UGO Home Page UGO Home Page

News Search Archive Forum Articles Tweaks Technology Files Prices Folding
Favorite Pics
Click to Enlarge
OCZ Tech Titan 3
1.0GHz Pentium III
eVGA MX Shootout
nForce Preview
VisionTek GeForce3
2001 Spring Lineup
GeForce3 Preview
eVGA TwinView Plus
VisionTek GF2 Ultra
OCZ GeForce2 Pro
Winfast GeForce2 MX
GeForce2 vs Quake3
Linksys Cable Router
GF2 FSAA Shootout
GeForce2 MX Preview
Benchmarking Guide
Quake 3 Tune-Up
Power DVD Review
Live! Experiences
3D Chipset
Gamers Ammo
Reactor Critical
GeForce FAQ
Dayton's Misc.
G-Force X Sweden
Media Xplosion
nV Italia
Riva Station
nV News Home Page

Thermaltake BLORB
By: Typedef Enum - October 11, 2001

Measuring Temperatures

The first thing I needed to do was to acquire a thermometer of sorts, so I went to one of the guys on my Engineering team, and borrowed a Fluke Digital Thermometer. The more difficult task was, of course, in trying to get the thermometer leads as close to the core as possible. Furthermore, in order to be fair, one would have to attempt to put the leads in the same location. I did take a screenshot of my Fluke Digital Thermometer, but it was severely overexposed. Hereís a photo straight from their website:


Fairly cheesy, but I think you get the idea.


The Setup


  • Windows 2000 SP2
  • FIC AD11 motherboard
  • 512 MB PC2100 DDR
  • AMD Athlon 1.368 (144x9.5) GHz. CPU
  • VisionTek GeForce3
  • nVidia 21.81 Detonator drivers
  • RivaTuner tweak application
  • AMD AGP driver 5.22
  • VIA 4-in-1 4.33
  • Quake3 v1.30 1024x768x32 Max-HQ (unless otherwise noted)
  • 3DMark2001 1024x768x32
  • Serious Sam v1.04
  • DronezMark
  • Giants v1.4


HSF Results

I experimented with the GeForce3 to determine the highest, most stable core/memory settings possible. I ended up settling on 250 MHz (core) and 560 MHz. (memory). Iíll have more to say about this later. The basic procedure used was as follows: I used RivaTuner to overclock the GeForce3, allowing sufficient time for the temperature to settle before running the benchmarks. Even when youíre not running any 3D games/software, the temperature will still rise. This will be noted in the graphs as ďNo Load.Ē Once I recorded the temperature, I then fired up the benchmarking software. In the case of Quake3, I used a looping script to allow enough time for the temperature to settle. As for 3DMark2001, this benchmark takes long enough for the temperature to stabilize.

 Letís take a look at Quake3.



I was rather shocked by the results, so I proceeded to redo the tests several times. Each time, I achieved fairly identical scores. No matter how you slice it, there's a massive difference between the 2 solutions. As you can see, a setting of 250/560 will give you a differential of 8.2 degrees under load between the 2!

 Letís now take a look at 3DMark2001

Once again, we see similar numbers. This time, the differential under load is 7.7 degrees. Pretty awesome so far. Now, let's see how this translates in real-world applications.

Next Page: Benchmarks

Skip To:


Last Updated on October 11, 2001

Copyright © 1998-2004. All rights reserved.
Reproduction in whole or in part in any form or medium
without written permission of the site's owners is prohibited.
All trademarks are properties of their respective owners.

Privacy Policy

FastCounter by bCentral

 Visitors Are Online
Powered by
Memory from

Shop at Monitors

Your one stop point for the complete power PC user