Hitting 6888 on 3DMark03

[WA261]

Got my rig going (bout damn time) anyway...here is a 3dmark03 link

 

[Harabecw]

meh, after seeing the results change dramatically from just 2 specific changes, I have zero faith in 03 as a real benchmark.
show us a game :|

 

[T9D]

..

 

[Harabecw]

your rig is still plenty fast. hmm...we really need a new DX9 benchmark that actually knows you have a computer, not just a graphics card.

 

[Noid]

wow ... 511 on the 9800 core ...

 

[WA261]

Originally posted by: Harabecw
your rig is still plenty fast. hmm...we really need a new DX9 benchmark that actually knows you have a computer, not just a graphics card.

Well, that is kinda the point of 3DMark..to test your vid card...not your cpu.

 

[KillaBong]

3dmark is biased towards the video card, but games are too. I think 3dmark always had a realistic measurment of your game performance. If I didn't play games I would still run my 333mhz iMac; I can't see any real difference between computers(besides games), except that it takes a few seconds longer to load things.

 

[PCboy]

already saw your post at rage and oc forums so once again, nice score.

 

[WA261]

thnx. I would like above 7k, doubt i will get there. This card does not like it if I run fsb over 210 ....strange.

 

[Jincuteguy]

how did you get the core clock to 511 ? did u use any cooling stuff?

 

[WA261]

H2O/TEC cooled

 

[KoolHonda]

You got me beat, but mines just huffin on air.

 

[WA261]

tried to us PS to crank the core up more, but i just crash using it.

 

[KoolHonda]

The new Catalyst 3.4's might push you over the "edge"

 

[WA261]

When are those going to be released? I went back to R3DTweak and all is fine again...Powerstrip sux

 

[KoolHonda]

Hopefully soon. I've read in a week or so, but then I read the same about the 3.3s a couple weeks ago.

 

[WA261]

Seems I am not going to hit 7k with current drivers/setup. After messing around forever all I am able to hit is 6888

 

[Deeko]

3DMark means NOOOOTTTHHHIIIINNNNGGG.

Please post a benchmark that matters.

 

[kylebisme]

3dmark has lots of tests that show quite a range of things, if you can't see how that matters then you are fooling yourself Deeko.

 

[element2k5]

umm yea... 3dmark03 kicked my ass... 688 yes 688

 

[Deeko]

Originally posted by: TheSnowman
3dmark has lots of tests that show quite a range of things, if you can't see how that matters then you are fooling yourself Deeko.

Don't talk back to me boy.

3DMark has NEVEr been a good benchmark. It has always been inconsistant, drivers have been made to specifically look good in 3DMark, there are tweaks just to make your 3DMark look better, sometimes 3DMark is bad when nothing else is. Fact of the matter is, you don't sit and watch 3DMark all day. Benchmark a game, if your game scores are bad, THEN you have a problem. If your game scores are where they should be, who cares?

This thread is a perfect example of why I don't like 3DMark. This guy is specifically trying to get his 3DMark over a certain level. Why??? Is this your geek version of a dick size contest?

 

[WA261]

Suggest something I should run. I only ran 3DMark cuz it is about all I know of progs to test a vid card.

 

[EdipisReks]

run unreal 2, or splinter cell.

 

[Noid]

Try the UT2003 Benchmark tool ..

I'd like to see your results... I bet they are awsome.

 

[Deeko]

Originally posted by: WA261
Suggest something I should run. I only ran 3DMark cuz it is about all I know of progs to test a vid card.

Unreal II, UT2K3, are good