I'm surprised that they didn't have too much increase when OC-ing... in my experience, if I increased the clock 10%, I got 10% increase in 3dmarks... maybe their computer dragged them down? I've got a lot faster computer...
plus, I only get about 4800 3dmarks at 166Mhz, how do they get 6000???
Can't find your answer ? Ask !
Anonymous
abU
Graphics card
February 8, 2001 3:55:40 PM
After reading this review, I will probably end up getting the ATI Radeon. He made it look like the 148Mhz bugger wasn't too bad either. That seemed a little odd to me.
#Ranked <font color=blue>6 in US</font color=blue> 2v2 Cstrike# -Feb 7 OGL Ladder (well, it's one of the largest ladders)
I don't know why they used the 6.18 drivers for the GeForce 2 GTS but the Radeon does show that it can compete for less. The new Radeon drivers make a huge difference putting performance closer to a Geforce GTS than to an MX as with the old drivers.
Rcf84, you are a MORON along with the rest of the trolls who don’t even know what this is all about but just chime in so they can think better of themselves in a puerile attempt to raise their stupid title ranking. LOL. First off the review is not of an AIW Radeon and secondly it is not even on a Win2k OS. The blithering idiocies of your spouting are so inane and thoughtless I don’t know how you get along in life.
Balls, said the Queen if I had them I would be king!