3DMark 2001 scores...

[Dragon]

Well i have a LeadTek Geforce2 GTS Pro 64mg..
and i ran it in 3DMArk 2001, ( video card on default settings )
the score i got from that was 3349 with the settings

1024x768, 32bit, compressed textures, d3d hardware T&L and antialiasing off..

is that a good score?

and i am running an AMD 1ghz o/c to 1.1ghz, MSI Pro2a KT133, etc....

[oc jason]

try changing the compressed to 32 and see what you git it shoul dbe a little higher

[Dragon]

i changed the compression rate to 32bit and changed the resolution to 1152x864, 16bit

and now my score is 3518 ...
is that good for what video card i got?
gts pro 64mg...

[Pinky]

That's a decent score. 2001 is a very tough benchmarking app. for the geforce 2 cards to score high in since it has geforce 3/Radeon 2 features that the geforce 2 and older cards score zeros on.

[Dragon]

This is something off the topic but when the geforce3mx comes out, is that going to better than a geforce2 gts pro?..


now back on to the topic, i'll go d/l 3dmark2000 and see what i get..

:)

[Pinky]

The GF3 MX will be a great card, much better than any GF2... but will still cost at least as much as the GF2 Ultra is right now when first released.

[Bobby Manus]

Gf3mz beats gf2 ultra? Woah I say to thee :P I think the ultra will have higher fps.

[Dragon]

Urmm PInky, how does a GF3MX beat all GF2 including the Ultra when the GF3MX is only 175mhz at the core and 200Mhz DDR at the memory?

[Sohryu Asuka Langley]

they current gf3 is 200/230 so the gf3mx's 175/200 wont be far off...unless nvidia cut pipelies or lightspeed.

[Geobronc]

I have received a score of 6200 in 3DMark2001.

[Tacoman667]

Hehe, mine is 7003. Pinky can vouch for me. =)

[Dragon]

i've ran a bench mark in 3dmark2000 and my score is 5636 so what you guyz think of this score?
by the way my video card is all standard and im running a leadtek geforce2 gts pro

[Pinky]

Originally posted by Tacoman667
Hehe, mine is 7003. Pinky can vouch for me. =)

Hehe... yep, saw that one months ago :) lol had my doubts, but I was quickly proven wrong!

As for the "faster" geforce 2, most PC fluent people know speed does not mean everything (means something but not everything)... the internal architecture of chips are what determines the quality and depth of a video card...

The geforce 3 will always be better than the GF2 line, for the simple fact it does everything the geforce 2 does plus some new features. You might lose a frame or two at 800x600, but at 1600+ the geforce 2 cards just can't compete... not to mention the new texture/lighting features, and so on...

Check out a few benchmarks online, many geforce 3 / 2 comparisons. I'll never go back to a geforce 2 :).

[!-=sky=-!]

i got 2017 in 3dmark2001 with my geforce256 sdr

is that a good score?

btw i m running 123/164

[Pinky]

Originally posted by -=sky=-
i got 2017 in 3dmark2001 with my geforce256 sdr

is that a good score?

btw i m running 123/164

That's about right for that card.

[TranceBear]

Don't forget the little GeForce-2 MX-400, they are a cheap alternative to the others. With enough tweaks you can get it to do more.

[Dragon]

Dam, a GF2 MX400 whooped my ass in 3dmark2001..
how shameful..
:(

[!-=sky=-!]

i m just wondering but what would be good settings for me geforce256 card?

i mean by like the settings in nvmax

[Bobby Manus]

WTF is that just the little MX that can go or what? My ultra gets 4k and it pulls out with 4.6? BAH! Not like my system is doging either...

[TranceBear]

I spent 1 solid week searching for tweaks for the system and card to get it this high.

[TranceBear]

Oh, my 2000 scores