9800GTX ftw

[Azza]

edit: azza i really dont get how your rig was beaten by mine(in 3dmark anyways) because you have a quadcore clocked @ 3.6ghz where mine is a mere 2x 3.6 and you have a 9800GTX, shows a totally different story with this new series.

My tests are at 1920x1200.

[Hicks12]

My tests are at 1920x1200.

ah that why then , can you try defaults? just for comparison.

Also dont see why your dvi wont let you have 1200x1000 because mine lets me .

[matty-hodgson]

ah that why then , can you try defaults? just for comparison.

Also dont see why your dvi wont let you have 1200x1000 because mine lets me .

what do you get with your rig at 1280 x 1024?

8800GT 3DMark06 score

can't get my 9800GTX to run the CPU test for some reason
runs fine with my 8800GT..

[Hicks12]

overclocked or stock?
also i ment too say try default 3dmark settings .

the ones i posted are : 1280x1024,will get a detailed brake down/

edit: @ stock 3dmark06 it was: SM 2.0 Score VirtualMarks 5908
SM 3.0 Score VirtualMarks 5791
CPU Score VirtualMarks 2708
12457

now overclocked= SM 2.0 Score VirtualMark 6461
SM 3.0 Score VirtualMarks 6366
CPU Score VirtualMarks 3285

was 14029 just found this old result .


edit2: well with just the cpu @ 3.6ghz rest stuff @ stock i got 13303
SM 2.0 Score VirtualMarks 6151
SM 3.0 Score VirtualMarks 5859
CPU Score VirtualMarks
3234

[matty-hodgson]

overclocked or stock?
also i ment too say try default 3dmark settings .

the ones i posted are : 1280x1024,will get a detailed brake down/

14011 doesn't seem too high when i can get 13713 at 700 / 1750 / 2000 on an 8800GT.. :S
i need to get a new monitor to see the real effects of a 9800GTX tbh..
if i get it working..

[Hicks12]

can your card go higher than those clocks? and the 8800gt/gts were not much different much like this 8800gts/9800GTX

[matty-hodgson]

can your card go higher than those clocks? and the 8800gt/gts were not much different much like this 8800gts/9800GTX

i can get 730 / 1825 / 2020 at a push..
scored 13851 then..
but i think that when posting a score, it should be how your PC runs all the time..

the 8800GT and the 8800GTS aren't really all that similar, there's like a 25 - 30% difference iirc

[Azza]

Q6600 at 3.6 and stock graphics.

[Hicks12]

also remember, yours is a quad core @ 3.2ghz=12.8ghz where mine @3.6ghz= 7.2ghz,cpu makes alot of difference.

[SiM]

also remember, yours is a quad core @ 3.2ghz=12.8ghz where mine @3.6ghz= 7.2ghz,cpu makes alot of difference.

Did you learn cpu maths on ebay?

It doesn't work like that mate... a E8400 overclocked to 4.2GHz would probably outperform this quad unless 3dmark is heavily multi core optimised...

Sweet score Azza!!! So you should be looking to get 17-18k when you oc it

[Hicks12]

Did you learn cpu maths on ebay?

It doesn't work like that mate... a E8400 overclocked to 4.2GHz would probably outperform this quad unless 3dmark is heavily multi core optimised...

in 3dmark a quadcore is used so it does matter, i score less then blitzen but he has the same card exept quad core about 1k+ higher his is.
my motherboard seems to hate over 1600fsb so cant try 4.2ghz sadly.

[SiM]

in 3dmark a quadcore is used so it does matter, i score less then blitzen but he has the same card exept quad core about 1k+ higher his is.
my motherboard seems to hate over 1600fsb so cant try 4.2ghz sadly.

Ok fair enough... I didn't know that... but AFAIK, in most games a higher clocked dual is better than a lower clocked quad...

[Hicks12]

Ok fair enough... I didn't know that... but AFAIK, in most games a higher clocked dual is better than a lower clocked quad...

yes that is correct , as long as a game doesnt fully use quad core then a dual core wins because of the superiour clocks etc, supreme commander uses quad core and thats it i believe.

[Azza]

Some OpenGL benchmark results so far...


FurMark - stock clocks




FurMark - 800mhz core, 1100mhz mem, 2000mhz shaders




Soft Shadows - stock




Soft Shadows - 800mhz core, 1100mhz mem, 2000mhz shaders




Surface Deformer - stock




Surface Deformer - 800mhz core, 1100mhz mem, 2000mhz shaders

[SiM]

There are newer drivers out here (174.74)

The one that came on the CD is 174.40

[SiM]

w00t, w00t, giggity, w00t... maybe its the new drivers, or maybe its the extra 50MHz overclock


I think this test is far to biased towards cpus... its meant to be a graphics benchmark ffs... if we take the cpu test out I reckon I won't be as far behind you guys