Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question
Closed

Disappointing OC's and 3DMark06 Scores on 8800 GT

Last response: in Graphics & Displays
Share
November 7, 2007 11:19:31 PM

Well, either I am doing something wrong or there are a bunch of people lying about the OC's and 3D Mark Scores they are getting from this card.

I am running an AMD 6000+ CPU running OC'd to 3.2 Ghz running on Vista 64. I have 4 Gigs of DDR2 Ram.

EVGA 8800 GT came with 650 x 1950 OC.

I used RivaTuner to OC the GPU and just left the Core Clock & Shaders linked.

I've been reading about people getting Core OC's of 738 to 750 with excellent stability and 1000 on the Memory Clock. These same people are claiming 3DMark 06 scores with stock cooliing of between 12,500 and 14,500.

Anyway, I can't get a stable OC over 710 Core x 1000 Mem Clocks. Any higher and 3DMark06 locks up. My highest score was 10,700 which is only about 150 points higher than I got with my 8800 GTS 640 :( 

So either I am doing something wrong, or all the hype on this card is just that - hype. These OC's and scores suck. Hope someone can help - at this point I am very disappointed.
November 8, 2007 12:04:24 AM

Oh how nice. I was just reading your other post complaining about this. Well I'll just say what I have said:

First of all, I'm willing to believe that the cpu is bottlenecking the video card in some part of the benchmark. Another thing is that running Vista may hinder your score.

What is your psu? It may or may not be the reason why you can't overclock as far as others. 700mhz is a great overclock already, considering that my 8800GTS could only reach 630.

And there is no way this card is just all hype. The STOCK speeds can nearly match the 8800GTX- at half the price!
a b U Graphics card
November 8, 2007 12:05:48 AM

Be sure to compare your setup to similar CPUs, from everything I've seen, all the high scores require wicked high intel CPU overclocks to bring out the extra points in 3Dmk06. You simply can't fully exploit the additional GPU power of any solution in 3Dmk06 without very high CPU OC on the most powerful CPUs. And while the 6000+ is nice for real world apps and games, it just doesn't play to 3Dmark's needs.

As for the hype, I've been trying to calm you down and bring you back to earth for the past week.

It's a DAMN fine card, but it's not magic. It's benefit wasn't that it destroys a GTS-640, it's that it's at or above a GTS-640 for a lower MSRP and lower power consumption rates, plus some hopefully good OC potential.

Personally I say forget the Bungholiomarks, play some games.
Related resources
November 8, 2007 12:15:07 AM

He's already got an OC from the factory from 600-650MHz and now he's upset that he got 60MHz more??? I don't get it? My 8800GTX got 10300 on the GFX card and 12200 total score. I could care less about some stupid bench mark, I can run Crysis on all high setting nicely thats my benchmark.
November 8, 2007 12:19:31 AM

TheGreatGrapeApe said:
Personally I say forget the Bungholiomarks, play some games.


So true...

it's sad you're basing this card off of 3DMark06 scores...that's just...sad. very sad.
November 8, 2007 12:20:11 AM

mitchellvii said:


Anyway, I can't get a stable OC over 710 Core x 1000 Mem Clocks. Any higher and 3DMark06 locks up. My highest score was 10,700 which is only about 150 points higher than I got with my 8800 GTS 640
Did you go from a GTS to a GT?? If so, why in the world would you do that? The GT isn't the latest greatest HIGH end card, it is the latest greatest MID range card that makes purchasing a current GTS or GTX pointless BUT if you already have a 8800GTS or a GTX it isn't worth it to "upgrade" to a GT.

Also you shouldn't buy a card expecting any overclock. Any overclock you get is a free gift. As has been said, just enjoy the card, don't stress out about a few whatevermarks.
November 8, 2007 12:30:15 AM

Hmm, I can't get RivaTuner 2.06 to work with Vista 64. It is saying I need a signed driver. Funny the Beta 2.06 ran fine.
November 8, 2007 12:57:20 AM

Complaining about 3dmark scores is just lame
a c 365 U Graphics card
November 8, 2007 1:11:12 AM

TheGreatGrapeApe said:

As for the hype, I've been trying to calm you down and bring you back to earth for the past week.



Sometimes it's just a waste of time to bring people back to reality. I still remember people complaining that the E6600 sucked 'cause they couldn't OC it past 3.2GHz or 3.4GHz.

For some people a reality check does not exist.
November 8, 2007 1:27:28 AM

systemlord said:
He's already got an OC from the factory from 600-650MHz and now he's upset that he got 60MHz more??? I don't get it? My 8800GTX got 10300 on the GFX card and 12200 total score. I could care less about some stupid bench mark, I can run Crysis on all high setting nicely thats my benchmark.


Yeah but you cant do antialiasing lmao:p  otherwise your gonna suffer for it:) 

LOL

I can barely do that using Sli GTSs hahah...but I did manage to get 50...70 Frames if I turn off shadows on Max quality...Antialiasing brings it down a little but...it drops alot huge scenerios:( 

God damn GTSs lol I should just sell em and get GTs lol but I'm just gonna wait till The 10.1 cards come out!
November 8, 2007 2:16:16 AM

I know 3dmark is lame, crap, and worthless when competing for a high score, but I'll still stand firm that when comparing similar systems, it is a great tool to use to see if your system is running properly. I have seen many problems spotted through 3dmark just because the score was significantly lower than a similarly equipped system.

It is perfectly normal to suspect that replacing the old 8800GTS 640mb with a 8800GT only increased the score by 150. The 8800GT is after all a much better performer than the 8800GTS. Instead of flat out stating that the 8800GT sucks, he posted here to solve the problem, not to get flamed.

That being said, use fraps to compare frame rates in a intensive game, assuming that you still have your 8800GTS 640mb.
November 8, 2007 2:18:48 AM

Wow dude...that is sad. If I got a GPU like that, I would play games for about 24hrs straight to break in that puppy...first thing you do is OC and 3Dmark06? I think you need to work on your priorities...
November 8, 2007 3:06:49 AM

mitchellvii said:


I've been reading about people getting Core OC's of 738 to 750 with excellent stability and 1000 on the Memory Clock. These same people are claiming 3DMark 06 scores with stock cooliing of between 12,500 and 14,500.

Anyway, I can't get a stable OC over 710 Core x 1000 Mem Clocks. Any higher and 3DMark06 locks up. My highest score was 10,700 which is only about 150 points higher than I got with my 8800 GTS 640 :( 


Should have gotten the SSC edition. All these people saying there is no diff in the quality and yet you still have people with others not able to get the OC in stable.

I ran the SSC only up to 740/1800/2000 on stock cooling and pulling 13058 (E6750 @3.6)
*running it back at SSC "stock" cause the gains seemed pointless for the fan noise increase

E6750 @ 3.6 1.525V
Thermalright 120 Extreme + SilenX
P35-DS3R
2x1GB DDR2-1066 Corsair Balistix (running 1:1)
eVGA 8800GT SSC
3DMark06: 13058
November 8, 2007 3:14:25 AM

Well, all 3DMark scores aside, I've run Quake Wars and UT3 with everything including ant0aliasing maxed out and both of them ran pegged at 60 FPS on Fraps (as high as mine will go anyway) almost teh whole time, so I guess I'm happy after all.

I was running at 700 / 950. Card seems to get better and better the more I use it.

And yes, I think my CPU Scores are bottle-necking the 3DMark Score.
a b U Graphics card
November 8, 2007 3:49:58 AM

monsterrocks said:
Wow dude...that is sad. If I got a GPU like that, I would play games for about 24hrs straight to break in that puppy...first thing you do is OC and 3Dmark06? I think you need to work on your priorities...


Funny thing is first thing I'd do on a new card is run 3Dmark, but in a continuous loop to ensure that everything gets well burnt-in and functioning. I don't do 24hr runs anymore (as it's not as good for a laptop as desktop) but I did run 3Dmark on a loop for 4hrs before I got into any serious work with it.

PS, MITCH, the CPU scores don't impact your 3Dmk06 scores, it's just the CPU that impacts the 4 graphical tests that make up the final score which is separate from the CPU score.
http://www.futuremark.com/companyinfo/pressroom/companypdfs/3DMark06_Whitepaper_v1_0_2.pdf
See Page 34.
November 8, 2007 3:50:42 AM

It's the AMD cpu.
I have X2 5000
Evga 8800 SC
3D Mark 06 = 9169
http://service.futuremark.com/compare?3dm06=3618523
with a XFX 8600GT XXX = 4961

All I intend to use the benchmark for is to run it from time to time to see if I have any problems. Enjoy your card.
November 8, 2007 11:15:56 AM

Don't Trust 3D mark for Graphic quality all the time...3D mark is ment to overstress the video card...lol It wasn't really inteded to get blazing frames on it...So I barely even run 3D mark I just play the games....if I have a low 3D mark score but the games run well Why should I care??? :p 
November 8, 2007 11:52:39 AM

UPDATE:

Having a lot of serious "locking up" issues with this card the more I use it. Called EVGA to discuss. They said card is definitely a bad one.

They are shipping me a new card with a free shipping label for me to send the old one back. Good policy on their part.

So final verdict - BAD CARD.
a c 86 U Graphics card
November 8, 2007 1:03:50 PM

Man you broke your card :p 
Anyways keep us posted on the progress you make with the new one
November 8, 2007 1:17:21 PM

Lol,

Nah I didn't break it. It came "pre-broken" just for me.

I have a Theory on that. I call it the "Law of Worst Returns"

LAW OF WORST RETURNS:
"The more difficult a product is to return and the more of a hassle returning it will cause in your life, the more likely that product will be defective, requiring a return."
November 8, 2007 1:41:51 PM

Well you did OC it so you might have a bad OCer
November 8, 2007 1:42:44 PM

mitchellvii said:
Well, all 3DMark scores aside, I've run Quake Wars and UT3 with everything including ant0aliasing maxed out and both of them ran pegged at 60 FPS on Fraps (as high as mine will go anyway) almost teh whole time, so I guess I'm happy after all.

I was running at 700 / 950. Card seems to get better and better the more I use it.

And yes, I think my CPU Scores are bottle-necking the 3DMark Score.


You can remove the frame cap, link in sig.
November 8, 2007 1:46:16 PM

Its not just a bad OC'er. If I even try to launch NVMonitor it crashes. Card is fubar'd.
November 8, 2007 1:47:47 PM

Stemmin,

"You can remove the frame cap, link in sig."

Sorry, don't know what you mean ...
November 8, 2007 2:16:03 PM

monsterrocks said:
Wow dude...that is sad. If I got a GPU like that, I would play games for about 24hrs straight to break in that puppy...first thing you do is OC and 3Dmark06? I think you need to work on your priorities...


Well I know that I for one would definitely do the exact same thing. Just as if I were to get a new CPU I wouldn't play a game until about 3 days of testing had ensued. Heck, when I build a whole new system. Aside from the OS being loaded the system has nothing loaded on it until after about 5 days to a week of intense testing and configuring. I refuse to use my system at less than its full potential that my abilities are able to achieve. If i did...the only thing I would be thinking about is..."Man, I could be running this better than I currently am right now." Which would make playing any game very difficult to enjoy...even if I was already @ 120 fps. So I see where he is coming from.

Best,

3Ball
November 8, 2007 2:32:36 PM

It is so enjoyable being attacked by pedantic, pontificating nerds.

I would hazard a guess that most people do what I do when they get a new GPU. OC the sucker and see how good their 3DMark06 is compared to their old card. Since it would take me about a month to actually "game for 24 hours" (I have a career AND a life), that means I wouldn't OC for my card until sometime in the middle of December.

But despite the condescending comments about how I should be happy with the card the way it is and I am crazy for trying to OC it in the first place so quickly, etc, turns out the card under-performed for the simplest reason of all - it's broken.
November 8, 2007 2:47:04 PM

mitchellvii said:
Stemmin,

"You can remove the frame cap, link in sig."

Sorry, don't know what you mean ...


In my SIGnature, there's a link to the Epic Games UT3 forums, in there, there is a list of tweaks you can do to the game, you must modify an .ini file to remove the framerate cap of 62.

Quote:
Open UTEngine.ini with ur editor.

[Engine.GameEngine]
bSmoothFrameRate=FALSE <- uncap fps cap oO
MinSmoothedFrameRate=22
MaxSmoothedFrameRate=62
November 8, 2007 2:52:16 PM

nerd is a strong word my friend.
November 8, 2007 3:13:13 PM

skittle,

And in the case that I used it, utterly appropriate. I only use it in referring to those that come into a thread insulting the OP for being some sort of idiot for doing things the way they do them.
November 8, 2007 3:14:28 PM

Thanks Stem,

I'll try that. Stem knows more than me, and yet he is helpful and NOT a nerd.
November 8, 2007 3:38:11 PM

skittle said:
nerd is a strong word my friend.


I consider nerd to be a great word and I use this word to refer to myself proudly. Though I dont look like what one would consider to be the stereotypical nerd considering I play basketball at the college level and keep in good shape and dont wear suspenders...lol. I have always when asked the question buy a fellow jock with a somewhat lesser mind "Dude, what are you some sort of nerd or something?" answered yes I am...and I am damn proud of it! lol, that plus my high school computer science teacher called everyone in her class nerds and it kinda stuck. lol nerds FTW!

Best,

3Ball
November 8, 2007 3:57:19 PM

When you were comparing 3dmark scores you were looking at scores people with simular processors and vista64 were getting right?

Going to be lower than someone with a 3ghz quad core or windows xp
November 8, 2007 4:03:29 PM

jwolf,

Well it's all moot as EVGA has determined that my card is "broken" and must be replaced.
November 8, 2007 5:10:25 PM

hey mitchellvii - remeber to turn of (disable) you peglink mode in the bios before trying to go upwards with gpu oc
November 8, 2007 5:12:35 PM

as for your card - i dont think its a broken one - 10% change i may be wrong - but thats not to worry about - youll see with the new card how it goes - i spot the same as the scores you gave above is precisely what they should be on your setup

November 8, 2007 5:14:41 PM

Jwolf is right. Most of these hotrod scores you see are on OC'd C2D/Q chips. Your 6000+ is not up to snuff there. You have to make comparisons ceterus paribus to be able to isolate a meaningful display of the video card's effect on the system.
November 8, 2007 5:15:24 PM

werner,

Thanks for that but I have no idea what you are talking about. I have a pretty crappy locked BIOS on my MB (EliteGroup MCP61PM-AM) and I'm not sure how much I can turn off or turn on.

One thing I was wondering though - how can I tell if my PCI-e is up to snuff for this card? Is that in the BIOS? (Oops, I am seeing that in GPU-z, looks like I have x16 so that should be ok I guess.)

EDIT: It's not just the low scores, the games are freezing up as well as some other bugginess. I concur that the problem I am having with the 3dMark scores is the 6000+ since that score includes a CPU test and I dont get over 1 FPS on that one.
November 8, 2007 5:15:37 PM

one more thing - although 3mark gives you a lower score - i guarantee you your minimum frame rate wont differ with more than 2fps from the other cards overclocked to those frequencies - i am 100% confident that you'll get a much much better minimum frame rate than with your gts -

hey - you have a great card - even though i support ati - i feel the green team gave us a great package this time
November 8, 2007 5:17:11 PM

Id use 3dmark06 almost right away too, its a great way to judge performance of your card since you know what roughly your score should be, to make sure your card is working.

Aside from that it's something to brag about. hell its even kinda fun, trying to always break my 3dmark06 score when I had my GX2. It is fun :p 

Useful in so many ways.
November 8, 2007 5:18:13 PM

ok - give me 5 minutes - i'll look up on your board and reply asap with details on how to turn it of - if possible on your board
November 8, 2007 5:30:22 PM

sorry mitvii - i'll have to get to this at a later time - in south africa its now 9:30 pm and me kiddie is calling for his daddy - will post tomorrow though - look out for it - ttfn (tata for now)
November 8, 2007 5:34:41 PM

Thanks werner.

I looked at the BIOS and didn't see anything that said "PegLink", but I did see an "HPET Support" which was enabled. Is that related in any way?
November 8, 2007 6:23:15 PM

I just got the card for my Buddy...its SOOO THIN!!!!! it plays bomb...Its not better than both my GTSs but It still dominates most things ....but I still wouldn't give up my 8800 GTS....they prove to be better overclockers...I have both mine at 600 from 525...and 850 from 775...So yeah...Plus I can do more but the cooling in my system is bad!

:) 
November 8, 2007 7:26:42 PM

8800GTS at those clocks still aint nowhere neat he 8800GT at stock.
a b U Graphics card
November 8, 2007 7:28:50 PM

Well Mitch, this time I used restraint when commenting on your posts, but really you're gonna have the chill the whole nerd thing. Coming into a tech forum and calling people nerds because they give you advice/criticism about how you overclocked your fresh to market hardware rings a little hollow don't you think? :pfff: 

Anywhoo, once again I recommend a little breather dude, relax, rethink, then repost. :sol: 
November 8, 2007 8:39:17 PM

TGGA,

Dude you are just a consummate, condescending ass, aren't you? What can I say? You speak to posters here like you are this wise old man patting little kids on the head.

It wouldn't be quite so obnoxious if you weren't totally wrong (G92 has only 112 shaders - lol, sorry that's just hilariously stupid) half the time and have no idea what you are pontificating about.

So to call someone's threads a "train wreck" and insinuate their insights are idiotic is "OK" (so long as YOU are doing it), but to call someone a "nerd" for making gratuitous attacks on my intelligence instead of just politely disagreeing is "crossing the line"?

I'm sorry, you may be the most arrogant, hypocritical, self-absorbed JERK I have ever met online and that's some pretty rough company.

P.S., Why do you even comment in my posts? In this post I was asking a question to solve a problem. At what point did I give you the impression that I respected your insights at any level? And yet, you come into my thread and post more than anyone else.

I am sorry, but in my opinion, anyone convinced that nVidia designed a whole new GPU based upon only 112 shaders when ther entire line before was 128 is just an idiot and not to be counted on for sound advice.

So my advice to you is, breathe, take a break, cool down and go bother someone who still thinks you know something.
November 8, 2007 8:48:57 PM

Hatman said:
8800GTS at those clocks still aint nowhere neat he 8800GT at stock.


The Card has a 10 Frame advantage over the GTS 320 its pretty much as good maybe a little better than the 640...I for one aint that wowed by it considering the 8800 GTS came out a WHILE ago and this is just a slight step up from the GTSs.
Considering the THG benchmarks:) 

Given they're a better deal than the 8800 GTS now...but I bought mine at the end of July for only 269.99 Each from Best Buy ...Sale cuz no1 would buy them for 349.99.
They can dish out any game on the market right now I even tried Crysis maxed out with 16X antialising It runs about 30 Frames but goes up when I turn off the Shadows:) 
So i dunno I dont find it that amazing considering the new Atis are around the corner.

I would've bought the 8800 GT if it came out instead of the GTS because thats the way it should've been but...meh I just rushed to much:) 

I'll have to wait for the 9 series:)  or tillt he Ultras are like 350 lol
November 8, 2007 8:50:54 PM

The G92 GTS with 128 shaders enabled and up to a Gig of vRam will be better and it will be released in early December. Just ask TGGA - roflmao!
a b U Graphics card
November 8, 2007 8:59:08 PM

mitchellvii said:

Dude you are just a consummate, condescending ass. What can I say? You speak to posters here like you are this wise old man patting little kids on the head.


Yep that's me.
Patt on the head or swat on the behind, whatever's needed.
I'll play the wise old man, you can play the petulant child. I think we're doing a great job in the roles all without professional writers too.

I didn't attack you once in this thread, but you obviously have issues from the previous thread, and you don't like when I, or obviously everyone/anyone else, don't see it your way.

Quote:
It wouldn't be quite so obnoxious if you weren't totally wrong (G92 has only 112 shaders - lol, sorry that's just hilariously stupid) half the time and have no idea what you are pontificating about.


Yeah, link me to that 128SPU card right now. Not a guess, but an actual link GPU-Z certification. While it makes sense, so did a whole bunch of other predictions that never came true, just like the 160SPU Ultra.
I never said it was impossible, I said don't count on it, either soon or for $300 before Xmas.
Rumours are one thing, actual shipping cards are another.
And considering your complete errors on DX10.1, really mine may be a reluctance to believe in the wolf after everyone cried wolf 4 times before, and other people (who've played with the HD3800 and GT>S) telling me the GTS is not what you think it is, while your is mistating publish spec facts about things. I'll take my doubt or rumours over your mistakes about facts anyday.

Quote:
So to call someone's threads a "train wreck" and insinuate their insights are idiotic is OK (so long as YOU are doing it), but to call someone a "nerd" for making gratuitous attacks on my intelligence instead of just politely disagreeing is "crossing the line"?


I didn't say it was crossing the line I said it rang hollow. If you prefer me to call it hypocritical that's fine too. Either way calling people 'nerds' in a tech forum is the lamest insult you can provide. And if all you can do is insult in reply, then really what does that say about the power of your argument?

Quote:
I'm sorry, you may be the most arrogant, hypocritical, self-absorbed JERK I have ever met online.


Good, always nice to be #1 at something, eh! But I'm sure I could do even more for you if need be. :sol: 

I suggest you take a timeout to relax, all you do by posting this type of stuff is make yourself look worse and waste yours and everyone else's time.
November 8, 2007 8:59:16 PM

lets hope so...Cuz the GT was just kinda pointless right now for most ppl that spent their mula on the GTS...but for ppl that want a cheap solution its an amazing deal GOD DAMN IT I WAS TO EARLY!!!!!!!

I sorta wanna go back to Ati thought they always built such amazing an overclockable cards...I never had an ATI fail on me...I had an 8800 GTS fail...and the only ATi that every sorta stopped working was the one I through on the ground when I got mad and it still worked...but froze sometimes. ( i said through not smashed...so don't consufe the two)
!