Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

ultra low score on 3dmark 05

Last response: in Graphics & Displays
Share
January 5, 2006 8:38:51 PM

im scoring 6500 on 3d mark 05 with a BFG 7800 GTX, 3.2 p4, 2.0 gb kingston ddr2 667 mhz ram and a WD 160 gb sata hdd, 400 watt antec psu ne help here or do i just have a bad system built??

More about : ultra low score 3dmark

January 5, 2006 8:49:15 PM

That score isn't <that> bad. It's probably your processor that's holding you back. Try overclocking ur processor like 100-150Mhz and you'll see a significant score increase. Also, DDR2 RAM has higher latency than DDR333/400 which will affect your CPU score (which is factored into your overall score).

You can overclock ur 7800GTX too, but it won't yield a much higher score.
I know 'cause I have 2 of those.

What clock speeds does that BFG card run at?

-mpjesse
January 5, 2006 8:51:31 PM

the BFG's run at 430 core 1200 mem, and the latency on my board can be lowered but would it increase my score tremendously or just a lil bit, and is my cpu really that bad?? cuz if thats my bottle neck then wow.... and would oc'in my cpu help at all cuz i coulda swore 3dmark 05 was a pure gpu test, with a cpu test, correct me if im wrong though
Related resources
January 6, 2006 1:12:16 AM

What software settings are running 3dMark? My XFX 7800 GT is getting around 7,060 3dMarks (2005) at the default (free version) settings. A GTX should do better, unless some settings are higher or the CPU is the bottleneck. My CPU is an AMD 3200 Winchester clocked at 2GHz.

Also your driver might have some fancy features like transparent aa turned on. Make sure sync is OFF for benchmarks. I prefer it ON for games but it will kill your benchmark scores so it needs to be OFF to bench.
January 6, 2006 2:07:45 AM

im running it stock, 1024x768x32, texture filtering is set to optimal, which isnt anything fancy, and im running it and my scre is acutlly 4665 not around 6500 like i had though, i ran it awhile ago and thought i got that, only got 4665 on this run so any suggestions would be appeciated
January 6, 2006 2:54:36 AM

Well you already know this but that score sucks for a 7800 GTX. My x800 XL AIW is mated to a p4 at 3.0GHz with only 1GB ram and I think it is getting around 4900 3dMarks (2005) so I don't think your CPU could be holding you back that much.

Are you running other programs in the background while you are benchmarking? Your hardward is first rate and should be doing a lot better. Have you tried other benchmarks like Aquamark? Did you install the motherboard drivers? Do you have any red or yellow marks in Device Manager?
January 6, 2006 10:03:54 AM

Quote:
im running it stock, 1024x768x32, texture filtering is set to optimal, which isnt anything fancy, and im running it and my scre is acutlly 4665 not around 6500 like i had though, i ran it awhile ago and thought i got that, only got 4665 on this run so any suggestions would be appeciated


have you checked the 6pin power connector is connected? the GTX underclocks itself if its not plugged in. i get 8020 in 3dmark05.
January 6, 2006 1:23:19 PM

In 3dMark, your processor shouldn't make more than 100 points or so difference. It's almost 100% videocard.

You should be getting a better score than that. Do you have the newest mobo drivers? Chipset, etc? How about your motherboard BIOS, is there a newer and better one out there?
January 6, 2006 1:23:48 PM

you deffinatly got a problem there.

what was your last video card?

Have you reinstalled your operating system so its nice and fresh?

Have you switched off AS/AA in the drivers option to application controlled if not do it and then rerun benchmark.

Check my score out on a standard cooled 7800gt in my signature it puts most cards to shame and yours should beat my card by miles.
January 6, 2006 1:25:13 PM

Flake your score is LOW, i get 7687 with a 7800gt.

with your spec i would be expecting 9000-10000, if i OC the card and cpu more i would easily pass 8100.
January 6, 2006 2:19:42 PM

Quote:
Flake your score is LOW, i get 7687 with a 7800gt.

with your spec i would be expecting 9000-10000, if i OC the card and cpu more i would easily pass 8100.


probably, but i havnt seen any other 3dmark scores with my setup ill find out at one point.
January 6, 2006 2:34:33 PM

Quote:
Flake your score is LOW, i get 7687 with a 7800gt.

with your spec i would be expecting 9000-10000, if i OC the card and cpu more i would easily pass 8100.


i just had a look around the net my score beats quite a few people with the same GFX so im happy there a few just under the 9k mark but there cards are seriously overclocked.
January 6, 2006 3:30:32 PM

I have a very similar system to Flakes (my X2-4400 is clocked a little higher than his) and my 7800 GTX (clocked to 450) manages to score almost 8100. You're definitely getting a low score.
January 6, 2006 3:34:20 PM

Quote:
Flake your score is LOW, i get 7687 with a 7800gt.

with your spec i would be expecting 9000-10000, if i OC the card and cpu more i would easily pass 8100.


Your GT is clocked to over 500... that explains your score. There's nothing wrong with his score for a stock 7800 GTX.
January 6, 2006 5:13:46 PM

Flakes, ya know it slow when a Dell beats ya! :wink:
January 6, 2006 6:41:51 PM

Quote:
Flake your score is LOW, i get 7687 with a 7800gt.

with your spec i would be expecting 9000-10000, if i OC the card and cpu more i would easily pass 8100.


Your GT is clocked to over 500... that explains your score. There's nothing wrong with his score for a stock 7800 GTX.

so ur sayin that my low score is normal?? hmm ok... if so nething i can do to incrase it, ill overclock, it just seeems so low for a nice graphics card considering everyone else is 7000+ and have a gt instead of gtx
January 6, 2006 6:59:50 PM

Quote:
Flakes, ya know it slow when a Dell beats ya! :wink:


8O 8O :? :?

well after hearing that i tweaked my system a bit(just a litle bit and got 8267 3DMark points...everyone happy?

GFX was at 467/1.28

and ill tweak this a little more see what happens...sheesh
January 6, 2006 7:07:37 PM

Now I better start OC and tweaking my X1800XT, since your getting to close to my 9500 :oops:  :roll: I think Windows plain sux as an out of the box performer... by now, u would think they would have smart installs optimizing OS based on host PC...
January 6, 2006 7:16:42 PM

Quote:
Now I better start OC and tweaking my X1800XT, since your getting to close to my 9500 :oops:  :roll: I think Windows plain sux as an out of the box performer... by now, u would think they would have smart installs optimizing OS based on host PC...


:twisted: you just wait.... on a side note since this topic is now way off, have you played around with the PCI express Clock Frequency option in the BIOS? just wondering how far it can go without killing something.
January 6, 2006 7:17:59 PM

oced my graphics card to 490 core, 1.31 ghz mem, got 4836................ a problem?? seems really low for such high settings
January 6, 2006 7:24:34 PM

Quote:
oced my graphics card to 490 core, 1.31 ghz mem, got 4836................ a problem?? seems really low for such high settings


probably throtlling due to heat if its a Nvidia dont know if ATI does this. relax those settings a bit and see if you get higher.
January 6, 2006 7:28:19 PM

well here is the problem i think i found, if u look up my mobo it has 2 slots for PCIE x16, and i had put it in the bottom one so that my gpu and northbrige would futher apart and stay cooler, well apperntly it also limited my settings to PCIE x1 instaed of x16, so i moved it back and am testing it and got 7024 with the oc in place (core 490 mem 1310) but didnt run cpu test so rerunnign it with those
January 6, 2006 7:36:51 PM

I was referring to the other guy's 500+ clock speed on his GT... the original poster DEFINITELY has an unacceptably low score in my book.
January 6, 2006 7:57:54 PM

i am the orignal poster and i oced it and everything and continue to get low scores regardless of what i do to it, got it running PCIEx16 core 490 and mem 1310 and only putting out 7000
January 6, 2006 8:08:27 PM

Quote:
i am the orignal poster and i oced it and everything and continue to get low scores regardless of what i do to it, got it running PCIEx16 core 490 and mem 1310 and only putting out 7000


put everything back to default. and try again..install the latest gfx drivers..
January 6, 2006 8:29:19 PM

everything stock with teh new 81.98 forceware managed to get 6826, even lower then my old drivers, everything is on air and willing to overclock if neone has ne ideas
January 6, 2006 8:39:03 PM

dunno if this is impotant but this kinda bugged me when i saw it
Driver Status Non WHQL - Not FM Approved
so ne details on that would be helpful and again, any reasons im scoring so low
January 6, 2006 9:01:33 PM

The rest of your problems are probably due to you motherboard. If you can find someone with the same setup (mobo, Card, Processor) would give you a better indication as to what you should be scoring. Cause at least one of the other guys talking about their scores being higher had a 4400+ x2 dual core amd which should on its own help to score signifganty higher.
January 6, 2006 9:05:56 PM

well im updating drivers and such, but isnt 7000 low for a 7800 GTX?
January 6, 2006 9:06:52 PM

4k is a bad low 3dMark 2005 score for a 7800 GTX. 7k is in the ball park but is still a hair low. An oced 7800 GTX should do better than 7k but not that much better. Now we are talking about tweeking instead of a major problem.
January 6, 2006 9:08:58 PM

ok, then my main problem was stupidty as to which i had my PCIE slot at x1 instead of x16 which hendered overall proformance, i can tweak fine bymyself, didnt no that that other slot ran x1, oh well, thanks for all of the help guyz
January 6, 2006 9:53:41 PM

Quote:
ok, then my main problem was stupidty as to which i had my PCIE slot at x1 instead of x16 which hendered overall proformance, i can tweak fine bymyself, didnt no that that other slot ran x1, oh well, thanks for all of the help guyz


it doesnt its just that slots not meant to be used at all unless you go SLI for which both slots will run at 8x instead of one running at 16x.
January 7, 2006 3:21:34 AM

Quote:
you just wait.... on a side note since this topic is now way off, have you played around with the PCI express Clock Frequency option in the BIOS? just wondering how far it can go without killing something.


Nope, just the drivers for ATI now have a large spread of overclocking built in, like 75mhz core and 100mhz memory over stock...
January 7, 2006 4:12:43 AM

Since you had your card it the wrong slot (which buy the way always gets you in trouble) you may want to check your ram is plugged in correctly(by correclty I mean the correct slot so that you enable dual channel) also that SLI selector card make sure it is turned the correct way for using one card.
January 7, 2006 11:26:50 AM

i used the standard nvidia OC tool in the driver, and it automatically OC the core to 509mhz from 450mhz standard and memory from 1.05 to 1.15. i have OC the core to 530-540ish stable and memort to 1.260ghz stable, just need to run 3dmark and post the score.

Your gtx should easily surpass my card in OC, i am really surprised how some gtx cannot oc over 500mhz core if a gt beats a gtx with a £100 price difference i would be pissed! :?
January 7, 2006 1:39:57 PM

i am pissed but i dont really no what to do about it i can oc it but even then im not gettin amazing results
January 7, 2006 1:43:31 PM

Quote:
i used the standard nvidia OC tool in the driver, and it automatically OC the core to 509mhz from 450mhz standard and memory from 1.05 to 1.15. i have OC the core to 530-540ish stable and memort to 1.260ghz stable, just need to run 3dmark and post the score.

Your gtx should easily surpass my card in OC, i am really surprised how some gtx cannot oc over 500mhz core if a gt beats a gtx with a £100 price difference i would be pissed! :?


thats only if you go with a pre overclocked version something i should of done a little bit mroe research on, the pre overclocked versions just dont overclock very well, well not to the heights of a normal 7800GTX.
January 7, 2006 7:36:43 PM

Quote:
......you may want to check your ram is plugged in correctly(by correclty I mean the correct slot so that you enable dual channel)....
Good idea. Has the OP done this yet?

It can be really hard to determine which slots to use because of the language barrier between english and where the boards are made. I'm still not sure if my memory is in the right slots. Is there a way to tell in software? My memory benches a hair slow on both my machines. I think the memory is in the right slots for dual channel but how do you know for sure?

Also (sorry for getting OT) in spite of having fairly fast xms memory I can not get bios to accept the faster timings on one machine and can't even find the memory timings on my other machine. Do some bios lock you out of such functions?
January 8, 2006 9:57:09 AM

you have 2 sticks of ram and you should also have 4 slots, they should be paired next to each other.

so u might have 1 pair of slots a space and another pair of slots, put both sticks into a pair of slots which are closer together. that should put you in duel channel the boot screen will tell you 128bit duelchannel enabled instead of single channel 64bit.
January 9, 2006 7:08:50 PM

acutly i have 4 sticks consiting of 512 each, so all o fmy slots are filled to let u guyz no, so im satisfied, can run fear, bf2, cod2 all maxed out with everythign aboce 30 fps, so im good
January 9, 2006 9:19:35 PM

I just checked both of my dual channel mother boards and both had the ram installed correctly, however each requires the ram be installed differently.

The Gigabyte 939 MB has 2 purple slots next to each other followed by 2 red slots. The slots go purple, purple, red, red. On this motherboard the memory goes in as RX8 said. If you have 2 sticks you put them both in purple, right next to each other. The memory benchmark in SiSoft runs about twice as fast with both sticks next to each other than if one stick is in each color. Final correct setup: purple filled, purple filled, red empty, red empty.

OTH I have an MSI 478 motherboard that goes green, green, purple, purple with a space between the 2 greens and the 2 purples. This setup actually makes more sense to me with the greens being one channel and the purples being another. On this MB the memory must have one stick in each color or the memory benchmarks will suffer. Final correct setup: green filled, green empty, red filled, red empty.

The bottom line is that it depends on your MB where you memory goes.
!