Are you kidding me? That's all you get? Ti4200's get that on an A64, without overclocking. Sounds too low to me. My 9800 pro / A64 3000+ gets about 18,700 without any overclocking of the cpu or video card, and click gamer below to see it when the 9800 pro is overclocked, and the A64 OC'ed to just 2.2GHz. I'd think people could probably hit 25K with a seriously OC'ed A64 3000+ and 9800 pro.
<A HREF="http://service.futuremark.com/compare?2k1=7768038 " target="_new">3DMark 2001se</A>
This is my score with the rig you see in my sig, minus the vid card which was fried, and was replaced with another 9800Pro (which btw, the sig has to be completely updated, for that rig is gone-- just been so damn busy).
As you can see, the score in there is quite a bit higher than what you are getting. Given, it is overclocked, but you aren't even close.
If I were you, I would search some reviews to get an idea of how your system should be performing. Also, futuremark allows you to search the ORB for other systems similar to yours so you can compare and tweak your system.
Your RAM is killing you!
-- the Doc
512mb Mushkin 3500 Level II@472 (2-2-2)
(grrrr.....I fried this one)
WD 80gb(SE)x2(RAID 0)<P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by drjeckyl on 12/22/04 03:30 PM.</EM></FONT></P>
Still seems low for an A64 and 6600GT. Look at <A HREF="http://service.futuremark.com/compare?2k1=8312175" target="_new">this score</A>, stock 3000+ winchester and 6600GT = 17,250. Sure 1,000 points could easily be the ram, maybe 2,000 even. Maybe another 1,000 for a different driver version. But that still leaves 2,000-3,000 unaccounted for. If he is running the default benchmark, and no AA/AF is being forced. What gives?
I doubt radeon 9800 pros were designed with 3dmark2001 in mind. Maybe GF4's. But even so, a GF4Ti4200 should score 12K on that system.
yea thats wierd, the 6800's is obviously a far superior card in all areas. maybe nvidia didnt take the time to floptomize thier drivers for 2001 like they did with the GFFX's sinse its old now.. but it does look REALLY bad when previous gen card of the same manufacturer outperform the newer ones in a benchmark
Really it's the cpu/system limiting that buddies 2001se score. 2001se is extremely cpu/system dependent, which is why an A64 should help raise the scores bigtime. Overclocking the CPU always did wonders for 2001se. But 03 and 05, the system makes alot less of a difference making it better to compare video cards. But since he is running my same CPU with this 6600GT posted above, why is he getting over 7,000 less points then my 9800 pro at stock speeds. Anyway, your buddies 3dmarks seem right on. Plop that into an A64, and his 2001se would be up an easy 2-3K or more.
hey folks thanks for your posts. It turns out you were rite. the performance was way too low. I realised that 3dmark 2001 se runs its benchmarks at a ref rate of 60hz and i had the overide function enabled in the nvidia settings to run at 120hz. Upon putting it back to default i managed to get a score of 18220. Which is much better!!!!! thankfully. Hopefully when i upgrade my memory i'll be able to hit 20K?