8052 on 3dmark2001!

[Ritteri&Bubbles]

Again no OCing at all, this score is from a clean install on Windows XP! Things are looking up, but the good thing is many of my games are now running longer than 10 minutes too!



GamersHQ » Products » ORB » 3DMark2001 Project Details


YOUR 3DMARK2001

RESULTS IN DETAIL




Project Name My Benchmark

Operating System Microsoft Windows XP
DirectX Version 8.00

Mobo Manufacturer ABIT
Mobo Model 761-686B(KG7)

CPU AMD Athlon(tm) XP/MP/4 1535 Mhz
FSB 133 MHz

3D Accelerator RADEON 8500/RADEON 8500LE
Graphics Chipset ATI Radeon 8500
Driver Version 6.13.10.3286
Video Memory 64 MB

Resolution 1024x768 32bit
Texture Format 16bit
FSAA Disabled
Z-Buffer Depth 16bit
Frame Buffer Double
Rendering Pipeline D3D Pure Hardware T&L





3DMark Result 8052 3D marks

Game 1 Car Chase - Low Detail 121.9 FPS
Game 1 Car Chase - High Detail 42.9 FPS
Game 2 Dragothic - Low Detail 139.1 FPS
Game 2 Dragothic - High Detail 81.3 FPS
Game 3 Lobby - Low Detail 116.1 FPS
Game 3 Lobby - High Detail 50.2 FPS
Game 4 Nature 39.0 FPS

Fill Rate (Single-Texturing) 876.3 MTexels/s
Fill Rate (Multi-Texturing) 1930.5 MTexels/s

High Polygon Count (1 light) 33.6 MTriangles/s
High Polygon Count (8 lights) 9.7 MTriangles/s

Environment Bump Mapping 117.0 FPS
DOT3 Bump Mapping 102.6 FPS

Vertex Shader Speed 95.2 FPS
Pixel Shader Speed 121.6 FPS
Point Sprite Speed 30.4 MSprites/s

Published No

[Maximus Nickus]

Wow, g3's have gone over 10'000.
Tell us when your system is something out of the ordinary.:burn:
Not bad for default though.

[Ritteri&Bubbles]

Show me a Geforce Ti500 that can score this at 100% stock speeds. Wont even come close. And as far as "ordinary" systems go, Ill put my rig up against anybodies on this BB for the most part.:p

[trey_w]

now all you need is to cool it better and overclock it, it looks like you have spent a lot of money

believe me i know, i have similar setup but im using intel P4 and Rambus(expensive)

[Ritteri&Bubbles]

Cooling isnt an issue with my system. Check out the stats. I have a system blower right underneath the card expelling all the hot air, aong with another 2 intake fans blowing fresh air on it.

[Maximus Nickus]

Similiar setup to mine with the blowers heh, anyway MOST g3 ti500's will get 8500 DEFAULT and 10'000 if overclocked well, why is your rig getting good marks? Its got loads of mem good board and cpu, i've got a choice of a ti200 or a 8500, your views? If i get one i'd like to see how our rigs fare! The ti200 is guarrented at 500mem!:burn:

[Maximus Nickus]

How stable is you rig though? I mean 8500's are unstable at the least!

[funnyperson1]

actually with the newer drivers most review sites said it was pretty stable, still not nvidia quality driveres, but it s gettting there,a dn also the people who have gotten 10K+ on Gf3 have rigs s nice as R&B and overclocked the snot outta them.....once R&B starts ocing ho could probly reach 11K easily....

[Ritteri&Bubbles]

Nick: first off, nobody has ever scored a 10k or even an 8k with 100% stock settings on a Ti500.About 7500 DEFAULT is what you can expect, and this is with a serious rig too. I scored around 7600 with my GeForce3 Ti500. ANd ill tell you, that took some tinkering in the BIOS screen and many driver swaps. I personally pride the fact that my rig is super stable, 100% rock solid, I try and make it run like an apple computer. Before i will even try to MILDLY overclock my rig, it must pass quite a few normal tests, and since this rig is only about 3 weeks old, Im still sorting out all the settings(about a books worth too)to optimize both hardware and software. THe new ATI drivers for XP(3286) are proving to me quite quickly to be the driver breakthrough ATI has needed, they are running pretty damn good so far, well see if it makes it through the first 48 hour burn-in benchmark with zdnet, in which it is currently running on right now.

[PJD]

hmmm, you got 8052 right? That's about 40 under my average. No OCing either. Actually, I tried OCing the video but results were bad, so I went back to defaults. I'll take 8090 scores over instability any day! Still, ATI sure is keeping nVidia honest.

[Maximus Nickus]

I'm getting a 8500.
YOU ARE WRONG!
Take 5 mins to look around and a LOT f ti500's get more than 8k wifout ocing, why can't you see two sides of an argument eh? AND YES 10K+ wif a ti500 HAS BEEN ACHIEVED SO HA HA HA!
See i'm sticking up for nvidia even though i'm getting a 8500, why because the 8500 is cheap and WILL eventually be the fastest card out.

[Ritteri&Bubbles]

Nick: really?? A Ti500 over 8k with No OCing?? Please show me the link.Make sure it points to proof where the card has no OCing.

And nick, BTW, what you do on your purchasing decision makes no real difference to me, my family owns a computer parts distribution center in NE, so my "opinion" comes from the fact that i can put into my computer whatever part I want, as money IS NO OBJECT when it comes to hardware. I too have a Ti500 in the drawer, as I find it has its own advantages, but I myself am starting to find the groove with the 8500, it may be the "sleeper" giant that is expected. ANd when set right, does some incredible things.:beer:

[Zuck Gou :)]

Originally posted by nick_cw
I'm getting a 8500.
YOU ARE WRONG!
Take 5 mins to look around and a LOT f ti500's get more than 8k wifout ocing, why can't you see two sides of an argument eh? AND YES 10K+ wif a ti500 HAS BEEN ACHIEVED SO HA HA HA!
See i'm sticking up for nvidia even though i'm getting a 8500, why because the 8500 is cheap and WILL eventually be the fastest card out.

Believe me he likes the Ti500 too :)

[funnyperson1]

Originally posted by nick_cw
I'm getting a 8500.
YOU ARE WRONG!
Take 5 mins to look around and a LOT f ti500's get more than 8k wifout ocing, why can't you see two sides of an argument eh? AND YES 10K+ wif a ti500 HAS BEEN ACHIEVED SO HA HA HA!
See i'm sticking up for nvidia even though i'm getting a 8500, why because the 8500 is cheap and WILL eventually be the fastest card out.

actually he said that 10K on a Ti500 hasnt been achieved at stock settings......without overclocking....

[Maximus Nickus]

http://gamershq.madonion.com/products/orb/?publish_compare.shtml?&project_type=6&dprid=1729167
NORMAL G3 not a Ti500 and 7719 Marks!
Anyways lets stop this argument, I'm getting a 8500 and after some serious research I think it is better than the Ti500, and for the cost of a Ti200. But why doesn't it come with Ramsinks?
What overclocking util can I use?

[Ritteri&Bubbles]

Again, you show me a link with an overclocked system(No AMD processor runs at 1750 currently), and this score is only 7700, I asked for a Geforce3 Ti500 that scores OVER 8K that is not overclocked in anyway shape or form. Better yet show me one that gets over 8k, is not overclocked in any way, AND runs Windows XP!

Here are my latest scores BTW, as usual NO OVERCLOCKING AT ALL. THis is an 8085, and remember I am using ECC REGISTERED RAM which actually decreases scoring.


GamersHQ » Products » ORB » 3DMark2001 Project Details


YOUR 3DMARK2001

RESULTS IN DETAIL




Project Name My Benchmark

Operating System Microsoft Windows XP
DirectX Version 8.00

Mobo Manufacturer ABIT
Mobo Model 761-686B(KG7)

CPU AMD Athlon(tm) XP/MP/4 1535 Mhz
FSB 133 MHz

3D Accelerator RADEON 8500/RADEON 8500LE
Graphics Chipset ATI Radeon 8500
Driver Version 6.13.10.3286
Video Memory 64 MB

Resolution 1024x768 32bit
Texture Format 16bit
FSAA Disabled
Z-Buffer Depth 16bit
Frame Buffer Double
Rendering Pipeline D3D Pure Hardware T&L





3DMark Result 8085 3D marks

Game 1 Car Chase - Low Detail 122.8 FPS
Game 1 Car Chase - High Detail 42.9 FPS
Game 2 Dragothic - Low Detail 138.6 FPS
Game 2 Dragothic - High Detail 82.2 FPS
Game 3 Lobby - Low Detail 116.6 FPS
Game 3 Lobby - High Detail 50.5 FPS
Game 4 Nature 39.0 FPS

Fill Rate (Single-Texturing) 874.6 MTexels/s
Fill Rate (Multi-Texturing) 1926.2 MTexels/s

High Polygon Count (1 light) 33.7 MTriangles/s
High Polygon Count (8 lights) 9.7 MTriangles/s

Environment Bump Mapping 117.3 FPS
DOT3 Bump Mapping 102.6 FPS

Vertex Shader Speed 95.5 FPS
Pixel Shader Speed 121.8 FPS
Point Sprite Speed 30.3 MSprites/s

Published No

[Maximus Nickus]

Get your 8500 to beat 7082 when your cpu's @ 1.3ghz and you have 256mb ram, then i'll shut up.:mad:

P.S. I edited this as I was mad when I said it! Don't worry mods it was only stars!

[Cisco Kid]

Originally posted by nick_cw
I'm getting a 8500.
YOU ARE WRONG!
Take 5 mins to look around and a LOT f ti500's get more than 8k wifout ocing, why can't you see two sides of an argument eh? AND YES 10K+ wif a ti500 HAS BEEN ACHIEVED SO HA HA HA!
See i'm sticking up for nvidia even though i'm getting a 8500, why because the 8500 is cheap and WILL eventually be the fastest card out.

Nick,

If you had been part of this forum a while ago you would have seen that Ritteri&Bubbles had a Ti500 video card in his machine. He was totally pro but he has been giving the 8500 a test to see if it gets his vote.

The guy knows what he is talking about, and what he says is pretty much dead on.

Ti500 are scoring on average in the low 8000 range , he is right there , very few if any have done 10K without being overclocked and on an overclocked machine. Things must be done at default to see the real picture.

Cisco Kid
:rolleyes:

[Maximus Nickus]

Sorry I got a bit carried away there and no offense was intended.
I was just stating that I have seen many ti500's not oc'ed hit 8K.
Just to show you I am sane I have just ordered a 8500. :D

Can you oc your 8500 to 300/600 then tell me what score you get without the cpu oc'ed?

[Maximus Nickus]

Is FSAA enabled on default? On a 8500? Cause his is off....

[Ritteri&Bubbles]

My score is on default setting:

Nick: I am a person who when talks "trash" or whatever you want to call it, will back it up immediatly with physical proof. I may not be the most liked person here in video land, but I dont speak out of my ass either.


Nick, you made a comment about seeing "stock" systems easily hit over 8k and 10k with GeForce3 Ti 500's. Well I am calling you on it. You have yet to show one single bit of proof to me. So let me clarify to you what I want to see:

1. A stock Geforce3 Ti500, all stcok settings
2. A stock computer, with no overclocking at all,doesnt matter if its an old AMD K6-2 or a Pentium 7 at a gazillion gigahertz as long as its at stock settings
3. Windows XP operating system, as Windows 98 using FAT32 gets higher scores. XP on NTFS scores much lower as is known, and getting 8k with a Ti500 I think may be next to impossible with current hardware configs.
4. A valid link proving the above.

When you show me the above, I will gladly concede to your own remarks, but if you cant provide the above, then IMHO you're talking out of your ASS and its nobodies fault but your own. You put yourself in this situation not me. When I make a "brash" statement, I at least make sure i can back myself up, because other fine folks on this BB will call me on it otherwise, just like I have done with you!:eek:

[Ritteri&Bubbles]

Update: I just hit an 8097, this time with correct&scrub turned off on the RAM.



YOUR 3DMARK2001

RESULTS IN DETAIL




Project Name My Benchmark

Operating System Microsoft Windows XP
DirectX Version 8.00

Mobo Manufacturer ABIT
Mobo Model 761-686B(KG7)

CPU AMD Athlon(tm) XP/MP/4 1520 Mhz
FSB 133 MHz

3D Accelerator RADEON 8500/RADEON 8500LE
Graphics Chipset ATI Radeon 8500
Driver Version 6.13.10.3286
Video Memory 64 MB

Resolution 1024x768 32bit
Texture Format 16bit
FSAA Disabled
Z-Buffer Depth 16bit
Frame Buffer Double
Rendering Pipeline D3D Pure Hardware T&L





3DMark Result 8097 3D marks

Game 1 Car Chase - Low Detail 123.0 FPS
Game 1 Car Chase - High Detail 43.0 FPS
Game 2 Dragothic - Low Detail 139.2 FPS
Game 2 Dragothic - High Detail 82.4 FPS
Game 3 Lobby - Low Detail 116.5 FPS
Game 3 Lobby - High Detail 50.4 FPS
Game 4 Nature 39.0 FPS

Fill Rate (Single-Texturing) 874.6 MTexels/s
Fill Rate (Multi-Texturing) 1925.8 MTexels/s

High Polygon Count (1 light) 33.7 MTriangles/s
High Polygon Count (8 lights) 9.7 MTriangles/s

Environment Bump Mapping 117.3 FPS
DOT3 Bump Mapping 105.3 FPS

Vertex Shader Speed 95.4 FPS
Pixel Shader Speed 121.7 FPS
Point Sprite Speed 30.3 MSprites/s

Published No



My goal is to get to 8250 with stock settings, but i dunno if this is possible with the current drivers available. Anybody with suggestions?? Also wtf cant i run compressed textures?? This is ****ing me off!:mad:

[Maximus Nickus]

1. I didn't think you said on XP.
2. No I don;t have any proof
3. I have seen 8k on ti500 systems
4. 10K once with a heavily oc'ed system.
I admitted i was talking out of my ass a bit as I have no proof but I am not lying, I mearly wanted to point out that you have an impressive rig and thats why you got such a high score, yes its down to the card as well but the cards are bottlenecked and will be by the cpu untill 2.5ghz = systems are out.
I would like to (civilised manner!!!) compare our systems when mine gets going, im getting a 8500 Win XP professional 768mb Crucial DDR (3 sticks) epox 8kha+ and im waiting for a 2200+ to come out, until then i have a 1ghz tbird.
:burn:

[Ritteri&Bubbles]

My system "as impressive as it may be" is actually slowed down a st!tload by these factors:

1. All IDE ports in use(both master and slave)
2. All PCI slots are in use(cept 1)with, USB,NIC,Sound,SCSI
3. ECC REGISTERED RAM is used
4. Tons of USB peripherals hooked up(scanner,printer,2 game controllers,mouse,keyboard,flashcard input,digital camera)

With all of the above hooked up, I am actually killing my score somewhat. If I wanted the highest score possible, I would dump all the USB ports, use PS2 mouse/keyboard,get rid of the DVD,CDRW,Superdisk, anmd run just a CDROM. As all items are taxing the system and take up resources, the more peripherals your computer has, the slower it becomes. People who want pure gaming performance and benchmark scores wouldnt have any of this extra stuff on their gaming rig, just a cpu,mb,video card, sound card,cdrom,keyboard,mouse,modem/nic,and game controller, thats it. Think of your computer like a tow truck, the more **** it drags with it, the slower it goes.

And BTW if you look closer at my above comments you will see how i mentioned XP as the default op system. People should only be using this or 2k now anyway as microsoft is finally phasing out 95/98.

[PJD]

I made the mistake of flashing the latest MSI BIOS and now my scores are 7980:-( Oh well, maybe once they figure out the stability issues, they'll put out a few performance updates. So currently, non-OCed I'm getting 7980 instead of the 8090 I was getting. I've done ATI before and Matrox and it will take a few more years before I buy another of them. Been reamed too many times before. nVidia has been great since the TNT cards, so I'll stick with them.

[Kingslayer]

Originally posted by nick_cw
I'm getting a 8500.
YOU ARE WRONG!
Take 5 mins to look around and a LOT f ti500's get more than 8k wifout ocing, why can't you see two sides of an argument eh? AND YES 10K+ wif a ti500 HAS BEEN ACHIEVED SO HA HA HA!
See i'm sticking up for nvidia even though i'm getting a 8500, why because the 8500 is cheap and WILL eventually be the fastest card out.

Let me stand up here and vouche for R&B. I have been in more than one ATI vs. GFarce arguement with him, me being on the ATI side....

But it kinda sounds like this ATI is starting to grow on you R&B....

[Yodums]

Originally posted by Kingslayer


Let me stand up here and vouche for R&B. I have been in more than one ATI vs. GFarce arguement with him, me being on the ATI side....

But it kinda sounds like this ATI is starting to grow on you R&B....

Yup I agree that ATI is starting to grow on him heheh

[image]

As soon as I get my new computer il do a benchmark with the asus v8200 im getting and we can compare (the new comp specs are on my sig) and we will see how the radeon does...

[Maximus Nickus]

Originally posted by Ritteri&Bubbles
My system "as impressive as it may be" is actually slowed down a st!tload by these factors:

1. All IDE ports in use(both master and slave)
2. All PCI slots are in use(cept 1)with, USB,NIC,Sound,SCSI
3. ECC REGISTERED RAM is used
4. Tons of USB peripherals hooked up(scanner,printer,2 game controllers,mouse,keyboard,flashcard input,digital camera)

With all of the above hooked up, I am actually killing my score somewhat. If I wanted the highest score possible, I would dump all the USB ports, use PS2 mouse/keyboard,get rid of the DVD,CDRW,Superdisk, anmd run just a CDROM. As all items are taxing the system and take up resources, the more peripherals your computer has, the slower it becomes. People who want pure gaming performance and benchmark scores wouldnt have any of this extra stuff on their gaming rig, just a cpu,mb,video card, sound card,cdrom,keyboard,mouse,modem/nic,and game controller, thats it. Think of your computer like a tow truck, the more **** it drags with it, the slower it goes.

And BTW if you look closer at my above comments you will see how i mentioned XP as the default op system. People should only be using this or 2k now anyway as microsoft is finally phasing out 95/98.

Sounds like one impressive rig!!! (Does 3 ram stick slow things down? 3x256.. I have got XP pro though) Anyways sorry by regaining my ability to think (i lost it back there!) I can clearly see that i was wrong and you seem to have a vast knowledge of the ATi/Nvidia debate! I'm sorry for acting a jerk and hopefully we can get along in a civilised mannor!!!
Why don't u try unplugging some of your pheriphals and see if you could hit 9K without an oc! That would be awesome....

[Ritteri&Bubbles]

Nick: I actually dont consider anyone to be a jerk here in this BB. I just get a kick out of it when somebody sometimes "inserts a foot" in the ol mouth. Im sure we have all done it, even me!:eek: I just love ragging on people when I know the "exxagerations" start to pour! Dont take it personally! Just ask FUNNYPERSON,ANGRY and a few others about me. Im sure they will tell you how much of a wiseass I am.:D

BTW 3 sticks of RAM wont hurt on XP at all. I got 4x256 myself. no probs.

[forceman]

Well, I don't have proof handy (I'm at work) but my non-OC's XP 1800 with non-OC'd GF3 Ti500 clocked in at something around 8K. I'll check it out tonight and see. I had the GF3 overclocked but I had to drop it back down because I was getting some of those NV4_DISP errors. If I run my 1800 at 1900 (12.0 x 133) is that stock enough since the XP 1900 is at 12x133? Also, I noticed your stats were showing 16 bit texture depth and 16 bit Z buffer, but when I run the default on the GF3 it uses (I think) 32 bit textures and (I know) 24 bit Z-buffer. Wouldn't that contribute to the higher speeds also?

[Ritteri&Bubbles]

16 bit textures actually decrease score from compressed textures, and i have to run it this way because the Radeon doesnt seem to like compressed textures on my rig. Running 16 bit z over 24 bit z on reduces scores by a margin at best, but in no way makes up for running 16 bit textures over compressed. Stock btw means all componenets run at stck speeds, no overclocking at all on both the card,cpu,mb,ram etc.

[Zuck Gou :)]

You gonna see what you can get after overclocking?

[Kingslayer]

I honestly am scared to see what this card can do overclocked, and I think so is nVidia...

Rivastation put up a decent review. It had some pretty good screenshots to show the different levels of the Radeons Smoothvision compared to the Ti500's Quincux. The Radeons lowest level looked better than the Ti's highest.

The only downfall that I can see to this card is the lack of DX7 support. This card gets whooped by the GF3 when it comes to games like Giants. But then again, its old games on new technology. The scores that they showed on 3DMark2001 where right on line with what R&B has been showing us. And the were ahead of the Ti500. The 8500 was also keeping up with Ti500 in QuakeIII also with the new drivers, and passing it in the higher resolutions. And it did this while looking better which is impressive.

All this and $100 cheaper. Can't beat that with a stick.

[Maximus Nickus]

Its ones awesome card! With the best drivers you could just imagine the speeds thsi could kick out... a geforce 4 contendor? When it comes out?????

[Kingslayer]

I wouldnt go that far....

[Maximus Nickus]

You're probably right but i think the g3 does 8gb/s and the 8500 does 12gb/s!!!!!! WOW!

[forceman]

I went home and tested it - and at stock speeds on all componets I got 7828. When I switched it to 16 bit textures and 16 bit Z-buffer it was a wash - score of 7825 or some such - pretty much what you expected. At 12x133 (1900+) it was 7950 or so. Have the newest Radeon drivers cleared up the problems folks were having with the card not running some games and stuff? I don't remember any specific examples but I know there were some complaints. I definately like the AA better on the Radeon, much better texture quality.

[PJD]

I still won't buy an ATI. It's a great price for a card with the abilities it has, but I used to be in both the ATI and Matrox corners and look what they've done before. The bonus with nVidia is options. They make the chip and it's up to the individual card makers to compete. LeadTek and VisionTek seem similar, but LeadTek makes better software. With ATI, what happens if you don't like their software. OCZ also makes a Ti500 that is above spec. Many possibilities is what I like. ATI reminds me of Intel in that you like some of what they do, but you're stuck with the rest of it. If anything, nVidia reminds me of AMD; they both make the chips and leave it up to the other guys to make the boards.

I believe like most do that the reason you guys want ATI so much is the way nVidia handled 3DFX. Deal with it!

[Rad]

Followed the interesting debate here guys:) and wanted an opinion on something *less* than cutting edge. It seems to me that ATI have finally started to get it together with the 8500, but am looking for something closer to one step down (Geforce 2/7500) - I don't want to pay the latest technology premium.

I'm running a tbird 1.2@1.33 and geforce 256 DDR asus v6800 @ 130/330. Get about 2800 on 3DMark2001. I gather that the 7500 is not worth it and I should go for the Geforce2 in the (generation-1) stakes.

Any suggestions?

[funnyperson1]

unless your going for a Geforce2 Ultra, the 7500 will beat almost every other Geforce2 in fps and its visual quality+dvd is unsurpassed, my adivce-look for a cheap ultra and if you dont find it, ordere a 7500

......about Nvidia vs. ATI, i like ATI's compromise between 2D and 3D, they realize htat some people do more than play games, but as companies i like both ATI and Nbvidia and i like the 8500 because we need both companies pumping out comepeting cards, noone should have topay 500$ (cough, cough Geforce2 Ultra, cogh cough Geforce3) for a video card, i can make a whole computer for that much money....

[Kingslayer]

Originally posted by PJD
I still won't buy an ATI. It's a great price for a card with the abilities it has, but I used to be in both the ATI and Matrox corners and look what they've done before. The bonus with nVidia is options. They make the chip and it's up to the individual card makers to compete. LeadTek and VisionTek seem similar, but LeadTek makes better software. With ATI, what happens if you don't like their software. OCZ also makes a Ti500 that is above spec. Many possibilities is what I like. ATI reminds me of Intel in that you like some of what they do, but you're stuck with the rest of it. If anything, nVidia reminds me of AMD; they both make the chips and leave it up to the other guys to make the boards.

I believe like most do that the reason you guys want ATI so much is the way nVidia handled 3DFX. Deal with it!

What ATI has done before is obviously different from what they are doing today. ATI is also allowing their chips to be used on 3rd party cards....just like nVidia.

And no the reason I want ATI is because it has always been better in other places like DVD and 2D. They are now making a great 3D card, one of the fastest ever seen. And by golly look at that, not only does it still have that 2D and DVD support, its $100 cheaper. Yes what they did to 3DFX was cowardly and they did it out of fear. Let's see how they try and kill off ATI now.

[Maximus Nickus]

What did they do to 3DFX?

[funnyperson1]

they couldnt compete with 3dfxes superior products so they bought em out....

[FrozenInHI]

no way will the ti500 score anywhere close to 8500 stock speeds, but in turn, the radeon will score 8k at stock speeds, but will be limited in it's top end score, due to poor overclocking results obtained by the radeon, i've seen it in my own rig. my score below is at a modest overclock on the board/cpu, and a pretty decent overclock on the gfx card, and i'm close to 9k on a full bench. i've hit well over 9k but the benchmark is not complete, i cannot get it to run the poly tests at extraordinary fsb speeds, but the funny thing is the system will sit stable at those fsb speeds and play any game i want, it's just 3dmark it doesn't like, workin on that though. anyhow, the radeon does score higher default speeds, but is definitely capped in the overhead. As far as ATI vs Nvidia, i wont' enter that argument on one side or the other, either card will give you more performance than you need rightnow and for a good while. the price on the radeon is right, but it does have some game compatibility issues still, hopefully the driver support will continue and improve, as yet i've seen not much gained in the new drivers, aside from a few features that aren't really handy just yet. i've got both cards, i run the ti500 all the time now for gaming, but i'll use the radeon in another system i build coming soon to play with and use as a server system, but i'll not bash the 8500 simply because it's new and needs help from it's manuf to get it to top performance, and until it's shown that it won't get it, i'll call it a better buy for the money. but once ATI shows it's driver support isn't adequate, i'll ditch any recommendation for it i've ever given, one too many burns from ATI at that point. and to all you image quality folks out there, i've not seen one decent difference in the two, in any game for that matter. the hardware is simply eons beyond the software since you can max out all settings in any game out there and still run smooth, looks great, and no problems at all. until the software gurus come out with games specifically designed for a piece of hardware you won't see any of those differences in my opinion.

[Ritteri&Bubbles]

Update: God damn the DVD player sucks bad, I get more BSOD's and freezes using the ati player. Also am getting a ton of artifacts on NHL 2002 and a few other games,stability still sucks with these drivers in many games i am finding.:confused:

[Rad]

Thanks for the comments guys.

One other thing you might be able to help with. I've oc'd my system (not the geforce card) and get two problems:

1. Locks up 3dmark2001 on the dragolithic high detail
2. Get weird flickers on my graphics card (very occasionally) in windows and alot on the front screens of Dungeon Keeper 2 - the gamplay is fine, just the intro screens.

I had FSB @ 140 x10 mult and backed it down to 133 and the flickering seemed to go (I suspect it doesn't like the oc AGP). This left me with a 1.2 @ 1276 (9.5x133). 3dmark now runs fine and flickering was gone. Cranked up to 10.5x133 (which is where I was at with 10x140 and 3dmark runs no worries but the flickering returned to DK2.

Any ideas.

[FrozenInHI]

artifacting and flickering, as well as 3dmark locks, are usually linked to one of 3 things:

1-fsb is too high for a pci card you have, or hdd.

2-heat generated by the gfx or cpu that is in excess of hardware tolerances for stable performance, commonly the gfx card, since cpu heat is usually monitored and it is quickly identified.

3-the fsb and the gpu overclock speeds aren't jiving well, you have to play around with gpu settings to get it to run smoothly sometimes. the troubleshooting method i use here is to overclock the fsb to the level i'd like to have it, then run 3dmark with no overclock on the gfx card, if it runs fine, (you only need run the game tests, just to determine stable operation for the bench) then you are all set on fsb speed working fine, then reboot and overclock the gfx card and run the bench, if it locks, you have gfx issues, be them driver related or gpu speed or memory(not likely) speed. when the memory is too high, you will see the artifacts, and some flickering, but the memory speed usually doesn't lock the bench up, just causes visual anomalies and are easily recognizable.

I'd try the above, and see how well you do then. also, to get those cards up there, you really need cooling on the memory and the gpu, stock cooling is generally unacceptable for higher overclocks on the gfx cards.

[Maximus Nickus]

Originally posted by Ritteri&Bubbles
Update: God damn the DVD player sucks bad, I get more BSOD's and freezes using the ati player. Also am getting a ton of artifacts on NHL 2002 and a few other games,stability still sucks with these drivers in many games i am finding.:confused:

Hold on i'm probably wrong but are you talking about the new drivers that are faster and enable smoothvision?
Cause I want to get an 8500 (same price as ti200 over here) but i still wanna play games like max payne/deus ex/gp3/g4/quake so do u know if i'll have problems with these?
Thank!!!!!!!!:D