Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Is my 9950 BE the culprit??

Tags:
  • AMD
  • Overclocking
  • Product
Last response: in Overclocking
Share
October 11, 2009 10:50:01 PM

So I think I know why my 3dmark06 and vantage scores are terrible.

My 9950 BE. Its overclocked to 3.3 Ghz at 1.42 vcore yet my 3dmark06 score for 2X280GTX is around 17k.

So is it possible that the CPU is behind all of this? I say this because:

* I changed the PSU to a 1200 Watt
* Made sure computer was stable
* I bought a new mobo
* reinstalled windows
* have latest drivers
* configured SLI in the console
* memory doesnt seem to be an issue


That just leaves out the CPU... your guy's thoughts since im just a n00b

More about : 9950 culprit

a b K Overclocking
October 11, 2009 11:53:34 PM

i don't know that looks pretty good to me
m
0
l
October 12, 2009 4:46:57 AM

That CPU appears to be in good standings with some of the other well desired CPU's so tbh other than the benchmark scores that make you feel less satisfied with your setup, what problems are you having playing games and doing other tasks?

http://www.tomshardware.com/charts/2009-desktop-cpu-cha...

I wouldn't spend more money trying to get 2,000 or so more points to gain .02 sec opening up windows explorer.

Use your current rig and wait for a couple of years for some real performance parts to come out to make it more worthwhile to upgrade. I have ran the upgrade rat race you are on now and its pointless tbh...
m
0
l
Related resources
a b K Overclocking
October 12, 2009 5:16:28 PM

It's your CPU.... My neighbor has an x4 955 (3.2Ghz) with dual 280's and he gets over 19K ........

At 3.6Ghz (dual core) I get 16k with a single GTX 260 ...... Hope this helps.....
m
0
l
October 12, 2009 5:40:21 PM

OvrClkr said:
It's your CPU.... My neighbor has an x4 955 (3.2Ghz) with dual 280's and he gets over 19K ........

At 3.6Ghz (dual core) I get 16k with a single GTX 260 ...... Hope this helps.....



955 as in phenom II?
m
0
l
October 12, 2009 6:02:40 PM

ok just making sure it wasnt a typo
m
0
l
October 13, 2009 3:45:12 AM

I also get over 19k with the Q9550 OC to 3.6 with a single GTX 275 and its in line with the AMD x4 955.

Another card and I should be over 20k easy but its pointless for 200.00 bucks.

m
0
l
October 13, 2009 3:52:16 AM

something is up.

my i5 (simmilar, slightly better performance) stock with single gtx 275 gets 17,000

overclocked to 4.x still on the single card it gets 22150.

there must be something running in the back ground.

also try overclocking the cpu to 3.6 and overclock the cards 10% or so
m
0
l
October 13, 2009 5:28:56 AM

Slick, I'm sure we would all like to see you post a valid 06 score @ 22150 with an i5 and a single 275 GPU.
m
0
l
a c 249 K Overclocking
October 13, 2009 11:35:05 AM

topper743 said:
Slick, I'm sure we would all like to see you post a valid 06 score @ 22150 with an i5 and a single 275 GPU.



Ditto, and don't block the view of the settings please.
m
0
l
October 13, 2009 12:09:19 PM

What motherboard do you have? If you are itching to upgrade (and I know you are) I would sell your cpu on ebay for 100.00 and get the AMD X4 940 Black Edition:

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...

I suggest this because most likely your new mobo will support AM2+. Which motherboard did you buy?

This cpu should put you around 20,000 or so with those two cards. Reply back with your mobo info...
m
0
l
October 13, 2009 6:37:54 PM

I have a pretty nice mobo, an Asus M4N82 980a which supports AM3+
m
0
l
a b K Overclocking
October 13, 2009 7:00:35 PM

Get a 945 or better yet a 955 and you should be fine.

Stay away from the x4 620 Propus.... Many here on Toms will suggest you purchase it when in fact you will end-up in the same situation you are in now....
m
0
l
October 13, 2009 8:29:56 PM

yeah i was leaning towards a 955, but does anyone know of a better AMD chip or better yet a new AMD chip being released?

I know the 965 is supposedly better, but with a 140w, it makes me hesitant to buy it
m
0
l
a b K Overclocking
October 13, 2009 8:49:13 PM

The 955 and 965 are basically the same... there is no reason to buy the 965 for just the 200Mhz extra that you get when all you have to do is raise the multiplier a tad to achieve the same exact speed....
m
0
l
October 13, 2009 9:51:59 PM

are you sure thats the only difference?
m
0
l
a b K Overclocking
October 13, 2009 9:56:16 PM

ohh I forgot... the 965 is 140w, while the 955 is 125w =)

everything else is the same..... not worth the extra 50+ dollars... in my opinion....

m
0
l
October 13, 2009 10:09:47 PM

yeah sounds like its worse in my opinion, higher watt means less overclock
m
0
l
a b K Overclocking
October 13, 2009 10:11:31 PM

if you overclock the 955 to 3.4 ghz the tdp becomes 140watts
m
0
l
October 14, 2009 8:38:12 AM

4Ryan6 said:
Ditto, and don't block the view of the settings please.



umm i dont know whats not to believe about it




theyve already been posted in my OC thread ;) 
m
0
l
October 14, 2009 8:55:45 AM

oh and that first one is 32,000 in 3d05.

now that thats shut you up. back to the thread ;) 

so have you made any progress OP? more overclocking?
m
0
l
a c 249 K Overclocking
October 14, 2009 11:31:30 AM

slickncghia said:
umm i dont know whats not to believe about it


I didn't say I didn't believe it, I said show the settings you used, to achieve that score.

I was curious to see what your 4.3 OCd CPU scored?



And I wanted to see if you had run 06 on default settings.

Quote:
now that thats shut you up. back to the thread


??? Shut me up ???

m
0
l
a b K Overclocking
October 14, 2009 2:56:50 PM

lol....

that was unnecessary....



m
0
l
October 14, 2009 9:12:47 PM

yeah standard. is that a single 260? the nvidias and intells sure score well.
m
0
l
October 15, 2009 3:16:35 AM

umm back to topic? lol
m
0
l
October 15, 2009 3:30:55 AM

anyways the 9950 typically becomes unstable past 3.3-3.4 Ghz in most cases (be different with liquid cooling).

My own 9950 becomes unstable after 3.3; so that is the highest I can overclock.
I increased my NB frequency to 2400 and that has helped a bit.

The thing is once I put my second card in, my SM2 scores actually drop a hundred or so points, and my SM3 scores rise by only a thousand
m
0
l
a c 249 K Overclocking
October 15, 2009 11:31:18 AM

3DM06 favors Intel so don't put too much stock in its results, you're better off comparing actual gaming FPS results or running 3DMVantage on Vista or Win7.

Your scores are really not too far off, I was running 2 8800GT BIOS Flashed OCd in SLI on my AMD 9950BE clocked at 3.2G and they scored 16,244, I don't have the SM2 and SM3 scores for you to compare, but I do have the CPU score of 4698.

Your CPU score should be somewhere in that area or better, I did discover with my setup that system memory could have an overall effect, I was experimenting at the time with 4G of Corsair Dominator 2 x 2G, 4G OCZ Platinum 4 x 1G, and 2G Patriot Viper 2X 1G, the Corsair 4G yielded the best results running WinXP Pro 32bit.

You really have a killer machine just enjoy it, unless you're being bitten by the upgrade bug and need a good excuse to upgrade.
m
0
l
October 15, 2009 12:12:20 PM

4Ryan6 said:
You really have a killer machine just enjoy it, unless you're being bitten by the upgrade bug and need a good excuse to upgrade.



My first point exactly. As I said before, I have been in that upgrade rat race and sure you get "faster" hardware by upgrading but in the long haul something faster will come out again and make you want to upgrade again, again and again. I probably have 10,000 in computers in the last 5 years by doing this (between 3 systems) and now I have slower systems that a lot of 1st time builders because I haven't leaped to the I7 yet. I'm not going to spend another 800 to 1000 bucks to get 10-20% more performance, if that just to have scores like everyone else.

My systems melt through any tasks or games I require and theres no real reason to upgrade unless I just want to blow money. Its fun for a while but once you see how much you eventually sink into these upgrades to keep up with the Jone's you will come to a screetching hault like I did and start getting some use out of your investment of your current hardware and make upgrades when it becomes more sensible.

You're better off putting money into a CD or buying property than blowing the kind of money like I have to tell your friends and post on here what your benchmark scores are.

Don't get me wrong, I love to upgrade but now only when its a reasonable thing to do. I used to wonder why some of these forum veterans were still gaming with AMD 4200 x2 systems and I finally figured it out, they still serve their purpose for what they do and they have no need to upgrade, yet...
m
0
l
a c 249 K Overclocking
October 15, 2009 10:04:45 PM

englandr753 said:
My first point exactly. As I said before, I have been in that upgrade rat race and sure you get "faster" hardware by upgrading but in the long haul something faster will come out again and make you want to upgrade again, again and again. I probably have 10,000 in computers in the last 5 years by doing this (between 3 systems) and now I have slower systems that a lot of 1st time builders because I haven't leaped to the I7 yet. I'm not going to spend another 800 to 1000 bucks to get 10-20% more performance, if that just to have scores like everyone else.

My systems melt through any tasks or games I require and theres no real reason to upgrade unless I just want to blow money. Its fun for a while but once you see how much you eventually sink into these upgrades to keep up with the Jone's you will come to a screetching hault like I did and start getting some use out of your investment of your current hardware and make upgrades when it becomes more sensible.

You're better off putting money into a CD or buying property than blowing the kind of money like I have to tell your friends and post on here what your benchmark scores are.

Don't get me wrong, I love to upgrade but now only when its a reasonable thing to do. I used to wonder why some of these forum veterans were still gaming with AMD 4200 x2 systems and I finally figured it out, they still serve their purpose for what they do and they have no need to upgrade, yet...


Well as a carpenter would say, you nailed it with that statement man, so true!

For me its best to not even start figuring what I've spent doing exactly the same thing, from my upgrading I've given away entire machines and hardware components, that were high enough quality to make the average user drool, but drool in ignorance because they don't even know what they have in their possession, its not like the older components came from the shelves at BestBuy.

Its almost like an addiction, heck maybe it is an addiction, IDK.

Good statement englandr753 !
m
0
l
October 16, 2009 4:34:08 AM

Thanks 4ryan6!

I do believe it is an addiction. With the economy the way it is now and money not flowing in as freely as before forced my hand to see the light, lol. I would sometimes find myself driving by the exit I should be getting off to go home and driving 20 minutes further to look at stuff I didn't need and walk out sometimes spending 500.00. That my friend is an addiction when you buy things you don't need for no logical reason.

Now at least I have trained myself not to look at the newegg and tigerdirect email offers I get knowing there are great deals to be had. I plan to use my current systems until something breaks or I have real problems doing important tasks.
If you adopt that mindset now you will save yourself tons of money! ;) 
m
0
l
October 17, 2009 8:52:09 AM

Well performance wise in real life applications:

in Crysis everything on max: 1X280GTX got me around 33 FPS average
2X280GTX got me around 35 FPS average

I am running it on only 1360X768 (on my TV, no LCD monitor ATM) so that could be the reason why im seeing such minimal gains. But could it something else entirely

This same trend goes for other games such as prototype, Farcry 2, NFS Shift, etc
m
0
l
October 17, 2009 8:54:31 AM

What im trying to say that this isnt exactly just a 3dmark issue. The problem applies to gaming. I might as well had sold the second 280GTX had I knew I wasnt going to get any FPS increase.

I hope some of you can understand
m
0
l
a b K Overclocking
October 17, 2009 9:34:12 AM

youra6 said:
Well performance wise in real life applications:

in Crysis everything on max: 1X280GTX got me around 33 FPS average
2X280GTX got me around 35 FPS average

I am running it on only 1360X768 (on my TV, no LCD monitor ATM) so that could be the reason why im seeing such minimal gains. But could it something else entirely

This same trend goes for other games such as prototype, Farcry 2, NFS Shift, etc


Obvious that dual 280's running only at 1360X768 will cause a major bottleneck, was there a reason to buy the second 280 instead of a new screen?


m
0
l
a c 249 K Overclocking
October 17, 2009 10:09:34 AM

OvrClkr said:
Obvious that dual 280's running only at 1360X768 will cause a major bottleneck, was there a reason to buy the second 280 instead of a new screen?


Totally agree, those graphics cards are on cruise control at those resolutions, they won't begin to show you what they can do until you hit around the 1600 x 1200 res and beyond.
m
0
l
a b K Overclocking
October 17, 2009 10:13:08 AM

morning ryan =)



m
0
l
a c 249 K Overclocking
October 17, 2009 10:17:33 AM

Morning OC
m
0
l
October 17, 2009 11:35:08 PM

OvrClkr said:
Obvious that dual 280's running only at 1360X768 will cause a major bottleneck, was there a reason to buy the second 280 instead of a new screen?


my LCD is in for RMA so for the time being I'm using my TV
m
0
l
a b K Overclocking
October 18, 2009 10:09:24 PM

yea, makes sense...

what monitor is being replaced?
m
0
l
October 18, 2009 10:34:26 PM

i dont remember the model but it was a Asus 19 inch LCD screen I think the resolution on it was 1680x1050
m
0
l
!