I purchased the 3870x2 graphics card, when it first came out. I was really excited when I got the card. I thought I was going to play crysis, all high on 1680 by 1050 with 40fps. But sadly, I was wrong I didnt think my system would bottleneck it that much after all people were saying 3870x2 would work almost to its full potential on most pci express x16 boards. (i was misinformed)
My system is: amd 6400 @3.2ghz, 2gigs DRR2 @ 800mhz, psu 850watts thermaltake and mobo GIGABYTE GA-MA69VM-S2. (you can see on my signature obviously) and my 3dmark06 score was 12333. I was pretty disappointed after all this is a $450 dollar product. My previous video card was the 7950gt and that was performing the same as my 3870x2 when i was playing games on high resolution. With the new card i ran crysis with around 17fps and call of duty 4 on all high with like 20-30fps (frames jumping everywhere). I was really disappointed. well I have came to a conclusion that it was my fault for going with amd. By comparing my scores with orb on futuremark, that no amd configuration with the 3870x2 score is higher than 14k. (even with the new phenom). Intel scores were much higher paired up with this baby. There is no comparison with intel and amd this generation. Sure amd is really cheap but it does not live up to the gamers expectations. I was really upset when my card did not run a lot better than my 7950gt. I feel like ati guaranteed high performance. Would future drivers increase this big performance gap with intel and amd? I mean these high end video cards run better on an intel configuration.

Couple of things when you say frames jumping all around the place could it be that you have V-Sync enabled ? if you do turn it off. The other thing that comes to mind is that given its performing like your 7950 used to i am wondering if its actually working in Crossfire mode or not. I beleive that there is a setting in the Bios that has to be enabled.
I have no acctual first hand experiance so you may want to wait for more replies from people who can tell you exactly what to enable. I do not know your level of expertese you may be happy just having a look for a Crossfire setting?
Are you using Vista or XP as the former will run games slower anyway.
Hope thats helpfull
Mactronix

hmm, are you saying that intel systems paired with the 3870x2 got much higher gpu scores than an AMD did, if so that would be odd but this is 3d mark so not too much to worry about.

if not and you are looking at total scores only, you are a fool.

you could also post some links to reviews where intel based systems score dramatically higher in games than a comparable AMD system.

overall your post makes me think you shouldn't be allowed to dress yourself.

I analyzed all parts of 3dmark06 not just the overscore. There was a tremendis increase in fps for the intel system in the graphics test of the 3dmark and the hdr tests while using the 3870gx2 compared to amd. This makes you think of the new amd spider (if its worth your time). And to mactronix, I am pretty sure I am using both gpu's because in gpuz i can see different work loads for each gpu and it says crossfire enable lol I am using vista 32 bit and ofcourse v-sync is turned off. (that is only if you have 60fps+ gets rid of some of the choppyness)

Quote of the day:

No worrys galatasaray just thought i would mention it we all miss the obvious little things from time to time
Mactronix

well, what games show improvements?

your crysis results look on par with this one

http://www.tomshardware.co.uk/ATI- [...] 03-13.html

and they use a faster proc. yuour CoD4 rsults do look low but again, that could be a driver thing, the corssfire not working properly. you ain't running fraps are you? there used to be could be a problem running fraps and changing settings in the CCC.

sorry for calling you a fool but your post doesn't smell of intelligence truth be told, see i hate people who make broad sweeping statements based on personal experience and using 3dmarks to justfiy it.

i searched for 3-3.2ghz C2D and a 3870x2 and they didn't get that much more than your own socre, about 14500k. you weren't looking at super overclocked versions were you?

sorry to sound like an arse(i am one i know) but you seem to be over reacting somewhat.

and lets face it, nothing plays crysis "all high on 1680 by 1050 with 40fps."




or am I missing something?

Im just stating the obvious strangesstranger, there is no amd configuration out there that can get over 15k i was wrong with 14k. Im sry if im making a general statement, im just upset with amd...Truth be told the all amd spider doesnt grasp my attention. My crysis wasnt using antialiasing

yes, but what about games, why is your amd worse than an intel(okay so they ain't as good). what is the point in your post, you are saying that that intel procs beat atlon x2's. no **** they have for a while however, where is your proof that your proc is bottlenecking your system?

i mean you clearly believe that it is the cause of your unacceptable performance. so apart form 3dmarks in what way is your proc holding you back so severly that a C2D would not.

you mentioned an intel system got far more fps in the bechies, can you link to orb and show the system?

http://service.futuremark.com/resu [...] ultType=14

http://service.futuremark.com/resu [...] ultType=14

take a look at the cpu scores, if intel are so god damn great why ain't they miles ahead, note that they are bnoth equally clocked so the C2D should do better.

I don't think that he's totally off base. I have an Athlon X2 4600+ on an MSI K9AGM 690V board with 2 gigs of Kingston DDR2 667 with a factory overclocked MSI 3870x2 and here's my 3DMark 06 score:



Note that there are only two configurations like mine, so I'm CPU limited on my old CRT, but will get an LCD soon. Either Tom's or Anandtech noted some CPU limits at 1680 x 1050, so I'm considering an LCD that can do 1920 x 1200 despite the cost, just to see how well the 3870x2 can do.

I've noticed for awhile that people with Conroes, let alone Wolfdales, get better game benchmarks and 3DMark scores than those of us with Athlon X2's. Just see the articles on the Q6600 or the Phenoms for comparison.

Also, there's a thread where a poster got a score lower than mine with a Phenom and an 8800gt, and he couldn't figure out why. Others with a Q6600 and the same card got higher than mine because the CPU score accounts for something.

That doesn't mean I mind the performance. In Oblivion, I've never dropped below 25 fps and usually get around 60 at 1024 x 768. In The Witcher, I can get around 60 fps most of the time. It's obvious that I'm CPU limited and as far as games like Crysis go, so is anyone with a high end Athlon X2.

Let's face it, the Phenom is a good improvement to the Athlon X2. It's 17% to 25% faster per core, but doesn't clock as high as the 5000+ or 6000+ X2's. It's still slower in games than the Q6600, though it beats some Conroes and Wolfies at stock speed in Supreme Commander and many applications (see Tom's Wolfdale preview).

AMD is a budget company, like back in the K62 days. When a 45nm Phenom arrives, then I'll decide whether I'll go AMD or Intel for a 45nm quad core. My budget will probably be in the range of the Phenom, after all I've spent on the graphics card this year.

SINGLE core processor???

3dMark06 is alot more GPU leaning than 3dMark05....you CPU will add very little to the score and only in CPU test part of the program,and games today are also GPU not CPU hogs.

Game and home/office software still use a P4 rateing scheme.

The system I put together about 3 weeks ago 6000+/2GB DDR-800/8800GTS 512 (G92) gives me just short of 12K and I have not bothered to OC the system yet.

EDIT: If your useing Vista -that- will slow your system down. Look at the ORB things strangestr anger posted and notice for one thing the OS used on the slower system.

strangestranger it means i can barely run call of duty 4 with my card. i have to turn the specs down to 1024 x 768 with low detail to get 60fps so i can play smoothly. Now why would i pay $450 and expect the same performance as my 7950gt now can u tell me that...And i dont know where you are going with ur links. Now i know i have a cheap crappy mobo which is like 60 dollars but that does not make a difference with other amd users who have the new 7 series chipset mobos they are still getting the same performance i am. Tell me how that is right? Im thinking maybe amd does not have the right drivers out yet.

Galatasaray mate i dunno whats wrong with ur setup but dont be throwing around i paided this much for something that doesnt perform as good. THE HELL IT WONT be you 7950. in everyway. Obviously something is a miss in you system cause i got a 6000+ at 3.4ghz and a 3870x2 at stock or oc'ed and i get easily playable frames in CoD4 and crysis is closer to the 25fps range for i. something in YOUR system is wrong. i get 12500 in 06 SEE.

SM2 5623
SM3 7042
CPU 2380
12673Marks