction, but all I wanted was a club sandwich.

User avatar
nutsloose
Comfortable with my sexuality
Comfortable with my sexuality
Posts: 130
Joined: Fri Jan 06, 2006 5:06 pm
Location: reloading punkbuster yet again..

Postby nutsloose » Sun Nov 12, 2006 7:43 pm

Give me a welder , lathe milling machine anyday and i can make something up for you but i am a little bit behind in the computer skills department , can someone explain a bit more about the 3dMark and the difference 06,05,03 numbers . Is the higher the number next to 06,05,03 the better . Do i just look up and down load 3dmark 2006 and run it?

Thanks.

User avatar
Brad
Comfortable with my sexuality
Comfortable with my sexuality
Posts: 1195
Joined: Fri Dec 02, 2005 7:49 am
Location: planting RDX on your tank

Postby Brad » Sun Nov 12, 2006 9:36 pm

they are different versions of 3dMark. They release a new version every year or so, as the graphics hardware gets more powerful, they need to bring out something new to cripple mere mortal computers. 2006 is the latest version.

B
I thought I had an appetite for destruction, but all I wanted was a club sandwich.

User avatar
Mort
Alpha-Forum Whore
Alpha-Forum Whore
Posts: 4232
Joined: Thu Dec 01, 2005 10:40 pm

Postby Mort » Mon Nov 13, 2006 10:36 am

Image

User avatar
nutsloose
Comfortable with my sexuality
Comfortable with my sexuality
Posts: 130
Joined: Fri Jan 06, 2006 5:06 pm
Location: reloading punkbuster yet again..

Postby nutsloose » Tue Nov 14, 2006 6:59 am

3dmark 2006=1439

Runnning pentium 4 3.06ghz
2g ddr-sd ram
radeon x800 pro graphics card agp

maybe time to look at a new motherboard /processor ?

Rob

User avatar
Mort
Alpha-Forum Whore
Alpha-Forum Whore
Posts: 4232
Joined: Thu Dec 01, 2005 10:40 pm

Postby Mort » Tue Nov 14, 2006 9:10 am

Did you doa compare using the Futurrmark ORB database? you can compare you spec against other similar machines to see if you are operating in the right ballpark.

Try the 2005 or 2003 version as well coz the 06 version is really only good for the absolute newest cards.
Image

User avatar
Piers
Comfortable with my sexuality
Comfortable with my sexuality
Posts: 1408
Joined: Fri Dec 02, 2005 7:57 am
Location: Horse country

Postby Piers » Sun Feb 11, 2007 12:56 pm

I *finally* sorted out my under-performing SLI rig (tip to the clan - give each card a dedicated PCI-E power lead each, don't share by using a molex double adaptor, and turn off the bios settings for cool'n'quiet / FanEQ when the manual tells you to!)

My old scores:
3dmark03 13279 (461)
3dmark05 5916 (2587)
3dmark06 3205 (1440/1557/706)

New scores:
3dmark03 26252 (972)
3dmark05 10209 (5399)
3dmark06 6563 (3053/3081/1445)

Note that all thes scores were done with all my bacjground apps running - quciktime, itunes, avast, commodo, canoscan, daemon, epson print monitor and so on. I should do a retest with a clean run and see what I get, I was pleased to break the 10,000 3dmark05 barrier without a hint of overclocking.

Money well spent!
(Especially considering a week ago my sli score has staggered to about 800 less than my single gpu scores because of my .. cabling error)
Image

User avatar
Mort
Alpha-Forum Whore
Alpha-Forum Whore
Posts: 4232
Joined: Thu Dec 01, 2005 10:40 pm

Postby Mort » Sun Feb 11, 2007 1:39 pm

When did you start setting up SLI? Those are rather nice numbers so if you are happy with whatever you spent it was definately worth it.

So what hardware are you running now?
Image

User avatar
Piers
Comfortable with my sexuality
Comfortable with my sexuality
Posts: 1408
Joined: Fri Dec 02, 2005 7:57 am
Location: Horse country

Postby Piers » Sun Feb 11, 2007 9:22 pm

Mort wrote:When did you start setting up SLI? Those are rather nice numbers so if you are happy with whatever you spent it was definately worth it.

So what hardware are you running now?
I had it for the last LAN party but it was underpowered, so I got all the nice textures with no framerate boost - was running around in titan mode this afternoon at a steady 65fps
Image

User avatar
Piers
Comfortable with my sexuality
Comfortable with my sexuality
Posts: 1408
Joined: Fri Dec 02, 2005 7:57 am
Location: Horse country

Postby Piers » Sun Feb 11, 2007 9:35 pm

Mort wrote:So what hardware are you running now?

Sorry, forgot to say - it's two 7900GTs, current running stock at 450MHz GPU & 1320MHz Memory, 256MB GDDR3.
One's my old Sparkle the other is a Leadtek with a fancy cooling fan (a steal at $170, but I'm guessing they're phasing out 7900GT and making the 7950 entry-level) - and here's the news, the Sparkle is better than the Leadtek - I tested both independently when I was trying to track down the problem and the Sparkle outperformed in every benchmark - 300 3dmark05 points, other results being closer - but the Sparkle gave me my first glimmer when it suddenly decided it could get and extra 4000 3dmark03 points where the winfast stuck around the 13000 mark.
Image

User avatar
Mort
Alpha-Forum Whore
Alpha-Forum Whore
Posts: 4232
Joined: Thu Dec 01, 2005 10:40 pm

Postby Mort » Mon Feb 12, 2007 12:16 am

I'd be very surprised if either card actually performed differently to the other. From past observations, Leadtek and Sparkle both use the exact same reference board Nvidia produce, so there must be some slight clock difference or something to get such a difference... different DDR RAM or speed perhaps?
Image

User avatar
Piers
Comfortable with my sexuality
Comfortable with my sexuality
Posts: 1408
Joined: Fri Dec 02, 2005 7:57 am
Location: Horse country

Postby Piers » Mon Feb 12, 2007 8:09 am

Mort wrote:I'd be very surprised if either card actually performed differently to the other. From past observations, Leadtek and Sparkle both use the exact same reference board Nvidia produce, so there must be some slight clock difference or something to get such a difference... different DDR RAM or speed perhaps?

Most of the results were only about 5-20 points different, so not statistically meaningful. I think the 3dmakr05 diff was an aberration.
Image

User avatar
Mort
Alpha-Forum Whore
Alpha-Forum Whore
Posts: 4232
Joined: Thu Dec 01, 2005 10:40 pm

Postby Mort » Sun Feb 18, 2007 3:44 pm

XP vs Vista
Ran some 3dMark tests comparing new and old...

3dMark05 (v.1.3.0)
Vista - 4542 (best)
XP - 4950

3dMark06
Vista - 2131 (06 without the patch)
XP - 2330

For 3dMark06, there is a new patch v1.3.0 which is supposed to be for Vista support, however if I run with the patch then the test crashes in Vista completely after the CPU tests. without the patch it will at least complete.

So far, Vista is not impressing me enough to recommend it to you all. I would say get it when you get your next super-upgrade, but don't bother with your existing machine.
Image


Return to “Hardware”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: CommonCrawl [Bot] and 0 guests