Printable View
I can see why Nvidia is upset. My 3Dmark score was 1135 under the new benchmark. I had 5-7 fps for a lot of the game tests. I have a standard Geforce3, running with 42.09 drivers and DirectX 9, and a Pentium 4 2.5 gHz with 512 mb of RDRAM.
My usual score in 3Dmark 2001 SE was 8623. Looks like Futuremark really raised the bar ... and I suspect the tests are no longer tailored to Nvidia's strong points.
Don't feel bad I have a p4 2.53 512 mb pc2700 ddr ram and Gforce4 Ti4600 and my first benchmark was 1677, I did have something else running on my pc at the time but DAMN! I am going to install the newest drivers and kill all other apps and rerun and post results tomorrow and see if it makes a difference.
These low numbers make me think they changed the scale or something.
4635 on my system, 14588 on old 3dmarks
hmm.. what you running rocks?
so far I'm the highest AK'er.. that is until Goob runs it on his 9700 and gets a 16743 or something like that...
The scoring system is the same.. just down to being how it was when 3DMark 2001 first came out.
Does Nvidia have DX9 compatible drivers yet?..
I believe every driver in the 42.xx series is DX 9 compatible. At least, that's what I've read.
Here's a good link for drivers.
http://bunny.xs4all.nl/software/nvidia.html
ASUS A7n8x with 1gb DDR pc3200 mem,AMD 2700+ and a new 9700 pro.
9700 Pro? What did you do with your old GF4?Quote:
Originally posted by Rocks
ASUS A7n8x with 1gb DDR pc3200 mem,AMD 2700+ and a new 9700 pro.
Setting on the my desk right now.. !!!! ANy ideas...
Yeah, I have one. :) I'll get the details from you later.
The new 3dMark takes full advantage of DX9, so unless you have an ATI 9700 or GF FX... you are going to have a very, very hard time breaking 2000 for a score as 2 of the tests won't even run without a DX9 compatible card.
ahh.. yeah the 9700 would push you up that high since 3DMark 2003 runs like crap on my system.. seriously the troll lair the highest fps I can get is in the 40's, and thats on the close-up of her face.
I finally got it today at work so I will see how it does on my rig :) I toped out at 16250 on 2002 so it should be interesting to see what pops out.
-Goob
started hitting in the 1500's with the 41.09 drivers.. went and downloaded the 42.30's and hit 1674.. still doesn't match my high though.
All we need for us Ti 4600 people is DX9 compatible drivers.. I have been running DX9 solidly for a couple months though... just need the drivers to utuilize it to the maximum.Quote:
Originally posted by [AK]Hylander
The new 3dMark takes full advantage of DX9, so unless you have an ATI 9700 or GF FX... you are going to have a very, very hard time breaking 2000 for a score as 2 of the tests won't even run without a DX9 compatible card.
Welp I got 5157... Not too shabby from what I have seen out there. It is pretty cool looking but from what I have read it is not that great of a system/gaming benchmark. A lot of the sites are hammering it.
It still looks cool though :)
-Goob
Agree on the test side, I think the 2001 gives you a better Idea on the performance changes. Anyway Goob, what are your specs?
Goobs Rig :)
Asus A7n8x MB (bios tweeked out)
AMD 2400+ unlocked runing 170x12.5 @ default voltage (still playing with settings)
Corsair XMS 3500 512mb (single stick)
Radeon 9700 Pro OC'd with Power Strip 3.3
2 IBM 60gb HD's ( just waiting for them to fail lost 3 already)
Plexwriter 40x CD Burner
cdrom...floppy...
Logitech MX-700 mouse ( I love this thing)
This has been the best setup for me to date. Rock solid. Once I get a ghost image of my system on my new Seagate serialATA drive (once it comes in) I am gonna push for a 200 fsb. The latest Asus 1002 bios is supposed to give a little more headroom for oc'ing.
-Goob
Running the lastest bios also, but with no O/Cing. I guess i;m stuck at 4635 for now or I can start the O/Cing process. Anyway, how are the temps with overclocking? My CPU sits around 43C
Goob, you got us all beat.. even Z if he had his rig I'm sure... (although he'd be overclocking it and tweaking it to the max if he had it).