3dMark06 Scores

When I went to compare scores it said there were no comparable computers. I'm pretty new at working with computers so I was hoping you guys could help.

XP64 os
Q9450 cpu
9800GTX gpu
GA-P35-DS3L mobo
4gb ram

Score: 13467
SM2: 5487
SM3: 5646
CPU: 4500


Are these scores alright? Sorry I'm so clueless.

Good for stock.

I get 13,376 with a 3.6 E7200 and a 8800GT stock on Vista 32.

And I only spent $550 lol.

I took off my virusscan but I left my firewall up. All my drivers are up to date. I'm trying to get quadro drivers on my card right now though but it's not working. I'll try it again though without the firewall

I'm only using this machine for photoshop and 3dmodeling so the 64bit lets me run 8 gigs of ram when I get it. I don't want to switch to vista because of all the issues.

Have you had any experience with RivaTuner?

Alright, I admit I know barely anything about computers. I just want a rig that does all my 3d modeling comfortably and runs gigantic photoshop files without crashing. Reliability and speed are what I'm looking for, and from what I've heard, Vista takes up more resources and isn't as reliable. I could be wrong and I probably am. I was told to get xp64 so I could run 8gb of ram, quadro card, and a quad processor. I couldn't afford the quadro card so I was just gonna put the drivers on the GTX but thats not working.

So are you telling me that Vista64 will run reliably and use less resources?

Vista 64-bit will use more resources, actually. However, this is a double edged sword. If you put in full 8 GBs worth and Vista 64, it will no longer need to pagefile back to the hard drive, and will become a lot faster. Downside is that it will take up about 1.6 GBs on it's own. In comparison, though, NVidia seems to have better drivers for Vista 64-bit, so your card shouldn't have as much of a problem, if it is having any now.

Overall, though, I'd personally say that your score is fine. If you're quad core isn't overclocked, then that is right where it should be. Now, if it was at 3.2 GHz, then I'd be a bit worried. However, being at it's stock 2.66 GHz, that seems about right.

EDIT: Yeah, pretty much, just like roadrunner said above me; Vista handles more RAM better than XP, so when you have that 8 GBs, you'll see more performance on Vista.

Those scores look fine for stock. I was getting 13,167 at stock with a similar setup (Vista 64 and 790i Motherboard though). Have now overclocked a little (see sig) and am getting 15,686.

With regards to Vista, it definately runs reliably for me. As for resources, it will use more than XP, but with 8GB of Ram you shouldn't see much of a difference.