I have a question, and was wondering if anyone had heard or might know an answer for me. I have the following comp stats:
Asus P4SDX SiS655
2x512MB Corsair CMX pc3200 in 128-bit mode, 400MHz
Sapphiretech Radeon 9700 Pro
I get a 3dmark 01 score of 13992. This seem slow, considering my old score on the e7205 board I used to have topped the 15K mark. What could explain this? I have optimized WinXP in the same way for both, but the intel-based board with generic pc2100 beats what should be a faster board down. Does the Application Accelerator have something to do with this? Or do the SIS AGP drivers simply suck compared to Intel. I am curious on others' thoughts.
<P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by shiroamakusa on 05/18/03 05:03 PM.</EM></FONT></P>
I have a Gigabyte 8KNXP, and I've noticed that with the Cat 3.2 drivers, my scores would fall into that same 13000-14000 range for no apparent reason. It was sporadic though--not every time. Since I went to the Catalyst 3.4 drivers, I haven't seen a score below 17,500. (Well, not since I figured out how to tweak my memory timings.)
<font color=green>The Netherlands is where you go when you're too good for heaven.</font color=green> :tongue:
<P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by Twitch on 05/19/03 12:22 PM.</EM></FONT></P>
First thought is the board is crap (Never have liked sis, but hey thats personal) and the second thought is, are you SURE you are running in dual ddr mode (hell I know nothing about that chipset, is it a dual ddr board?) Last thing is, out of curiousity, why did you "upgrade" from a e7205 board to a sis655? The granitebay boards were hella good boards (performance wise).
My 7205 board didn't provide a way to throttle down to AGP 4X, and Smartgart changes would cause lockups on boot (it was an MSI workstation board, the only one I could get my hands on at the time). I ran into the 7205 AGP 3.0 bug on that with my 9700, so I bought what according to the reviews I read here and other places was a comparable if not faster platform. I am indeed running in 128-bit mode, (the BIOS is very proud of itself, and lets me know that at least twice during bootup). The build is on a clean-formatted WD100JB, And I do the normal service/xp bloat removal/disable you should do before any benchmarking. I have not checked RAM timings, but both boards were using SPD timings, the old sticks being 4 256MB 2.5 Crucial from a year or so back, the new sticks being Corsair CMX variety supposedly C2.
I recently upgraded to the Cats 3.4 (which I had to clean load to do, since the normal uninstall/upgrade process borked all direct-3D acceleration on my system and re-loading the old drivers didn't solve) and I actually *LOST* 50 points on my overall score. (sigh!) I am never buying a non-intel chipset for a pentium ever again.
This thread is old, but I thought I'd post what I found. The 1002 bios for my P4SDX didn't support Fast-Writes, even though the option was in the BIOS. It also locked the AGP Aperture to 32MB. The 1003C bios fixed these problems as well as supposed compatibility improvements. After flashing my BIOS, I set everything to auto, AGP at 64 and Fast-Writes enabled. I re-tested on 3DMark01SE, and my score was 15454. Much better than the 13492 it was. I found that running the memory at 400MHz actually lowered my scores. So now it runs at 333MHz, Ram timing tweaked a bit, and it's turning the numbers I think it should stock. Too bad the bios update makes my games get graphic anomalies at AGP 8X. I'm not too concerned, I have an Abit IS7 on the way, and I bid these SiS silly times goodbye.