3dmark 03 with X800pro

[wedge22]

well i benched farcry @ 1280x1024 with max settings everthing on and it ran at 41fps, how does that sound.Plus it looks amazing.

[Grey M@a]

Kezzer do what everyone else does, drop the synthetic tests and use the ones built into todays games, ie farcry, ut2k4 use games that you know would destroy performance and then let it loose on your card. 3d mark is crap and always will be aslong as ATi and Nvidia rig their cards/drivers to take advantage of the 3dmark software

[iMc]

how do you run the far cry test?

[wedge22]

I used a program called benchemall, search for it on google.

[SilentDeath]

ATI do not rig there drivers or cards to do what you are suggesting grey m@a, and never have. Nvidia do and will continue to do so for a long time, at a guess...

Far cry has to man graphical bugs to use for reliable benching, use tryed and tested games, not used ut2k4 but it sounds like a good benching app for this.

wedge22 I played far cry in 1600*1200 with 16x af and iirc 2x aa, and got about that with everythign maxed, I cant remeber exactly I might have turned a few things down, but I dont think the gfx is limiting you on far cry...?

[StarkMjolk]

I believe/hope Nvidia has learnt their lesson and won't rig drivers in a while, would cost them too much if they were caught. And I don't see ATI as a saint ether. Not that I say that they have rigged their drivers, but I don't think they'd hesitate to do it if they thought they'd earn anything on it and being able to do it without getting caught...

[wedge22]

Well I will also be getting a new Silent X psu tomorrow so hopefully i will be able to o/c my rig to 3200 speeds.

[turkster]

wedge22 I played far cry in 1600*1200 with 16x af and iirc 2x aa, and got about that with everythign maxed, I cant remeber exactly I might have turned a few things down, but I dont think the gfx is limiting you on far cry...?

Youve gotta be joking . That game is pretty heavy on graphics as far as i can see. At 1280x1024 no aa no af i can only get decent frame rates out of medium-high in game graphics setting on my stock 9600XT. Seeing as Ive got an XP2500 running at 2.2Ghz and 1 GB Corsair XMS Pro I should imagine it is graphics limited in this case.

I would still expect better than 41fps with a X800Pro even with maxed out graphics setting though

[Korky]

Remember cpu speed doesnt affect 2k3 much, maybe 500 marks if u o/c alot.

[LayZeh]

It is the CPU that's holding him back, the card is capable of far higher scores the CPU is imposing a bottleneck.

[wedge22]

Well hopefully the silent x psu will allow me to overclock to 3200 speeds, which should improve my framerates considerably.

[Grey M@a]

ATI do not rig there drivers or cards to do what you are suggesting grey m@a, and never have. Nvidia do and will continue to do so for a long time, at a guess...

If you go read through the archives at HardOCP you will find that ATi were caught for the 9700 card and Nvidia were rigging their FX5 series. Ati tweaked settings on their early cats, cos face it back then the cats were crap, now that their driver development team has everything sorted they only needed to do it the once. How about the time ATi got caught writing doom 3 specific instructions to catch Nvidia at the time in the Doom 3 tests? Obvioulsy these go out the window now as Doom 3 wont really push any modern card.

They are both as bad as each other, also the fact that ATi are part of the 3dmark beta program, hence they get it earlier than most, so they have all the tools to tweak their cards to 3Dmark prior to its release to the public. Funny how Nvidia are not part of this program now. Personally 3Dmark is an unbalanced testing platform, swap to using the built in game ones and other benchmark applications. A good example of this is the 6800 v x800 in 3Dmark the ATi card stormed ahead and had a couple of thousand extra points, but when it came to the games there was only a 5 - 10fps difference which doesn't equal that of a couple of thousand points in 3Dmark does it.

[Kezzer]

I want an X800 XT now

Even on my system it would make games run super well

/me saves

[Grey M@a]

if you are wanting the latest and gratest, sit on it for 6 months and whilst everyone else has bought one at the premium price you buy it later and save a packet in comparrison

[Kezzer]

I fell for that one when i bought my 9800 Pro. £280 down the drain

I will be waiting yes but i would be buying it for STALKER, HL2, Doom 3 and all that. It will still run stupidly well on my system though.

Just think, you need a seriously OC'ed card or CPU (talking 9800 Pro here) to get a score of 6k in 3d mark 03. The new cards can get 8k with a Front Side Bus on an AMD system of 333MHz. Either it's a serious hack in the drivers and 3d mark or they're pretty good for their buck.

[Grey M@a]

like i said before forget 3dmark, if the card will run the games at a good quality what does it matter that the card scores this and that. For example I have a ti4680 geforce 4 and a friend of mine has a 9700pro his card outscores mine by 2k on 3dmark but when it comes to running the likes of tribes 2 full details my lower spec card gains an extra 40fps over the 9700 pro, in doom 3 they are equal, COD i get a steady 89fps @ 1024 full details, he gets 61fps

So like i said 3d mark is a load of tosh, proves nothing, to 3d mark his card is better than mine, in the real world gaming the gf4 actually does a little better in those games mentioned.