Just ran 3dmark 2001SE for the first time

[zc3]

I keep seeing others people's score so I decided to try it out also. I just want to know if my score is about where it should be.

my system(won't exactly blow you away)
amd xp 2000+
9500 pro
512mb ddr
ECS k7s5a pro
windows xp

I got a 6971 on 3dmark 2001SE. Is that about where my score should be?

 

[markgun]

No!
I'd imagine you should be in the 12K range?
Here's my 3DMark2001SE <A HREF="http://service.futuremark.com/compare?2k1=5542021" target="_new"> score</A>. Yours should most definitely be higher (You should know this from looking at other people's scores! ) What drivers are you running? Did you uninstall any old drivers? Have you tried running a driver cleaner? ARe your chipset drivers installed? Have you tried doing a clean install of your OS? Are AF and AA off? We need to get you in the 12K range, buddy!

 

[ltj311]

For reference I get around 8700(default) with this setup:

Compaq mobo
Athlon XP 1500+
(2)256mb PC2100
GF4 Ti4200 64mb



--

"<i>I'm seriously you guys.</i>" - Cartman

 

[phial]

3dmark does still have its uses

like seeing if a computer is running at its fullest potential

honesly i still use it to test if overclocking increased speed (the individual tests like fill rate and geometry, pixel shader etc)



and no, that score sucks. something isnt configured correctly

-------

<A HREF="http://www.quake3world.com/ubb/Forum1/HTML/001355.html" target="_new">*I hate thug gangstas*</A>

 

[zc3]

Ouch, I wonder what went wrong.

Okay I have the latest catalyst 3.5 drivers, I did uninstall my old nvidia drivers, I've never used a driver cleaner(didn't even know they existed 'till now), haven't done a clean install(I have too much crap on my comp right now and my burner is busted), and I'm not sure if AA and AF are off(how do I check?) but if you're talking about the settings in 3dmark, then I'm just using whatever the default settings are.

Wow, did I get screwed or what. =\

 

[phial]

dude its ok

the simplest of things can make you lost performance like that. itll suprise you


first, download Rage3d tweak from <A HREF="http://www.rage3d.com" target="_new">Rage3d</A> so you can check if AF and AA are on, and for various other options. its a great tool, its what i use



uninstall your current drivers from teh Control Panel. Check your motherboard manufacturers website for new drivers, could be a problem

and try Catalyst 3.4

on my Radeon 8500 3.5 gave me such a huge drop in performance should have been emailed to ATI as a bug. i have no idea why, but 3D games just ran like [-peep-]. i was piszed so i just uninstalled them and put 3.4 cats back in becaues they worked great and fast for all my other games


try that and then let us know how it goes

-------

<A HREF="http://www.quake3world.com/ubb/Forum1/HTML/001355.html" target="_new">*I hate thug gangstas*</A>

 

[zc3]

Thanks for the advice, right now I have to leave but when I get back I'll make sure to download that rage3d software and then try to run 3dmark again.

I'll let you know the results tomorrow. Hopefully it's just a small problem.

 

[GeneticWeapon]

My 9500Pro was getting 11,200 3DMarks. And I considered that to be a bad score. I'm hitting 11,00 with a Ti4200, AthlonXP2100+, 768megs of DDR266.

Please refrain from personal attacks of other users and the use of foul language or you'll be banned. Last warning. - Fredi

 

[confoundicator]

For <A HREF="http://service.futuremark.com/compare?2k1=6705430" target="_new">comparison</A>.

<font color=blue>Build a foolproof system and they'll build a better fool.</font color=blue><P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by confoundicator on 07/01/03 11:23 PM.</EM></FONT></P>

 

[phial]

no prob

Rage3d wont fix your problem, itll just allow you to mess with more options. and yes its probably a small problem, but its the small ones that are sometimes hard to find


seriously recommend 3.4 catalyts.



-------

<A HREF="http://www.quake3world.com/ubb/Forum1/HTML/001355.html" target="_new">*I hate thug gangstas*</A>

 

[GeneticWeapon]

His card is clock-locked Phial.....

Please refrain from personal attacks of other users and the use of foul language or you'll be banned. Last warning. - Fredi

 

[ianmills]

I get a 3DMark2001 score of 10700 at stock speeds with a similiar setup to yours. I might have had wmp playing at the same time though, since I'm too lazy to turn it off lol.

athlon 2400+
9500 pro
512mb 266ddr
ecs k725a
winxp

 

[zc3]

Alright I just ran it again last night, this time my score was 10158. That's a pretty big difference from before. I guess this is the score that I should be getting, right?

 

[markgun]

Yep, that sounds like a solid score. You could probably get it up quite a bit with tweaking, but I wouldn't worry about it! It's just 3Dmark afterall. Although 3Dmark can be useful to see if there's misconfiguration with your system (ie, your score was really low). Glad to hear everything's working. If you encounter any weird problems, uninstall the drivers, run <A HREF="http://www.driverheaven.net/cleaner/" target="_new">Driver Cleaner</A> then reinstall the drivers.

 

[phsstpok]

Try clean installs of these drivers; chipset drivers, Catalysts, and DirectX. That is remove each driver then reinstall it.

You need something like <A HREF="http://www1.freewebz.com/firecat/" target="_new">DirectX Eradicator</A> to remove DirectX (version 2 thru 9).

By the way, if you have a dial-up connection (or even if you don't), do yourself a favor and get the redistributable version of DirectX 9.0a installer.

Those on-line updates of DirectX are very tedious with a dial-up connection.

p.s.

Anyone know of a good ATI driver clean up program?

<b>56K, slow and steady does not win the race on internet!</b>

 

[peterfagg]

I've got an almost identical system to the original question, and get 10500ish in 3D 2001, on the default catalyst 3.5 settings. How can I bump that up (safely!) to the 12k you lot were suggesting? will 3.4 really make that much difference? What kind of 3D 03 score should I be getting?

The computer has had a clean install in the last month, but has had a Radeon 7500 in it until a week ago.

Cheers

 

[markgun]

I've been using <A HREF="http://www.driverheaven.net/cleaner/" target="_new"> Driver Cleaner</A>. I use it between all my Cat updates now (sometimes just uninstalling alone leaves me with problems: ie, Cat 3.4 to 3.5). It works for both nVidia and ATi drivers.

 

[phsstpok]

Thanks.

I had so many problems installing the Win 9x/ME versions (Win98SE in my case) of the ATI drivers that I've completely switched to Omega's drivers. I can install/reinstall these at will without problems, plus the driver/control panel is a single installation. I don't think it's a driver issue so much as an old (2 years) installation of Windows. I never re-install Windows unless I get a new hard drive or motherboard.

I need the cleaner utilities when I switch video cards, nVidia to ATI or vise versa.

<b>56K, slow and steady does not win the race on internet!</b>

 

[markgun]

Will Omega be releasing a new ATI driver set based on the 3.5s soon? Hehe I always thought that Omega's AF looked better; however, I soon found out that this was because the AF never worked for me using the standard ATI control panel.

 

[phsstpok]

10500 seems kind of low for a 9500 Pro but it's hard to say what you should be getting.

I would have guessed about 11,000 for a non-overclocked 9500 Pro. Maybe 12,000 with a faster processor, but I don't really know.

Try my tip and see if it helps. Just redo the driver installs in the order listed. You might also try <A HREF="http://www.omegacorner.com/" target="_new">Omega's tweaked drivers</A>.

I don't know what you can get for 3DMark2003 with a stock 9500 Pro. My guess is about 3100-3500 but it's just a guess.

By the way, what are the stock speeds GPU/Memory for your video card?

<b>56K, slow and steady does not win the race on internet!</b>

 

[peterfagg]

It won't even hit 10500 consistently, often getting a bit below 10k. It does 3500 normally in 03.

Stock speeds are 276, 270(540)

I'm running XP pro so are Omega's drivers ok? Going for a full rebuild at the end of teh summer so won't bother too much with driver cleaning!

 

[GeneticWeapon]

<dancing around> I'm getting 11,000 3DMarks with a cheapo Ti4200! HaHaHaHaHa!!!! <dances around>

Please refrain from personal attacks of other users and the use of foul language or you'll be banned. Last warning. - Fredi

 

[RandalFlagg]

 

[phsstpok]

It won't even hit 10500 consistently, often getting a bit below 10k. It does 3500 normally in 03.

Below 10K? Yup something is wrong.

I've got an old Radeon 8500 that hits 9070. (Don't ask my 3DMark03 score). Granted the 8500 is decently overclocked @300/325(650) and I have a Tbred at 2.1 Ghz but I also only have an SDRAM motherboard. You should be outscoring me by a lot more than you are.

Unfortunately, the online results brower at Futuremark isn't much help at determining what you should be getting. The 9700s are grouped with 9500s and overclocking results are in the same mix. Can't pick out stock video card results to compare with you

I'm running XP pro so are Omega's drivers ok? Going for a full rebuild at the end of teh summer so won't bother too much with driver cleaning!

Driver installs are less time consuming than a complete Windows installation besides Windows XP may load old chipset drivers for your mobo or even incorrect drivers.

A clean install of latest chipset drivers, and latest video drivers after a clean install of Windows is still the best policy.



<b>56K, slow and steady does not win the race on internet!</b>

 

[peterfagg]

I'm not going to bother with cleaning as I'm splitting my computer into 2 - and this card is going to be running in the faster computer (a new P4 2.8 hopefully)! I've put catalyst 3.4 on now, and soft-modded the 95pro to a 97pro and overclocked it to the right speeds for a 97pro (now running at 324/310(620) nice and stable!

2001 score: virtually unchanged (managed 10700).

2003 score - up 15% (now 4050)!

What is going on? why does one change significantly and the other doesn't?