That seems low... my x850 netted me 7018 in 05. Do you have a comparison ling?
Exactly. 6192 at default 3DMark 05 settings
is low considering that his CPU and memory are slightly better than mine:
He has a 3.2 GHz P4 vs. my 3.0 GHz P4
He has PC 4000 vs. my PC 3200
Not to mention that his Raptors are faster than my Barracudas
I am using an eGeForce 6800 Ultra AGP vs. his X1950 PRO AGP
and my 3DMark 05 score at default settings is something around 5650 points.
This is the second time I see really disappointing benchmark scores for X1950 PRO AGP (the first guy who posted here earlier had Aquamark 3 score of some 58,000 which is 6000 lower than mine).
I would expect to see default 3DMark 05 scores around high 8,000s - low 10,000; and Aquamark 3 in the vicinity of 80,000-90,000 by upgrading from a 6800 Ultra to X1950 PRO.
By the looks of it I can expect what? A 10% increase?
I remember when I was considering the Gainward Bliss 7800GS+ I consistently saw people posting scores (with PCs comparable to mine) of like close to 10,000 3DMark 05s....
Isn't X1950 PRO supposed to kind of eat the Bliss for breakfast?
According to
THIS ARTICLE an X1950 PRO AGP should be at least 30% faster than a 6800 Ultra AGP (all else equal, of course).
Could anyone please tell me what is wrong with this picture?
Cleeve? It seems we need your expertise here.
I get 8500+ with Athon 64 and X1950PRO AGP; and 6800+ with P4 3.2GHz... 3DMark05 heavily promotes A64 over P4.