Printable View
well just got my rad 9600 pro
and getting pretty low scores in 3d2001 so downloaded rage sd tweak to look at mem and core speeds to find this -------------
http://ibmike.homestead.com/files/rage.JPG
please can someone tell me this programme is lieing or have i bought a dodgy card
there were no clock speeds on the site where i bought the card but surely if they are selling as a pro it should have speeds of 600+400 ?
400 core, 600 is the mem which is ddr = 300*2. ur card is fine.
Just a side note on this - I've just got a 9600 non pro and it's clock locked (more like clock restored actually) with any drivers later than 3.4 - but with the 3.4's I can overclock the core up to 475MHz (the memory on the non pro is 200/400MHz DDR but my memory chips are actually rated at 275/550MHz and will go that fast - but no faster). Not sure if the pro is clock locked but thought it might be worth a mention before you start wondering WTF is going on with the card / riva tuner!
;) Some 9600PRO's are locked but I believe most aren't. As said some gfx cards quote the DDR RAM at the full effective speed (nVidia) while others quote the actual speed minus DDR optimisations (ATI), so 300mhz DDR is 600mhz effectively when you take DDR into account. 9600PRO do o/c VERY well, 400/600 to around 550/700 is not uncommon, nothing guaranteed though so take small steps and test thoroughly at each setting, IMHO RAM first and then core. Ensure Vsync is disabled for benchmarking and that you don't have AA or AF forced on in the drivers ... you may want 1 or more of these forced on when actually gaming though. Finally rem CPU speed and technology plays a big part esp in the faster gfx cards which take leaps in speed with every extra 0.1ghz. You should expect around 10000marks in 3DMARK2001SE depending upon CPU, if you compare gfx cards you will see 9600PRO is actually placed above you but that's just because almost all benchmarks submitted are from o/c'ed systems. What's your spec?
I have a Sapphire 9600 Pro and it clocks to around 550mhz core.
Off topic but is there a similar proggy for me to download for Nvidia cards to see clock and mem speeds etc?
Cheers,
MM
What 3DMark01 scores are you getting with your R9600Pros guys?
OK I just found it. I needed to use the word "tweak" in my google search for it.
http://download.guru3d.com/nvhardpage/
CHeers,
MM
My 9600 non pro gets 12217:Quote:
Originally posted by Howard
What 3DMark01 scores are you getting with your R9600Pros guys?
http://service.futuremark.com/compare?2k1=7015217
(3DMark 2K1 thinks it's a 9600 pro but trust me it's not!)
Some less informed ppl are led to believe because it has a higher core speed than the 9800, it should get a similar score but mem bandwidth and rendering performance between the 2 is very different thats why you pay more than twice the price for a 9800pro :P
system specs
ecs kv7mm+ mobo
256mb pc2100
xp 1800+ t bred
as stated 9600 pro
:D ibmike XP1800+ is still a mighty fine CPU and very capable in todays games, but in benchmarks it will hurt you a little esp if your gfx card can take advantage of the faster CPUs. It is Tbred so runs pretty cool and TbredA should o/c to 1.8ghz XP2200+ while TbredB should o/c to around 2.2ghz XP3000+? Can't find any info on kv7mm+, what chipset does it use? 256MB of PC2100 is more than fine, nice to have the faster RAM for o/c'ing (esp FSB) just as it's nicer to have mroe RAM ... but then isn't it always? Very well balanced system which should game VERY well and yet not cost the Earth. You'd get a bit more by o/c'ing the CPU and gfx card ... even at stock perf should be very good and you should ideally enable 4xAA+4xAF all the time to help soak up some of the gfx card power your CPU can't quite tap.
;) 9600nonPRO is pretty decent but your some way behind a GF4TI4200 in raw 3D speed. 9600PRO is quite a lot better esp when it's o/c'ed. The problem with the whole 9600 series is that they use only 4 pipes (like the 9500 nonPRO did) which is a significant disadvantage and why the 9500PRO (8 pipes 275/270) is faster than the 9600PRO (4 pipes 400/300), 9600PRO needs 550mhz core to have the same sort of core throughput that the 9500PRO has at stock. 9500PRO was too good to be true and thanks to 0.13mu the 9600PRO is very close behind. 9700 and up all use 8 pipes except for the 9800SE. Here's the perf on paper ...
CURRENT CARDS:
9800PRO (0.15) 380/340 256bitDDR 8pipes 21.8GB/s 3.2Gp/s
9800 . . . (0.15) 325/310 256bitDDR 8pipes 19.8GB/s 2.6Gp/s
9600PRO (0.13) 400/300 128bitDDR 4pipes 9.6GB/s 1.6Gp/s
9600 . . . (0.13) 325/200 128bitDDR 4pipes 6.4GB/s 1.3Gp/s
PREVIOUS CARDS:
9700PRO (0.15) 325/310 256bitDDR 8pipes 19.8GB/s 2.6Gp/s
9700 . . . (0.15) 275/270 256bitDDR 8pipes 17.6GB/s 2.2Gp/s
9500PRO (0.15) 275/270 128bitDDR 8pipes 8.6GB/s 2.2Gp/s
9500 . . . (0.15) 275/270 128bitDDR 4pipes 8.6GB/s 1.1Gp/s
NEW 09-2003:
9800SE_1 (0.15) 325/250 128bitDDR 4pipes 8.0GB/s 1.3Gp/s
9800SE_2 (0.15) 380/340 256bitDDR 4pipes 21.8GB/s 1.6Gp/s
well that has just explained alot thanks m8 the only problem is that my mobo(elite k7vmm+) has no overclocking options in the bios
It doesnt matter what "number" you get. As long as you can play the games you want to play with a decent res and quality dont worry about it.
;) I agree, the bottom line is that so long as your PC can do what you demand of it at least satisfactorily then there's no problem, real games and real perf are what truly count. However synthetic stuff does help to compare and examine how your system is running, how upgrading could enhance things and more importantly check that you are running about where you should be with your setup. With manu's like Powercolor (eg 64bitDDR on cards that should have 128bit DDR) out there you really need to check the perf is what it should be, esp on the lower end cards (GF4MX, GF-FX5200) wjere many manus quietly down the clock speeds from what they should be.Quote:
Originally posted by m2c4u
It doesnt matter what "number" you get. As long as you can play the games you want to play with a decent res and quality dont worry about it.
that is the only thing i use 3d mark for Austin
but as you say if i think i can get it running a little faster then i will do that but only for best performance
not to say my cards faster than yours ETC
Well I decided to OC my Sapphire 9600Pro now and I've gotten to 500mhz on the core and 364.50 on the memory (729mhz DDR) and I'm getting about 13000 in 3DMark 2001
System specs:
XP2500+ oc'd to 2400Mhz (219x11) using 1.775v
Lanparty NF2 Ultra
512mb TwinMOS PC3200 (2-5-2-3-11 timings)
The system has only been up and running for about 2 or 3 days so I haven't gotten into the hardcore clocking. Did have it booting and working properly at 2.6ghz using 1.80v
How do those clock rates compared to others cause I'm personally not sure about them. Yeah I was never expecting to get 18000/19000 clocks that the 9700/9800Pros are getting but I think in someways that the score is a little low :(
:D 500/729 is about right for a Rad9600PRO (average between 500/650 and 550/700) and gives a very sizable boost. 3Dmark2001 is a bit long in the tooth now, it was designed to push the GF3 (and later Rad8500) which are both far slower than the Rad9600PRO even before o/c'ing and obviously they also lack its wonderful DX9 and superb AA+AF. Anything over 10000marks is fantastic, to really see anything worth while (ie push your card) you should look to upping the res and adding AA+AF or look at other benchmarks (like 3Dmark2003 esp for DX9 cards).
;) It's good getting a Barton XP2500+ to 2.3ghz (2.2ghz + 400FSB = XP3200+) so if you are Prime stable at 2.4ghz (XP3500+?) that is amazingly good. I prefer to stay below 1.70v myself certainly for TbredB and Barton, but since they're pretty cheap now it doens't overly matter should you injure yours from overvolting.
:cool: TBH even a stock XP2500+ is capable of turning in fantastic gaming speeds IF coupled with the right gfx card ... so your benchmark results may seem a little low but you have to rem a Rad9700-9800 will own you even on a CPU @ 1.8ghz (XP2500+) ... but hey you are exceeding the speed of a £350 CPU (XP3200+) and your gfx card is near 9700 speeds but costs a good £100 less (certainly than the 9800 series). Nice system, will play everything very well for a good while to come.
PS. So 13000 is a good score and roughly where you should be.
Thanx for your kind words Austin. I don't think that I have done too badly with this system considering that I have gone from an Athlon 1.4ghz (266mhz) on an Abit KT7-RAID to now this and this is my first proper attempt at overclocking with this kind of hardware.
I never expected to be able to get what I have gotten from this hardware. I'm looking forward to my days playing with this system especially now that everything is working properly and prime stable :)
I think that I will have to see if I can drop the VCore down to 1.7v and see what happens really :) Anyway glad to see that my scores are okay which is the main point of this thread :)
Edit: I tried it out with 3dMark2k3 and got just over 4000 marks for it which I thought was okay awell but the ORB was down so I couldn't compare :(