Why is my 3dMark 06 score so low?

[]-[itman]

Alright, so my score is seriously low for my system. Compared to people with less overclocked systems, with the same drivers, I'm getting lower scores. My 05 scores were kinda low too, but not this bad. My 01 and 03 scores seem to be right in line, so what is with my low score. Any ideas would be great. Fast writes is enabled and aperature size is 128mb. Performance settings don't seem to make much of a difference. Also, gpu clock rate is actually set at 540.

http://service.futuremark.com/compare?3dm06=12493

[brickout]

3dmark06 favors SM3.0 (which you have), Intel cpus, and dual-core cpus. For whatever reason, Futuremark generated a product that weights those heavily. Maybe due to complaints that older 3dmarks favored AMDs...

So you more or less have one of the least capable cards that can run the program with full support.

Seems to me your score isn't low enough to cause alarm...3dmark06 isn't as brutal as people expected, but it's still pretty rough.

What were your '05 and '03 scores? Is your caed overclocked? What brand is it? Does it have GDDR3? Have you formatted lately? Driver version, etc?

[~x-3]

i think thats normal for a 6600gt

[]-[itman]

I don't know, looking at other scores around, people have %50 better scores than me and like i said, their overclocks are lower.

It's a Leadtek 6600GT oc'd to 540/1160 currently. CPU is at 2500mhz right now. Like I said, people with lower cpu scores with the same drivers and card as me are getting %50 better scores. Something seems wrong here. 05 scores were around 3500-3700 and 03 scores were points away from breaking 10,000.

[azu]

jw.. why is the GDDR3 boosted soo much and the core not that much? unless its not 500 core.. then my bad. loll. i don't remember !

AGP performance on the Dual-SATA2 isn't top notch. though, the PCIE performance was decent.

[icedragn]

Intel P4 EE w/ 7800GTX 512mb - 4553
http://service.futuremark.com/compare?3dm06=19396

AMD Athlon 64 w/ 7800GTX 512mb - 6407
http://service.futuremark.com/compare?3dm06=6055

the intel's gtx is even clocked considerably higher. I'm failing to see how it "favours" intel. Also, notice that the AMD is running at 1900x1200.

[]-[itman]

Intel P4 EE w/ 7800GTX 512mb - 4553
http://service.futuremark.com/compare?3dm06=19396

AMD Athlon 64 w/ 7800GTX 512mb - 6407
http://service.futuremark.com/compare?3dm06=6055

the intel's gtx is even clocked considerably higher. I'm failing to see how it "favours" intel. Also, notice that the AMD is running at 1900x1200.

2 things.

1. [edit, did you switch compare links or am I just losing it?]You're comparing a heavily oc'd AMD to a mediocre oc on the Intel. Although the higher res. is a good point.

2. Go make your own thread about this.

[Vengance_01]

B/C in the cpu test, thats an FX A64@3.2GHZ and the Intel is at stock 3.6. To get to 3.2 Phase or a pelt of some kind is normally need, you can get away with water on a golden opteron 939 chip or FX chip.

[icedragn]

-[itman']3 things.

1. You're comparing a SMP 2 cpu opteron system against a single core p4.

2. The AMD system is running at a lower resolution.

3. Go make your own thread about this.

1. it's a single core... athlon 64, not opteron.

2. p4ee res = 1280x1024, amd = 1920x1200

3. get some glasses.

[Vengance_01]

-[itman']3 things.

1. You're comparing a SMP 2 cpu opteron system against a single core p4.

2. The AMD system is running at a lower resolution.

3. Go make your own thread about this. you want to get your facts straight. the AMD is not a DC, it a very highly O/Ced single core@3.2GHZ, secondly the AMD is running at 1900-1200, P4 is at standard res. My DC Opteron gets around 1800 on the cpu part, and I am only at 2.5GHZ :)

[icedragn]

B/C in the cpu test, thats an FX A64@3.2GHZ and the Intel is at stock 3.6. To get to 3.2 Phase or a pelt of some kind is normally need, you can get away with water on a golden opteron 939 chip or FX chip.

if it's an FX, it's a peice of crap... my 3500+ winnie scores just higher than it in cpumarks...

http://service.futuremark.com/compare?3dm06=6110
(my compare... if u wanna check my cpumarks)

[]-[itman]

Seriously, I must be losing it tonight because I was looking at a dual core opteron system for some reason.

[]-[itman]

if it's an FX, it's a peice of crap... my 3500+ winnie scores just higher than it in cpumarks...

http://service.futuremark.com/compare?3dm06=6110
(my compare... if u wanna check my cpumarks)

I think you're looking at the P4 scores. The Athlon had a .04fps at a higher res. although I'm not sure if rasing the res effects the cpu tests.

[icedragn]

-[itman']I think you're looking at the P4 scores. The Athlon had a .04fps at a higher res. although I'm not sure if rasing the res effects the cpu tests.

lol ya i was lookin at the P4, also i think, no matter what res, the cpu tests use like 640x480.

[brickout]

Initial tests at pcperspective showed favoring to Intel chips. Since I can't even run mark06, and don't care about benchmarking much anymore because of it, I haven't tested it myself.

Your '03 score is fine, and your '05 score might be a little low, but again, not alarmingly. My heavily clocked GT barely broke 4k in '05, and about 9300 in '03.

I still think you're right on target. Realize that some of the GT's you're comparing to are volt-modded and/or extreme-cooled.

[liftedcj7on44s]

i scored only like 3100 in 06 on my heavily overclocked system

[]-[itman]

Initial tests at pcperspective showed favoring to Intel chips. Since I can't even run mark06, and don't care about benchmarking much anymore because of it, I haven't tested it myself.

Your '03 score is fine, and your '05 score might be a little low, but again, not alarmingly. My heavily clocked GT barely broke 4k in '05, and about 9300 in '03.

I still think you're right on target. Realize that some of the GT's you're comparing to are volt-modded and/or extreme-cooled.

I'm not talking about the heavy oc'd systems. I'm talking systems that are very near stock both cpu and gpu scoring %50 higher then me. Something's not right there. Best I can figure is the board, but my oc should make up for any little disadvantage my board has against practically stock systems.

[xTrEmEoVrClOcKr]

I get an average of like 11 fps w/ my 7800GTX w/ my 641 @ 4.75ghz ... I wouldn't beat myself up about it ;).

Also, have you tried reformated?

[DDR-PIII]

should be higher, see the rig in my sig, it scores 1585, and if i had a faster cpu itd be even higher.

[]-[itman]

Windows install is only a few months old, shouldn't need a reformat. I'll check drivers for board and make sure they're up to date and see if that helps at all.

[DDR-PIII]

should be 8.1.9.8's

[steveeb]

The best 05 scores I ever got were somewhere around 4100. I'll try the 06 today and let you know what I get on my 6600GT so you can compare.

[Kowalski3500]

Well, maybe you were looking at the results and failed to realize that the others could be going SLI... that would explain 50% better results. The reason the cpu test is at a low resolution is to move the bottleneck as much toward the CPU as possible, if you remove the Videocard from doing very much, then the CPU gets tested.

[]-[itman]

Well, maybe you were looking at the results and failed to realize that the others could be going SLI... that would explain 50% better results. The reason the cpu test is at a low resolution is to move the bottleneck as much toward the CPU as possible, if you remove the Videocard from doing very much, then the CPU gets tested.

No, SLI tests were getting upwards of 3000. Anandtech just did a test of 3dMark 06 and scored above 1700 with a stock 6600GT and a very small bump in processor(stock FX-55). Scoring %42 more with a stock video card is not any kind of error. There definitely seems to be a problem. Like I said, 3dMark 03 seems to fall right in line, 05 a little low, but 06 is just rock bottom. Oh well, I'll flash bios, update mb drivers and see what happens.

[dfonda]

Major suckage :cry:


http://www.ocforums.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=47852&stc=1
3dmark06score.jpg

[larva]

-[itman']... aperature size is 128mb.Try setting it to 256MB.