Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

3d mark06 score

Last response: in Graphics & Displays
Share
August 26, 2007 8:51:37 PM

Hi,

I just upgraded from one graphics card to 2 in SLI:
Core 2 Duo e6750 @ 3ghz
2 gig Crucial balistix @ 900mhz DDR2
ASUS P5N32-e SLI
2x eVGA 8800GTS 320 Superclocked
X-Fi xtreme gamer with the x ram
an sata 2 drive with 320 GB
and a Seasonic 650W 80 plus PSU

My 3d mark score @ 1280x1024 is 13478...
Is this what I should expect?

My previous score without the second graphics card was ~10,000.
so a ~3,478 increase is expected? or is that not enough...

any ideas?
I am new to the SLI field, but am excited!

More about : mark06 score

August 26, 2007 9:03:54 PM

Congrats on your upgrade! :D 

From what I have been reading around the forum, SLI really kicks in when you go to higher resolutions, I suggest doing the test once more @ 1600x1200 and the increase will probably be more at your likings.
August 26, 2007 9:32:50 PM

SLI is generally better in higher resolutions, but seeing as you own the 8800GTS 320MB, the limited amount of memory is going to hurt performance at these resolutions.
Related resources
Can't find your answer ? Ask !
August 26, 2007 11:17:52 PM

Imo one high end card is always the better option over two lower cards. The 30% increase in performance for twice the price never seemed like a good deal. Remember people with 2x 7900gtxs? One new 8800gtx kills it. Btw i score ~11000 with one gts.
a c 273 U Graphics card
August 26, 2007 11:26:38 PM

cory1234 said:
Remember people with 2x 7900gtxs? One new 8800gtx kills it. Btw i score ~11000 with one gts.

:non:  Two 7900GTX's were never meant to be compared to any amount of GF8's or GF6's but only to a single 7900GTX only those who cannot get their heads around the concept of dual cards would compare two different series.
August 26, 2007 11:48:57 PM

I have to agree with mousemonkey

I also can get up to 11,000 with one gts but that is with overclocking the already overclocked card even more...

Now I have a BIG problem...at 1280X1024 lost planet dx10 in Vista 32 with the newest drivers 162.22 gets aweful FPS something like 5-15 outside...ouch

I am forced to run it at 1024X768...I turned on multigpu etc. but is this a software issue? I think so because Unreal 3 is supposed to run fine on a system like mine...

any thoughts?
a c 273 U Graphics card
August 27, 2007 12:00:44 AM

I don't think the 'one size fits all' driver idea is going very well myself, I know some people might not be having any issues with them but they gave me nothing but grief. have you tried an earlier version?, although I don't suppose earlier Vista drivers any better are they.
August 27, 2007 12:01:30 AM

Also, I cannot run 3dmark06 at 1900x1200 because my monitor does not support any more than 1280x1024...

I am happy with the 13,478 score since I can overclock the cards a bit more and squeeze out some more 3dmarks...but why bother.

I am more worried about the lost planet fps...should I try the call of juarez benchmark?
August 27, 2007 12:26:16 AM

yes i tried an older version and the 163 version from 3dguru but they are unstable for me...bah.

I think it is lost planet because i see on google others complaining about it...I want to try bioshock but it is not dx10 (what is really?) and am afraid of silly drm software on my PC.

I don't want to get the game because I reformat often (once a season) and I am not sure how it will react. sigh.
a c 273 U Graphics card
August 27, 2007 12:39:41 AM

Well if it makes you feel any better, I thought Lost Planet was crap and I am not going to touch Bioshock until the DRM\activation issue is sorted out, which is a shame because I was really looking forward to that game.
August 27, 2007 12:50:58 AM

lost planet was great at 1024x768, but...that is NOT what it was written for. It was written for xbox i believe, and we cannot expect much from microsoft...thanks Mr. Balmer!
a c 273 U Graphics card
August 27, 2007 1:02:35 AM

T'was indeed a ported Xbox title and thus not a true DX10 game, and I got narked by not being able to play in first person view or being able to shoot straight up but only at 140 - 160 degrees at most which meant too much running back and forth if something was flying above you.
August 27, 2007 1:21:22 AM

Seems about right. Maybe a tad low?
I get 12,000 on:
q6600 @ 2.7
GTS320

Thats on the unreg version if that matters
August 27, 2007 1:35:34 AM

12000 what resolution?
August 28, 2007 12:33:22 AM

AAAAAAH
the stupid motherboard died on me last night! (ONE LOOONG BEEP)
ugh
I replaced it with an ASUS Striker... and paid another $120 extra. geez.
Oh and the ram died too.
I paid another $6 to get the corsair xms 2 with 4-4-4-12 timings and NO MORE OVERCLOCKING FOR ME that is IT

I am now at 2.66 Ghz and will not touch a bloody thing!
August 28, 2007 1:00:27 AM

AAAAAAAH
now my GPU 1 is operating at 104 degrees C
it was 60 on the last motherboard...what the heck?
the GPU 2 is at 64 degrees.

i have the latest drivers and bios and am NOT overclocking!
August 28, 2007 1:35:57 AM

fixed it
I exchanged the two cards' position in the case...why this makes a dif I don't know...
now it reads GPU 1: 58 and GPU 2: 62
August 28, 2007 3:16:40 AM

Ok my new 3d mark score is a measly 12112.... i lost 1400 points because of the CPU?

even the sm03 score is down...It is comforting to know that we cannot take the 3dmark score seriously anymore since it is quite old.
Oh yeah updated rig specs:

Core 2 e6750@2.66
ASUS Striker Extreme
Corsair XMS2 2 Gig @ 800 with 4-4-4-12 and 2t
Seasonic 650W 80 plus PSU
2x eVGA 8800 GTS 320
a 19" monitor @1280X1024
HDD is sata2
a c 273 U Graphics card
August 28, 2007 3:28:51 AM

If it's of any comfort you are over 4000 points above the best my Sli'd 7900GT rig can manage when the CPU and cards are at their max OC.
August 28, 2007 4:41:35 AM

i Think mrmez got a great score because quad cores make a significant difference in 3dmark 06...

again we have to wait for REAL software to be written for the 8800 and dx10.

is unreal 3 dx10? and if not how does it look so good?
August 28, 2007 5:13:37 AM

The only real world benchmark for me is FPS, because at the end of the day thats what matters. Great 3D mark score BTW.
August 28, 2007 6:00:36 AM

i tell you what.
what game is a good benchmark for my system (considering I have SLI) and what FPS should I get.
I will buy that game and try it out. NOT BIOSHOCK...damn DRM.
quake 4? prey? halflife 2? something newer?

I play colin mcrae dirt with 1280x1024 with everything turned up all the way and I tell you it looks beautiful with no slow downs...but I do not know how to measure the FPS in it.
August 28, 2007 7:18:22 AM

bornking said:
i tell you what.
what game is a good benchmark for my system (considering I have SLI) and what FPS should I get.
I will buy that game and try it out. NOT BIOSHOCK...damn DRM.
quake 4? prey? halflife 2? something newer?

I play colin mcrae dirt with 1280x1024 with everything turned up all the way and I tell you it looks beautiful with no slow downs...but I do not know how to measure the FPS in it.


Try Oblivion as this game can make others PC's cry, and its one of the best games ever to be released! OMG the graphics are to die for! I play Oblivion on my old P4 with my 7800GTX 256 and it played it well.
!