3dmark05 scores

[Lash444]

Im wondering if my scores are where they should be. My BFG Ultra OC is a horrible overclocker, so I leave it at stock. 425/1100. I use the GT GS bios (tighter timings) from Gainward and have my cpu and ram overclocked in my system. Anyway, here are my scores and would be appreciative if anyone could confirm that my scores are about in line with others.

P4 3.0c @ 3.52
235fsb 2-2-2-5 1gig
425/1100

XG 66.76b - 5350 quality settings
XG 71.81 - 4560 high quality settings

I really dont know what else i can do to get better scores. Im going watercooling soon, but my ram on my videocard just doesnt seem to be up to snuff. No matter what i do to get 1200 on the memory, its just doesnt seem to want to work. Ive reseated the vgpu, used AS5 on the mosfet cooler, and applied different ramsinks on the memory of the graphics card. Its sooo close to stock that I dont even bother. Btw, i run win2003...not that that matters but I use it for its remote desktoping abilities. What do you think?

[|MaguS|]

What does this have to do with the For Sales and Trade forum? Your scores look aittle low but considering my GT is clocked as fast as your ultra It might be because of that.

I don't know why you would run GT bios on a Ultra though considering the Ultra likes more Voltage then the GT Bios provide.

[Lash444]

What does this have to do with the For Sales and Trade forum? Your scores look aittle low but considering my GT is clocked as fast as your ultra It might be because of that.

I don't know why you would run GT bios on a Ultra though considering the Ultra likes more Voltage then the GT Bios provide.

Woops, wrong forum...moderator if you can move this please...
I explained the GT bios thing, tighter timings. You can always up the voltage using an editor. Anyone who doesnt use a GT bios on their ultra is making a mistake.
Btw, if your score is 5300 in 3dmark using quality settings and not high quality...then im probably where I am supposed to be. You are using an Athlon 64, which is a better performer in games, and running slightly faster on gpu. Whats wrong with my scores.

Remember, this is with no tweaking of the display drivers to achieve a higher 3dmark score. Those who lower the iq, or reduce the quality settings of the drivers are just kidding themselves.

[|MaguS|]

Im using High Quality, I never lower it... hate how it looks in Normal Quality. I know my CPU is faster but not by much, considering your OC'd. My 5mhz wouldn't matter much at all.

BTW, don't try to tell me how to bench ;) Been doing it awhile now. :)

[saturnotaku]

/moved to proper section :)

[Lash444]

Im using High Quality, I never lower it... hate how it looks in Normal Quality. I know my CPU is faster but not by much, considering your OC'd. My 5mhz wouldn't matter much at all.

BTW, don't try to tell me how to bench ;) Been doing it awhile now. :)

Where do I begin.

#1, where did I state that you didnt know how to bench?
#2, 5mhz on the gpu will not make much of a difference no. However, having an A64, while I have an P4 quite possibly will since these cards are cpu limited and I have heard that A64's are better in gaming situations than their intel counterparts. Maybe 3dmark05 isnt that cpu dependent, however, I dont claim to know everything about this benchmarking tool, and instead come on to the forum to listen and learn.
#3 Why not give me your driver versions (some drivers give as much as 1000 pts difference in 3dmark because of a lower IQ)
#4 Why not give me your bios version?
#5 Heck, why not give me more info than just whats in your sig? Obviously I am not concerned with my RAW benchmark score like you are. I want to have the best IQ, with as reasonable performance as I can.

If you want to flex your benchmarking muscle, there are plenty of threads to do that in. I would prefer to have someone confirm that my scores are indeed in line with a system of my caliber with the drivers that I am using. Someone out there has to be using either of those drivers at those settings.

[keith33]

Using stock XFX bios running at 425/1200
Forceware 75.90 with High Performance for benching
eVGA copper cooler with AS5
3dmark05: 5947

Hope that helps. No other "tweaks" persay. Also using SM2.0 instead of 3.0 seems to add like 20 points but that means nothing to me.

[SLippe]

I hate 3dMark05, for some reason I can never break the 1500 mark. Bleh!

[Riptide]

Grunt dude it's probably that 5950. Nothing short of a 6800 series or X800 series card will do well in 05.

[Viffer5]

Grunt dude it's probably that 5950. Nothing short of a 6800 series or X800 series card will do well in 05.

My OC'd 6600GT (575/1.08GHz) on Athlon XP 3000+ OC'd to 2310 pulls around 4400~4800. (I know I haven't specified all my system details, but you get the point!)

I know my system isn't all that hot, but the 6600GT (AGP) does ok all things considered.

:p

[zer0]

palit geforce 6800
67.66xg
380/832

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v518/zeero19783/015%20MAR%2018%202004/3dmark05_04.jpg

360/875 -> 375/820 -> 380/832
3657 -> 3728 -> 3868

[macatak]

CPU matters very little in 3DMK05, i swapped out my xp3200+ for a 64 3500+ and my 3DMK05 scores never changed one bit, here's a breakdown of how my CPU upgrade affected the scores in 3DMK01, 3DMK03, 3DMK05 and AM3:

3DMK01:18,151===>22,685(25% increase)
3DMK03:11,399===>12,118(6.3% increase)
3DMK05:4,856====>4,864(within variation)
AM3: 53,775====>64,995(21% increase)
I benched my setup before and after the upgrade using the same driver and settings of course(driver: 67.03)

Anyway, i score anywhere from 4,8xx to 5,3xx depending on which driver i use, that's using default settings in the nVidia Control Panel(Image Setting = Quality), the highest scoring drivers i have used are the 75.90's which give me about 5,300 with no o/c's :)

[Vengeance]

I hate 3dMark05, for some reason I can never break the 1500 mark. Bleh!

Damn really? I could get 24xx with my 128mb 9800Pro. In my system in my sig. I more than doubled it with my 6800GT :nana:

[$n][pErMan]

3DMark05 I get 5049 on High Quality settings on my rig. I dont bother testing quality as I never run anything on it. I do all my benches in games or on these things with the same high settings id expect to play in a game :)

[jAkUp]

Yes the FX series does not do well in 3Dmark2005 because the tests are very shader intensive.

[Blacklash]

The problem with benchmarks is many people simple don't truly understand the term or the reason for their creation. System performance ought to measured in the same fashion in which you intend to use said system. If that is plus 24 mip BIAS, high peformance driver settings disconnected from the internet with all background applications killed but the bare min, so be it. If not, you are only fooling yourself.

A bench is meant to reflect performance under real expected system settings when it is in use. Aka if you play high quality driver settings you ought to be benching that way if you are looking for a true reflection of your system's performance under day to day usage.

Again, benchmark=repeatable test to judge a system/software performance in actual day to day use. Application and systems setting ought to be left alone and normalized if you are looking for a more accurate reflection of what your system will/can do on average.

I would advise folks looking to actually judge their scores by comparison to do so with reviews first and users second. A reviewer will use normalized settings more like you will in actual use/gaming over users who often get into meaningless pissing contests.

So if your single X800Pro is not turning in 17k in 3dmark03 like user Y, I wouldn't sweat it. Dig up some reviews that use games/benches you are interested in on said card.

[Marcos]

^^^

i dont use 3dmark to show how fast my computer can play games. I use 3dmark to see how fast my computer can run 3dmark.

[cooliscool]

'01 - http://service.futuremark.com/compare?2k1=8497506

'03 - http://service.futuremark.com/compare?2k3=3851451

'05 - http://service.futuremark.com/servlet/Index?pageid=/orb/projectdetails&projectType=12&projectId=718067

Ran with Quality driver settings.. no real driver tweaks or anything. Catalyst 3.5 on a 9800 Pro (thanks ChrisRay ;)).

You'll notice in the '03 test my CPU is at stock 3.2GHz. I decided to set it back to stock, because of my board not having an AGP/PCI lock, and generally just not being overclockable. Plus, at 3.2GHz, I can run at 1T. :)

[p3dj4]

3dmark03 - 12900 driver: 7.6.1.0 XTreme-G
3dmark05 - 5586 driver: 7.6.4.1 XTreme-G

CPU Score
3dmar03 - 870
3dmar05 - 4475

Everything on my system is stock :alc:

[Marcos]

3dmark03 - 12900 driver: 7.6.1.0 XTreme-G
3dmark05 - 5586 driver: 7.6.4.1 XTreme-G

CPU Score
3dmar03 - 870
3dmar05 - 4475

Everything on my system is stock :alc:

I get 4800 stock....

[SLippe]

[pErMan']3DMark05 I get 5049 on High Quality settings on my rig. I dont bother testing quality as I never run anything on it. I do all my benches in games or on these things with the same high settings id expect to play in a game :)

Well, it's gotta be your 6800 GT then, because I have 3200+ compared to your 2800+, although you do have your cpu oc'd higher than mine, but at a lower fsb...hmmmmm. Also, my scores of 1500 or so are at High Performance with AA and AF off. So I don't know what the hell is goin' on!! :mad:

EDIT: I don't know, maybe my score is about right. Check out this review...http://www.extremetech.com/article2/0,1558,1665283,00.asp

[Maverickman]

Hey my POS system gets the following scores:

3DMark 2001 SE = 18242

3DMark 2003 = 11330

3DMark 2005 = 4690


These scores have to rank near the bottom. But I wouldn't expect any more from my crap CPU :mad: . At least my gamers play O.K. That's what it's all about! :)

[Roliath]

Here's a general idea of what i've been scoring, specs are in sig
03 - 123xx
05 - 53xx/54xx
AQ3 - 684xx
using latest drivers from nvidia's website, you guys think my scores look okay?

EDIT:updated 05/03/01 scores in sig

[guybo]

2536 with the little 6600 that could in 3dMark05 (full version all tests). OC'd to 675/360

P4 2.8, 6600, Audigy2 ZS, 512 PC3200

[Maverick123w]

4621

http://service.futuremark.com/compare?3dm05=803359