3D Mark 05 Scores

Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.nvidia (More info?)

Anyone tried 3D Mark 05 yet?

I got a whopping 588 with the following setup, LOL

AMD Athlon 2600+, ASUS A7N8X-E Deluxe, 512MB PC3200 RAM, ASUS Geforce FX5700
128MB
Nvidia Mobo driver 5.10, Graphics driver 61.77, nothing overclocked.

Yikes! Roll on the AGP 6600's I say...
15 answers Last reply
More about mark scores
  1. Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.nvidia (More info?)

    > I got a whopping 588 with the following setup, LOL
    > AMD Athlon 2600+, ASUS A7N8X-E Deluxe, 512MB PC3200 RAM, ASUS Geforce
    > FX5700

    5256 here
    http://service.futuremark.com/compare?3dm05=88318

    rms
  2. Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.nvidia (More info?)

    "rms" <rsquires@flashREMOVE.net> wrote in message
    news:mNV8d.4336$5b1.1223@newssvr17.news.prodigy.com...
    >> I got a whopping 588 with the following setup, LOL
    >> AMD Athlon 2600+, ASUS A7N8X-E Deluxe, 512MB PC3200 RAM, ASUS Geforce
    >> FX5700
    >
    > 5256 here
    > http://service.futuremark.com/compare?3dm05=88318
    >
    > rms

    I wondered who would be first to rise the bait.
  3. Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.nvidia (More info?)

    http://service.futuremark.com/compare?3dm05=107535


    5506 no tweaks just standard test
  4. Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.nvidia (More info?)

    FX-51 system with FX5950 Ultra 256 (nothing overclocked)

    Got a score around 1600.

    Feeling kinda sad about that.

    Buddy of mine with a Pentium IV 2.8ghz (overclocked to 3.0 I believe) and a
    BFG FX6800GT OC (overclocked from 350 to 370 out of the box) got a score
    around 4500

    I just ordered the card he has :)
  5. Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.nvidia (More info?)

    nice. it will be obsolete in 6 months

    "Scotter" <spam@spam.com> wrote in message
    news:zeY8d.341$iC4.3@fe2.texas.rr.com...
    > FX-51 system with FX5950 Ultra 256 (nothing overclocked)
    >
    > Got a score around 1600.
    >
    > Feeling kinda sad about that.
    >
    > Buddy of mine with a Pentium IV 2.8ghz (overclocked to 3.0 I believe) and
    > a BFG FX6800GT OC (overclocked from 350 to 370 out of the box) got a score
    > around 4500
    >
    > I just ordered the card he has :)
    >
    >
  6. Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.nvidia (More info?)

    > I wondered who would be first to rise the bait.
    I think we've already been here.

    5422 for me:
    http://service.futuremark.com/compare?3dm05=81822

    I see no reason why they were compelled to release 05. It's the most
    worthless one of the bunch.

    Gary


    --

    Tweaks & Reviews
    www.slottweak.com
  7. Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.nvidia (More info?)

    Athlon xp2500+ o/c'd to 205 FSB so now it's an XP3200+ with 512 MB Ram and
    an 6800 128MB and a score of 3860.

    Robin
  8. Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.nvidia (More info?)

    > 5256 here
    > http://service.futuremark.com/compare?3dm05=88318

    Finally upgraded from the Athlon 700, eh? :)
  9. Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.nvidia (More info?)

    960x720@32 bit is your resolution in this test, better go for 1024x768 32bit
    if you are gonna compare.

    "FatDaddy" <KillinU@worm.com> wrote in message
    news:69ydnSCEpYN_oPncRVn-oA@comcast.com...
    > http://service.futuremark.com/compare?3dm05=107535
    >
    >
    > 5506 no tweaks just standard test
    >
  10. Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.nvidia (More info?)

    Also his fsb speed is overclocked.


    "Runar" <runarhalvorsen@hotmail.com> wrote in message
    news:2sj61dF1mgkhvU1@uni-berlin.de...
    > 960x720@32 bit is your resolution in this test, better go for 1024x768
    > 32bit if you are gonna compare.
    >
    > "FatDaddy" <KillinU@worm.com> wrote in message
    > news:69ydnSCEpYN_oPncRVn-oA@comcast.com...
    >> http://service.futuremark.com/compare?3dm05=107535
    >>
    >>
    >> 5506 no tweaks just standard test
    >>
    >
    >
  11. Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.nvidia (More info?)

    Yup! Gotta love how as far as PC technology goes, no matter what you buy, it
    will be obsolete quicker than you can replenish the crazy amount of money
    you spent buying it, heh.

    "Predator" <predator.this@predator.that> wrote in message
    news:gcadnRXL3JZm_fncRVn-gw@giganews.com...
    > nice. it will be obsolete in 6 months
    >
    > "Scotter" <spam@spam.com> wrote in message
    > news:zeY8d.341$iC4.3@fe2.texas.rr.com...
    >> FX-51 system with FX5950 Ultra 256 (nothing overclocked)
    >>
    >> Got a score around 1600.
    >>
    >> Feeling kinda sad about that.
    >>
    >> Buddy of mine with a Pentium IV 2.8ghz (overclocked to 3.0 I believe) and
    >> a BFG FX6800GT OC (overclocked from 350 to 370 out of the box) got a
    >> score around 4500
    >>
    >> I just ordered the card he has :)
    >>
    >>
    >
    >
  12. Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.nvidia (More info?)

    4850 with a GT@Ultra and a P4 2.6ghz :-) (use 66.81 drivers)
  13. Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.nvidia (More info?)

    Yeap, you can say it worthless as of 05 but I see value to it. 3DMark05 will
    indicate how much your card can handle those 3D intensive calculation. Then
    make your own standard level to set for every PC being built in the future
    or in the planing. The result PC should or will be expected to perform well
    when come to heavy 3D base application or game. But as for end-user, it very
    disappoint to see the card you own hit under 1000 and other can get higher
    [matter of speaking as an example]. This also can be use as in burn-in test
    for PC prior to release. You can also take notice how much heat being
    generated for certain card being use or planing to use on that PC so this in
    turn set what type of cooling will be use.

    CapFusion,....


    "GTX_SlotCar" <deroy@maine.rr.com> wrote in message
    news:2sjlg9F1l696lU1@uni-berlin.de...
    >> I wondered who would be first to rise the bait.
    > I think we've already been here.
    >
    > 5422 for me:
    > http://service.futuremark.com/compare?3dm05=81822
    >
    > I see no reason why they were compelled to release 05. It's the most
    > worthless one of the bunch.
    >
    > Gary
    >
    >
    > --
    >
    > Tweaks & Reviews
    > www.slottweak.com
    >
    >
    >
  14. Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.nvidia (More info?)

    Well its a relief to see the poor score is mainly down to the graphics card
    :)

    "Quietman" <quietman1968 at hotmail dot com> wrote in message
    news:3oOdnZSo_67Ju_ncRVn-uQ@nildram.net...
    > Anyone tried 3D Mark 05 yet?
    >
    > I got a whopping 588 with the following setup, LOL
    >
    > AMD Athlon 2600+, ASUS A7N8X-E Deluxe, 512MB PC3200 RAM, ASUS Geforce
    > FX5700 128MB
    > Nvidia Mobo driver 5.10, Graphics driver 61.77, nothing overclocked.
    >
    > Yikes! Roll on the AGP 6600's I say...
    >
    >
  15. Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.nvidia (More info?)

    > Yeap, you can say it worthless as of 05 but I see value to it. 3DMark05
    will
    > indicate how much your card can handle those 3D intensive calculation.

    I understand that. It's just that I don't see it doing this any better than
    03 does.

    Gary

    --
    Tweaks & Reviews
    www.slottweak.com
Ask a new question

Read More

Nvidia Asus 3D Graphics