Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

3d mark 06 -wtf-

Last response: in Systems
Share
April 12, 2008 4:28:10 AM

ok i just ran it on my new system and i didnt even break 10k sooo WTF

wut i got

abit ip35 pro
xion E3110
8800gtx
2x2 of adata ram

so can some one explain how i dont have over a 10k score on that run cuz iv seen system that are all most identacle as mine and they got higher then me?

More about : mark wtf

April 12, 2008 4:49:56 AM

What are the scores? All of them. Even better, post a link to the comparison page for that run.
April 12, 2008 5:06:51 AM

dont tell me u got 9999 n u upset?
Related resources
April 12, 2008 5:47:50 AM

what power supply are you using? What Nvidia Driver?
I am running the 8800GTS 640mb slightly overclocked with a stock q6600 and getting 10,266. Not great but you should be higher than that I would think.
April 12, 2008 9:11:06 AM

ok it was a pain to get this pic up system locked up like 6 times wile trying to upload it and such thank i may have a virus even threw i scaned for one on two diffrent programs didnt find one on either one so idk...

so i ran the benchmark agine and this is wut i got



btw i have the latest driver my PSU is a HX620W corsair.

and during the cpu test i kept getting 0-1 FPS on both cpu test...?
April 12, 2008 9:38:06 AM

ok for some reason photbucket makes the pic a lil smaller then it really is but the scorse are:

"3dmarkscore virtualmarks" 9380
"SM2.0 Score VirtualMarks" 4335
"SM3.0 Score VirtualMarks" 4834
"CPU Score VirtualMarks" 1849

hopes this hlps
April 12, 2008 10:08:21 AM

Perhaps you are referring to the Xeon E3110.......

In that case, that IS bizarre and a bit low. I have similar scores to you but I only have a A64 X2 6000 (OCed 5600) and Radeon 3850.

http://service.futuremark.com/compare?3dm06=5307453

Well, first things first, when you check out Task Manager, does it show two cores?
April 12, 2008 5:40:33 PM

yes two cores and running at 2-4 precent
April 12, 2008 6:17:43 PM

jormm said:
yes two cores and running at 2-4 precent

Did you install the chipset drivers et cetera off the motherboard CD?
Also check if BOTH power cables are plugged into the GTX.
April 12, 2008 6:19:47 PM

Wait wait.. this isn't 3DMark06..it's "virtual marks"? Looks like it's in beta stage too. Are you sure you downloaded and installed "3DMark06"?

EDIT:

hmm, still seems strange i guess as i got 11100 marks. This tools is pretty accurate, but maybe not so on a GTX?
a b B Homebuilt system
April 12, 2008 6:22:16 PM

jormm said:
"CPU Score VirtualMarks" 1849


Gotta find out why this score isn't around 2800.
April 12, 2008 6:30:04 PM

CPU score looks a little low. Do you have latest bios? Maybe its not running 1333. Use CPU-Z and see how fast it is running. Your bios might not support this chip or this speed. A bios update should fix your problem. Your CPU should be in the 2400-2600 range for score.
April 12, 2008 11:55:02 PM

ok how do i update the bios i download the bios update had 5 files in it after extracting it i made a bootable flopy disc and tried to copy all the files in it but disc says its to full am i doing something wrong and/or is there any easyer way to update bios?
April 13, 2008 1:28:10 AM

Try 2 floppies, make one bootable and the other with the BIOS update files on it. Boot from disk 1 and then put disk 2 in and type RUNME.

Did you run CPUz to verify what speed the CPU was running at???
April 13, 2008 2:06:20 AM

yes ok i thank i did it right my new score on the benchmark is 11881 overall

and as far as CPUz says
core speed: 2004.3MHz
multiplier: x6.0
Bus Speed 334.0MHz
rated FSB 1336.1 MHz
April 13, 2008 2:09:08 AM

jormm said:
yes ok i thank i did it right my new score on the benchmark is 11881 overall

and as far as CPUz says
core speed: 2004.3MHz
multiplier: x6.0
Bus Speed 334.0MHz
rated FSB 1336.1 MHz



6x multiplier? It's being throttled, check temperature, or shut off speedstep.
April 13, 2008 2:12:12 AM

ok no idea how to do that but temp from uguru is 20C and speed fan says 25C
April 13, 2008 2:15:09 AM

jormm said:
ok no idea how to do that but temp from uguru is 20C and speed fan says 25C



That means speedstep is on, go to bios and disable it.
April 13, 2008 2:15:50 AM

oh ok ty brb turning it off now
April 13, 2008 2:25:51 AM

ok i didnt not find any thing that sayd speedstep in my bios?
April 13, 2008 2:33:33 AM

jormm said:
ok i didnt not find any thing that sayd speedstep in my bios?



The motherboard manufacturer may call it something else, instead of speedstep. It does the same thing - lowers your cpu multiplier from 9x to 6x - no matter what it's called. You should search the manufacturer website to see what they call it.
April 13, 2008 2:34:45 AM

oh ok btw sicne i have little knowladge about stuff like this wut is a key word for me to look for?
April 13, 2008 2:39:57 AM

jormm said:
oh ok btw sicne i have little knowladge about stuff like this wut is a key word for me to look for?



See if there are options C1E and EIST, if yes, turn them off.
April 13, 2008 2:41:49 AM

ok brb
April 13, 2008 2:45:05 AM

Why on earth would you want to disable EIST and/or C1E? You only do that if you have problems (like me). I disabled EIST, but C1E works fine.
April 13, 2008 2:51:10 AM

Both of those are listed under Advanced BIOS Features - CPU Feature. Seems to me if both those setting are Enabled and working, the multiplier listed in CPUz will be the lower x6.0 when idle but will jump up when the CPU has work to do, up to the normal x9.0. I noticed that on my 4 yr old laptop using speedstep....
April 13, 2008 2:54:37 AM

umm? ok well i disabled both and now im at x9.0 on first boot up it froze restarted checked cpuz and it at were you said it should be

but randomizer??? was i wroung in doing this?
April 13, 2008 3:00:42 AM

jormm said:
umm? ok well i disabled both and now im at x9.0 on first boot up it froze restarted checked cpuz and it at were you said it should be

but randomizer??? was i wroung in doing this?



You should keep them both off. One decreases bus speed, the other multiplier.

Run priome95 and see if it's stable.
http://www.mersenne.org/freesoft.htm
April 13, 2008 3:01:07 AM

This is just a suggestion... a test... Go back and re-Enable both. Restart computer and run CPUz. Wait a bit to make sure the computers not working on something right after startup... you could use the Task Manager to see if the CPU usage is low.... then while CPUz is still running, start up a movie or a game or something and see if the multiplier changes...
April 13, 2008 3:12:47 AM

ok dagger and draac ill do wut you have suggested ill get back tomarrow with how things are thank for the hlp thus far i thank this is by far the most hlp iv ever gotten on toms in a long time =) but i have a party to go to and i have to go.

-thanks
April 13, 2008 4:11:32 AM

dagger said:
You should keep them both off. One decreases bus speed, the other multiplier.

Run priome95 and see if it's stable.
http://www.mersenne.org/freesoft.htm

WRONG! You obviously don't understand the function of these two features. They are power-saving features and also help to keep the CPU cool and increase lifespan (a null issue really, nobody keeps them for 10+ years anyway). They do not hamper performance at all save for a fraction of a second where the CPU speeds up under load. I have done prime95 tests and the difference between C1E enabled and disabled was around 0.005-0.01s (ie. inside margin of usual time fluctuations). That is absolutely nothing at all in real life terms. If these features just lowered performance, what the heck is the point of them? Don't give bad advice on things you don't have a clue about. The ONLY times you would need to keep them off is if they are causing problems (BIOS issues usually) or if you intend to change the startup multiplier for your CPU.
April 13, 2008 4:23:33 PM

randomizer said:
WRONG! You obviously don't understand the function of these two features. They are power-saving features and also help to keep the CPU cool and increase lifespan (a null issue really, nobody keeps them for 10+ years anyway). They do not hamper performance at all save for a fraction of a second where the CPU speeds up under load. I have done prime95 tests and the difference between C1E enabled and disabled was around 0.005-0.01s (ie. inside margin of usual time fluctuations). That is absolutely nothing at all in real life terms. If these features just lowered performance, what the heck is the point of them? Don't give bad advice on things you don't have a clue about. The ONLY times you would need to keep them off is if they are causing problems (BIOS issues usually) or if you intend to change the startup multiplier for your CPU.



Higher end machine users want performance, not power saving. The power saved is minimal while system is in idle state. FSB throttling, and to a lesser extend, multiplier throttling, can destablize systems, especially when overclocked. At best, it brings no benefit (if the small power saving is not considered benefit) for high end users, at worst, it'll destablize your system. Also, there is voltage spike when multiplier switches. Eliminite this possible complication by turn those off, and your system will perform the way you expect it to.
April 14, 2008 2:46:17 AM

So you want maximum performance while surfing the net? C'mon dude what are you talking about? This "destabilisation" is only going to happen with multipliers other than default, or if you have a really messed up rig. My system always performs the way I expect it to, except when the software is dodgy. Besides, the FSB has nothing to do with C1E or EIST, it is only the multiplier and vcore that changes.
April 14, 2008 3:13:31 AM

There must be a trade off for this kind of power saving feature. There must be delay when switching between the power states (i.e. 6x <-> 9x) and this will affect performance when more processing power are needed but can't raise CPU speed in time to meet the demand.
April 15, 2008 2:34:10 AM

well i changed them back to defalt and tryed runnnig a dvd to check if it swiches from 6 to 9 but for some reason my system wont let me run dvd threw window's media player so idk i started a virus scan to see and yea it moves to 9 and back and forth like crazy

but btw how can i get my dvd's to work? i reinstalled nvida drivers and utility's and i cant get nothing to work?
April 15, 2008 2:38:59 AM

You need a DVD player program to have the proper codec installed, not sure off hand if you can just get the codec to work with Media player.
April 15, 2008 2:42:26 AM

well im not sure how to find it or w/e i just downloaded nvdvd from evga site and that didnt work and i couldnt find an update from microsoft for it so im lost and i got the trial verson of nero to at least run the movie but no sound will come out?
April 15, 2008 2:53:07 AM

Sometimes you'll get a copy of "some" dvd player software with your dvd drive... if purchased separately.
April 15, 2008 2:54:39 AM

so i will not be able to use windows media player at all then?
April 15, 2008 3:11:42 AM

Hell I get ~9,200 at on stock settings with my junk and OC'd I get about 11,300.
April 15, 2008 3:18:23 AM

Looks like media player 9 has the needed codec......
April 15, 2008 3:29:24 AM

... i new i shouldnt of built my own these lil thing's are starting to piss me off...
!