Is this benchmark right?

[stuff]

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

Hi all,

I've just installed my new Radeon 9800 Pro and run 3D Mark 2001.

After all the tests it came up with a benchmark of 13547

Is this okay? I've been a user of NVidia all my PC life so this is my first
ATI card.

My system specs:

AthlonXP 2400+
512MB PC2100 RAM
ATI Radeon 9800 Pro 128MB-256bit Catalyst 4.3 Drivers
Soundblaster Live Value
Mercury nForce2 400 Ultra motherboard
40GB Maxtor HD
Windows XP SP1

Thanks.

 

[stuff]

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

"sTuFf" <20@something.com> wrote in message
news:EPAXc.1528$Xw2.17703088@news-text.cableinet.net...
> Hi all,
>
> I've just installed my new Radeon 9800 Pro and run 3D Mark 2001.
>
> After all the tests it came up with a benchmark of 13547
>
> Is this okay? I've been a user of NVidia all my PC life so this is my
first
> ATI card.
>
> My system specs:
>
> AthlonXP 2400+
> 512MB PC2100 RAM
> ATI Radeon 9800 Pro 128MB-256bit Catalyst 4.3 Drivers
> Soundblaster Live Value
> Mercury nForce2 400 Ultra motherboard
> 40GB Maxtor HD
> Windows XP SP1
>
> Thanks.

Looking at the online results browser on Futuremark, people seem to be
getting around 20000. So why is mine so low?

 

[Guest]

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

On 8/26/2004 11:49 PM sTuFf brightened our day with:

>Hi all,
>
>I've just installed my new Radeon 9800 Pro and run 3D Mark 2001.
>
>After all the tests it came up with a benchmark of 13547
>
>Is this okay? I've been a user of NVidia all my PC life so this is my first
>ATI card.
>
>
>
You can do better, but for a first run not really knowing what the hell
you're doing with your ATI card that's pretty good. If you don't have
anything overclocked that's probably OK.
I get 16900 with my 9800 Pro overclocked, a faster CPU and more and
faster memory.
You should try running 3DMark2003, that's a little less reliant on your
CPU/Memory speed than 3DMark2K1 is.
And get the latest drivers from http://ati.com/support/driver.html.
You should get somewhere between 5500 and 6000 on 3DMark03.

--
History shows again and again
How nature points up the folly of men

Steve ¤»Inglo«¤

 

[stuff]

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

"Inglo" <ioo@??.¿¿¿> wrote in message
news:0nBXc.8647$QJ3.630@newssvr21.news.prodigy.com...
> On 8/26/2004 11:49 PM sTuFf brightened our day with:
>
> >Hi all,
> >
> >I've just installed my new Radeon 9800 Pro and run 3D Mark 2001.
> >
> >After all the tests it came up with a benchmark of 13547
> >
> >Is this okay? I've been a user of NVidia all my PC life so this is my
first
> >ATI card.
> >
> >
> >
> You can do better, but for a first run not really knowing what the hell
> you're doing with your ATI card that's pretty good. If you don't have
> anything overclocked that's probably OK.
> I get 16900 with my 9800 Pro overclocked, a faster CPU and more and
> faster memory.
> You should try running 3DMark2003, that's a little less reliant on your
> CPU/Memory speed than 3DMark2K1 is.
> And get the latest drivers from http://ati.com/support/driver.html.
> You should get somewhere between 5500 and 6000 on 3DMark03.
>
> --
> History shows again and again
> How nature points up the folly of men
>
> Steve ¤»Inglo«¤

Thanks,

Looking at the other benchmark results the only difference i can see between
the systems is that i have slow PC2100 memory at 133FSB whilst others seem
to have PC3200 @ 200FSB.

Hmmm. New memory?

 

[Guest]

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

On 8/27/2004 12:21 AM sTuFf brightened our day with:

>"sTuFf" <20@something.com> wrote in message
>news:EPAXc.1528$Xw2.17703088@news-text.cableinet.net...
>
>
>>Hi all,
>>
>>I've just installed my new Radeon 9800 Pro and run 3D Mark 2001.
>>
>>After all the tests it came up with a benchmark of 13547
>>
>>Is this okay? I've been a user of NVidia all my PC life so this is my
>>
>>
>first
>
>
>>ATI card.
>>
>>My system specs:
>>
>>AthlonXP 2400+
>>512MB PC2100 RAM
>>ATI Radeon 9800 Pro 128MB-256bit Catalyst 4.3 Drivers
>>Soundblaster Live Value
>>Mercury nForce2 400 Ultra motherboard
>>40GB Maxtor HD
>>Windows XP SP1
>>
>>Thanks.
>>
>>
>
>Looking at the online results browser on Futuremark, people seem to be
>getting around 20000. So why is mine so low?
>
>
>
>
Other people have Athlon 64 FX Processors and PC4000 RAM and their 9800s
are overclocked by 100 MHz.
Do a search that matches your specs, lots of people have similar scores.

--
History shows again and again
How nature points up the folly of men

Steve ¤»Inglo«¤

 

[sleepy]

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

"sTuFf" <20@something.com> wrote in message
news:EPAXc.1528$Xw2.17703088@news-text.cableinet.net...
> Hi all,
>
> I've just installed my new Radeon 9800 Pro and run 3D Mark 2001.
>
> After all the tests it came up with a benchmark of 13547
>
> Is this okay? I've been a user of NVidia all my PC life so this is my
first
> ATI card.
>
> My system specs:
>
> AthlonXP 2400+
> 512MB PC2100 RAM
> ATI Radeon 9800 Pro 128MB-256bit Catalyst 4.3 Drivers
> Soundblaster Live Value
> Mercury nForce2 400 Ultra motherboard
> 40GB Maxtor HD
> Windows XP SP1
>
> Thanks.
>
>
That looks like a decent score to me - a lot of the prats who
put in high benchmarks in 3dmark run their system stripped down
to graphics card only - no sound card or network card etc ...
with a fresh install of only Windows and 3dmark you can
artificially increase your score too - if you take the lid off your
case and point a desk fan in there you can increase memory timings
that would be unstable in everyday use.
My brother benchmarked his system with 3dmark2001 and
he has a XP2400, 512mb DDR, AIW 9700pro clocked to 9800pro
speeds in a 'normal' system and he got around 12000 IIRC so you're
not doing anything obviously wrong.

 

[Guest]

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

In article <xuEXc.1616$kk4.18654279@news-text.cableinet.net>,
nospam@here.com (Sleepy) wrote:

> That looks like a decent score to me

Me too. I get 20,000 ish with an x800Pro (flashed to XT) on a Barton
2.3GHz system.

Not that 3dmark2001 seems very important these days... other than for
generating large random numbers

Andrew McP

 

[Firthy]

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

its probably right, i have a 9600xt on stock speeds, with an XP2500+ clocked
up to 3200+ speeds getting this

http://users.bigpond.net.au/firthys/bm/

HTH

Firthy


"sTuFf" <20@something.com> wrote in message
news:EPAXc.1528$Xw2.17703088@news-text.cableinet.net...
> Hi all,
>
> I've just installed my new Radeon 9800 Pro and run 3D Mark 2001.
>
> After all the tests it came up with a benchmark of 13547
>
> Is this okay? I've been a user of NVidia all my PC life so this is my
first
> ATI card.
>
> My system specs:
>
> AthlonXP 2400+
> 512MB PC2100 RAM
> ATI Radeon 9800 Pro 128MB-256bit Catalyst 4.3 Drivers
> Soundblaster Live Value
> Mercury nForce2 400 Ultra motherboard
> 40GB Maxtor HD
> Windows XP SP1
>
> Thanks.
>
>

 

[augustus]

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

"sTuFf" <20@something.com> wrote in message
news:EPAXc.1528$Xw2.17703088@news-text.cableinet.net...
> Hi all,
>
> I've just installed my new Radeon 9800 Pro and run 3D Mark 2001.
>
> After all the tests it came up with a benchmark of 13547
>
> Is this okay? I've been a user of NVidia all my PC life so this is my
> first
> ATI card.

That sounds about right. Like others have said, '01 is more sensitive to CPU
speed and RAM than is '03. Upping my RAM to 1 gig and enabling dual channel
at the same time boosted the score by 700+. And as was mentioned, running
either 3DMark after fresh reboot ups the score a fair amount too. By a fair
bit. My old 8500 128Mb card in would clock 2450 in '03 after a fresh reboot.
But it would only bench 1850-1900 on repeated tests. My Barton 3200 with
1gig dual channel and a 9800 Pro at stock clocks does 17,300 in repeated
tests. In '03 it does 5900.

 

[Guest]

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

> Looking at the other benchmark results the only difference i can see between
> the systems is that i have slow PC2100 memory at 133FSB whilst others seem
> to have PC3200 @ 200FSB.
>
> Hmmm. New memory?

Nah. Your XP2400+ won't run at 200FSB anyway.

High scorers in 3DMark 2001 do all kinds of tweaks to get their score,
resulting in horrendous image quality and questionable system stability.
They don't play games using the same settings they benchmark with.
It's not worthwhile to try and catch up with the highest score people
reach with similar hardware.