PDA

View Full Version : Ti 4600 3dmark 2001 scores ... Is it normal?


Pages : [1] 2

thewizard
03-29-04, 07:27 PM
Hey folks,
I just went down from 9700pro to Asus Ti 4600 ultra
I performed 3dmark 2001 @ 1024*768 ...........I got 9605 3d marks .... Is that any good?

My system specs:
AMD mobile 2600 @ 2.0GHz (133fb * 15)
768mb RAM (256mb PC2100 samsung + 512mb PC3000 corsair)
Asus Ti 4600 ultra
120GB (80GB WD @ 7200rpm + 40GB seagate @ 5400rpm)

ChrisRay
03-29-04, 07:29 PM
You sure your Athlon XP 2600+ Is @ 2.0 Ghz? They should 2.1 Ghz or somethen, That makes it actually an Athlon XP 2400+ Specially since ya running 15x 133, Like my system @ stock.

Anywho,


Dunno that doesnt sound right to me.. you should be in 11k + fields IMO.

saturnotaku
03-29-04, 07:30 PM
My old Ti4600 on a 1.9 GHz Athlon would easily score 11-12k. Something's not right with that configuration.

jAkUp
03-29-04, 07:37 PM
Try pulling out that 266mhz memory and just using the 366.... I dunno, just a thought.

anzak
03-29-04, 07:38 PM
What is the Ti 4600 clocked at? There is something wrong with that score because my 9600XT can hit 15k at 570/820 :rolleyes: For some reason the card could be underclocked.

thewizard
03-29-04, 07:44 PM
I am getting Rivatuner to check the configuration of the card.
I dunno I got this brand new from a member from amd forums.
The card came in brand new and the seller had awesome feedbacks.
So I think I will just take out the Pc2100 DDr and try...

BTW what are the other things that you would look for ???

Blacklash
03-29-04, 07:54 PM
I do not use futuremark benches myself. I can give you numbers for the UT2004 bot match all bench for a PNY geforce 4 ti 4600 in my system now:

dm-rankin
38.728516 / 75.740334 / 170.470871 fps
Score = 75.844063

as-convoy
16.399494 / 43.056561 / 90.327133 fps
Score = 43.107857

ons-torlan
11.851067 / 63.465862 / 115.599052 fps
Score = 63.553307

br-colossus
21.175924 / 89.893372 / 198.919708 fps
Score = 89.970657

ctf-bridgeoffate
32.198120 / 100.722870 / 233.425873 fps
Score = 100.887047


Aquamark turns in a GFX score of 2250 for the same card. By contrast my old 5700u did 4100. Aquamark was run at 1024X768 with 4XAF quality driver settings. If I force AF off via the driver control panel the score becomes 3420 for GFX in Aquamark. UT2004 was run at 1024X768 bot match all, NO AF or AA, Quality driver settings. I have DX9 and the latest nvidia drivers, forceware 56.64 on my system.

thewizard
03-29-04, 08:23 PM
So I did the 3dmark 2001 score again.
I am still getting 9642 3dmark with just one stick of PC3000 corsair XMS.
No significant increase.
:screwy:

ChrisRay
03-29-04, 08:26 PM
You are stuck using 266 mhz DDR memory? I mean going to 333 mhz FSB would get ya like 10,500 points I'm sure, But thats still kinda Low IMO.


I mean my system pulls 13,500 on that benchmark.


Btw mind posting a link? I mean some things can be told just your fill rate ect. Yada yada.

einstein_314
03-29-04, 10:29 PM
I have a XFX Geforce 4 Ti4600 and I get 9909 when it is overclocked to 310/680 (It's normal clock settings are 300/650). This is with the following other hardware:

AMD Athlon XP 1800+ @ 1.73 Ghz (138 * 12.5)
Asus A7V266-C motherboard
512 MB PC2100 DDR RAM
40 Gig Western Digital HD (7200 rpm)

I'm thinking you should have a higher score than that. Oh, and what is a Ti4600 ultra? Is that a 4800? Never heard of an 4600 ultra. You should definately be getting a higher score than that though.

theultimo
03-29-04, 10:55 PM
Around 18,000 and change in aquamark total, 2350 in gfx...somethings DEFINATELY wrong with the config.....AsI only got a 5600....(Specs in sig)

Geforce4ti4200
03-29-04, 10:59 PM
can you link me to your published score so I can see where it is low?

ragejg
03-29-04, 11:13 PM
#1: The fsb is POSITIVELY an issue. this score really wouldnt be that much lower @ his bus speeds if it was a tbird 1.33...

#2: The mobile 2600 is possibly that of the barton core, which is a chip that runs a 266 fsb but has 512k cache onboard...

#3: nv's recent drivers have NOT been kind to 3dmark'01... Try 40.71 drivers :cool: ...

ChrisRay
03-29-04, 11:22 PM
#1: The fsb is POSITIVELY an issue. this score really wouldnt be that much lower @ his bus speeds if it was a tbird 1.33...

#2: The mobile 2600 is possibly that of the barton core, which is a chip that runs a 266 fsb but has 512k cache onboard...

#3: nv's recent drivers have NOT been kind to 3dmark'01... Try 40.71 drivers :cool: ...



Reallly, I should try those drivers, Cuz I get 13,550 with my current system.

What were the last drivers optimised for 3dmark2001? I'm Just Curious, Cuz I know I'd prbably hit the meaningless 14,000 with them just for the fun of showing it.

ragejg
03-29-04, 11:25 PM
I don't think those'll worky on an FX card... (remember, I said I don't think they'll ... uh, worky)... :rolleyes: :D

thewizard
03-30-04, 12:06 AM
http://service.futuremark.com/compare?2k1=7707117
9676 3dmarks is the maximum I got after 3 trials.

Gator
03-30-04, 05:04 AM
What is the Ti 4600 clocked at? There is something wrong with that score because my 9600XT can hit 15k at 570/820 :rolleyes: For some reason the card could be underclocked.

That's not a fair comparison, the R9600XT is significantly faster and more powerful than the TI4600, so of course your score is higher :rolleyes:

I don't think those'll worky on an FX card... (remember, I said I don't think they'll ... uh, worky)... :rolleyes: :D

Well he's using a TI4600, so FX-compatible drivers don't apply here ;)

And yes that score does seem a little low, and I think you're lower bus speed is to blame. Overclock the fsb for that cpu and make sure the ram is syncronized with it. And don't bother with the PC2100 chip it'll screw your overclock. And finally as always, make sure AA/AF are not in use.

ChrisRay
03-30-04, 05:10 AM
That's not a fair comparison, the R9600XT is significantly faster and more powerful than the TI4600, so of course your score is higher :rolleyes:



Well he's using a TI4600, so FX-compatible drivers don't apply here ;)

And yes that score does seem a little low, and I think you're lower bus speed is to blame. Overclock the fsb for that cpu and make sure the ram is syncronized with it. And don't bother with the PC2100 chip it'll screw your overclock. And finally as always, make sure AA/AF are not in use.


Well his responce was based off my question of what driver set to use for inflating 3dmark scores >< ;p

zakelwe
03-30-04, 05:42 AM
For which driver to use for 3dmark2001, best optimised

GF4 ti series 42.01, 42.51
GF4 MX 44.03
FX series 44.03.


You shouldn't be running 56.64 with a GF4 though if you want a good score.

Try 42.51 and then report back

Regards

Andy

thewizard
03-30-04, 07:01 AM
I just ordered a new chaintech 7NIL1 mATX mobo from newegg and should be getting it by thursday. With that I can atleast overclock the CPU and should be able to run the RAM at PC3200 speeds.
I will get the 42. drivers and see what kind of scores I can get. I dunno but 56.64 drivers make all my games look good. I tried MOTOgp2, max payne 2, Prince of Persia Sands of times.... many more. The only difference I find between 4600 and 9700pro is that ATI's color is little bright while for nvidia its little saturated and yeah the extra 80 bucks. I am getting Far cry within few days and if the game runs fine within slowing down then I would stick with 4600 for atleast another year.
I think my VIA mobo it to blame for such low scores....

Dr_s99
03-30-04, 07:16 AM
uh... this is odd...
i have TI 4600, and my score is same thing as urs.. or sometimes higher...
i think so far the 2 best graphic card by NVIDIA are
Geforce 4 Ti 4600
and
Geforce FX 5950

so far i like my geforce 4 since i could play every game avilable.. like Far cry...
Splinter cell PArdon tomorrow... and unreal tourm...2004

i'm using the newst drivers...
i think its much better... and the performance has changed a little bit...
since the old driver....
can some one explain why in 1280x760 the frame per sec.. is like 50-60 in some games that uses DX 8.0 and then in 1600x1200 is like 55-65 ?

einstein_314
03-30-04, 01:13 PM
I'm thinking that it could have something to do with your mobile processor. According to your futuremark results, it's a Duron. That could be the problem as it has a much smaller L2 cache. and the frontside bus issue (only 266) also doesn't help. I'd say that's about right for your system. But going to the older drivers will give you a higher score. I used to get around 10,500 but now it's only 9900ish. :lame:

Geforce4ti4200
03-30-04, 07:59 PM
ok no wonder. you are doing everything wrong. first you need the 40.72 drivers. then you need windows 2k, its much faster in 3dmark and games. then you need to overclock your cpu and gpu. sell your ram and get pc3200 ram. your rig is capable of like 14k marks dude......

thewizard
03-30-04, 09:11 PM
ok no wonder. you are doing everything wrong. first you need the 40.72 drivers. then you need windows 2k, its much faster in 3dmark and games. then you need to overclock your cpu and gpu. sell your ram and get pc3200 ram. your rig is capable of like 14k marks dude......
I don't have Duron. I have a Barton Mobile processor. Dunno What's wrong with 3dmark01.
[http://server5.uploadit.org/files/thewizard1785-amdmobile.JPG]

ragejg
03-30-04, 09:23 PM
its the fsb!!!

and

it's the driver version you're using!!

THOSE are what's to blame for your low fsb scores... plain and simple.