odd benchmarks...

[JoeB]

I just compared the "VGA buyers guide 07/2003" benchmarks of Ut2003 to those of the VGA Charts, "Part I: High-End Systems" and i noticed that, while the system setup was exactly the same (Xp2700/asus a7n8x/512pc2700), the Ati radeons went roughly 10fps SLOWER in the vga buyers guide. The 9700Pro went even 18 (!!) fps slower than in the old benchmark.
How is it possible that the same cards on the same system work a lot slower than before??

<A HREF="http:// http://www6.tomshardware.com/graphic/20021218/vgacharts-04.html " target="_new">http:// http://www6.tomshardware.com/graphic/20021218/vgacharts-04.html </A>

<A HREF="http:// http://www6.tomshardware.com/graphic/20030714/vga_card_guide-12.html " target="_new">http:// http://www6.tomshardware.com/graphic/20030714/vga_card_guide-12.html </A>

<b> ASUS A7n8X // AMD Xp2400+ // 512MB DDR333 // 80Gb 7200RPM // ATI Radeon 9600Pro </b>

 

[davepermen]

different drivers? different settings?

"take a look around" - limp bizkit

www.google.com

 

[JoeB]

sorry, the links had dubbel http in it, these will work.

<A HREF="http://www6.tomshardware.com/graphic/20030714/vga_card_guide-12.html" target="_new">http://www6.tomshardware.com/graphic/20030714/vga_card_guide-12.html</A>

<A HREF="http://www6.tomshardware.com/graphic/20021218/vgacharts-04.html" target="_new">http://www6.tomshardware.com/graphic/20021218/vgacharts-04.html</A>

<b> ASUS A7n8X // AMD Xp2400+ // 512MB DDR333 // 80Gb 7200RPM // ATI Radeon 9600Pro </b>

 

[speeduk]

WTF? 9700pro, 2700xp,A7N8X,512mb 2/2/2/5,DX8.1 and cat 2.5 = 177fps @ 1024x768 antalus map.
Same hardware, benchmark and resolution, only thing diff is DX9.0 and cat 3.5. Everything from ram timings is exactly the same. 9700pro = 159fps???? surely a new driver cant lower performance this much?

<A HREF="http://service.futuremark.com/compare?2k1=6868334" target="_new"> MY RIG </A>
<A HREF="http://service.futuremark.com/compare?2k3=1150155" target="_new"> 3D-03 </A>
<font color=red> 120% overclocker </font color=red> (cheapskate)

 

[speeduk]

LOL I like how the 2700xp beats the 3.06ghz P4 in the tests too. So if the 2700xp is faster than the 3.06P4 then the 3200xp really does deserve a 3200 rating compared to this P4!

<A HREF="http://service.futuremark.com/compare?2k1=6868334" target="_new"> MY RIG </A>
<A HREF="http://service.futuremark.com/compare?2k3=1150155" target="_new"> 3D-03 </A>
<font color=red> 120% overclocker </font color=red> (cheapskate)

 

[davepermen]

compare with a "real" p4 (ht, 800mhz fsb, ddr400) and every athlon gets his ass kicked..

till athlon64 at least, then they kick back (hopes/waits for it and yes i'm an anti-amd dude since i got birth actually.. :| )

"take a look around" - limp bizkit

www.google.com

 

[speeduk]

Yeah I said this P4 silly. I knew someone would flame me :/

<A HREF="http://service.futuremark.com/compare?2k1=6868334" target="_new"> MY RIG </A>
<A HREF="http://service.futuremark.com/compare?2k3=1150155" target="_new"> 3D-03 </A>
<font color=red> 120% overclocker </font color=red> (cheapskate)

 

[Willamette_sucks]

Athlons do exceedingly well in most game benchmarks (not q3 based), esp. in ut2k3. A 3200 is about as fast as a 3.0C, thats right C DAVE!!!

Mines faster than that anyways.

"Mice eat cheese." - Modest Mouse

"Every Day is the Right Day." -Pink Floyd

 

[Willamette_sucks]

Oh, and about the benchmarks, I think THG is pullin one on us.

"Mice eat cheese." - Modest Mouse

"Every Day is the Right Day." -Pink Floyd

 

[daddywags214]

Yeah, I think they're pullin' something too.

<b>Who dares, wins. </b>