Far Cry 61.76 Vs 61.77

Well I was using the HardwareOC Bench Tool and in it I selected to enable SM2.0b and it ran fine. maybe i should have selected default model instead. Hmmm

Edit: ok I updated the scores with sm2.0. I don't know if my card was really running sm2.0b but that's what I had the HardwareOC BenchTool set to.

[ststephen]

I got a 200 point drop in 3dMark and small drops in Far Cry benchmarks:

Far Cry:
Ver,SM,Map: Run 1/Run2
6176,2,Training: 55.17/53.93
6176,3,Training: 51.89/54.06
6177,2,Training: 54.04/53.25
6177,3,Training: 51.46/53.96
6220,2,Training: 51.75/50.89
6220,3,Training: 49.43/52.15
6176,2,Research: 59.45/60.07
6176,3,Research: 68.55/78.68
6177,2,Research: 58.10/58.71
6177,3,Research: 64.58/76.36
6220,2,Research: 52.70/53.57
6220,3,Research: 60.82/69.99

3DMark03:
6176: 11963
6177: 11745

P43.2@3.52 (220FSB)
1GB DDR 4000
GeForce 6800GT, Audigy2

/// No good for me, I'm switching back.

[Dot50Cal]

61.76 - 11970
61.77 - 11987

You should bench again, I first tried it and I got 10000! I knew something was wrong so I restarted and it solved it. I actually gained a few points.

[ststephen]

You're right. I boot into Linux and use PartImage to restore a clean XP+SP2RC2 image, then install infinst.exe, then nvidia driver, then audigy drivers. The previously saved image was getting ~11700 repeatedly -- three times, across mulitple reboots. Then I did a fresh install again and got 11950.

Bizarre, but comforting, I guess.

[ststephen]

No one cares, but I'd been running my memory at auto, so the P4C800-E was choosing 3:2. I set it to 1:1 properly, now I get 12300 3dMarks joy.

Now if I could only get the memory to run faster. I really messed up when I bought this 3.2, I can only O/C it to 220, so my memory doesn't run that fast even though I have PC4000 memory.

[Blacklash]

Lately I have been trying my rig at 3.68 with 2-2-2-5 timings on the ram and my mobo's GAT at Street racer, which is one up from what I can run at 3.9. The difference with the 61.77 driver(3dmark03) is now 13241 at 3.9 and 13198 at 3.68. The tighter ram timings and higher acceleration seem to offset the higher clock to a degree. We are only talking about 43 3dmark03 marks.Another thing I like is I can run my CPU at default voltage for the 3.68 instead of the mandatory 1.675 to get 3.9.

The 61.77 driver does great with Far Cry. Anyone running everything at very-high/ultra high that wants to see a real FPS boost at 1600 res, just drop your shadows to medium. Yes you lose the nice shadows on your weapon but you gain a large amount of FPS. One point in training for me went from 63 FPS all the way up to a steady 80.

[ststephen]

I'm up to 12475 3dMarks. I can't get my PNY to O/C past 405/1100. Malificar: what speed is your GT at?

[Blacklash]

Originally Posted by ststephen

I'm up to 12475 3dMarks. I can't get my PNY to O/C past 405/1100. Malificar: what speed is your GT at?

It will only do 415/1.20 tops. Sometimes the test fails on 1.20. I wish I could get more on the core. Those Ultra folks getting 460 or so on the core make me sick

Edit: I tried my rig at 3.74(220) 2-2-2-5 and I got 13,219 in 3dmark03, so that's what? About 22marks or so over 3.68? I will likely just stay here. Nice to see it can hold the timings there though.

[ststephen]

Yeah but trust me as a recent owner of a 9800XT, a $550 (w/ tax) video card, you feel like a total chump having paid $500+ for a video card when it no longer is the tastiest in 2 months. I feel very happy with my $400 video card -- I don't feel like as much of a sucker. Plus I unloaded the 9800XT for $120, which helped mitigate the cost even more.

I think I did really good with this generation by sticking with the GT. I felt too much like a crack-addled loser paying $500 for a video card that's only cherry for 1 gaming cycle of a few months.

[Blacklash]

Originally Posted by ststephen

Yeah but trust me as a recent owner of a 9800XT, a $550 (w/ tax) video card, you feel like a total chump having paid $500+ for a video card when it no longer is the tastiest in 2 months. I feel very happy with my $400 video card -- I don't feel like as much of a sucker. Plus I unloaded the 9800XT for $120, which helped mitigate the cost even more.

I think I did really good with this generation by sticking with the GT. I felt too much like a crack-addled loser paying $500 for a video card that's only cherry for 1 gaming cycle of a few months.

I agree. This one is even all the more sweet because BB honored the brief 299usd deal they had up for it. I planned on trying a X800XT myself, but I couldn't turn down a card like this for that price. Overclocked it is very close to what I would be getting out of the XT.

This generation it seems like you can get much more bang for your buck. Even the 6800, mildly overclocked it a very good deal for 299 msrp. I have seen them do up to 10k in 3dmark03 depending on the OC you get.

Too bad Ati hasn't got the lower clocked version of XT out the door yet.

Sounds like you are set though, a rig that can do 12.4k in 3dmark03 will handle anything coming out.