• Welcome to Overclockers Forums! Join us to reply in threads, receive reduced ads, and to customize your site experience!

9800p -> x800xtpe = no performance gain???

Overclockers is supported by our readers. When you click a link to make a purchase, we may earn a commission. Learn More.

axhed

Member
Joined
Feb 7, 2003
Location
cleveland
aw man... i knew it would be severely limited by my 2.5GHz barton but this is just not right. tonight i installed sp2, removed cat 5.4, turned off pc, installed x800xtpe, installed cat 5.6 and voila!

3dmark01 went from 18500 on the 9800p to 20250 with the x800xtpe....
ut2k4 onslaught frames were equal or DECREASED.

something is wrong....
 
Well first off, dont use 3Dmark01 to do Video Card benchies, cause 01 is mainly a system bencher, Try using 3DMark03 or preferibly 3DMark05, because they focus more on the video card.
 
hmmmm........ well i rebooted and cloned another monitor to do a side-by-side LCD vs CRT comparison, but anyway...

my 3dmark03 went from 5861 to 6024. whoops... i mean 9800pro '03 was 5861 and x800xtpe '05 is 6024. 9800pro scored 2800 in '05... now i feel better... gonna run ut2k4 again and see what's up with that.

i am having some weird desktop issues at the moment.... at the end of the 05 test the result window popped up, but it was 15-20 secs before any text showed up... maybe to build suspense?
 
wtf is ati's cli.exe? there's three of them running at the moment...

task manager's showing 342MB of ram in use, but a quick run down the task list shows the total should only be about 160MB...
 
then you have an task thats running invisable it could be a viruse spam trojan horse so on try an viruse scan spam scan and every other scan you can think of that way you can count any of those probs out
 
Yeah I get the exact same thing w/ showing the score in 05, and also the same thing w/ CLI (whatever the hell CLI is, but its for the ATi drivers I know)

Anyway, What I'd suggest you do is once the Omega Drivers based on the Catalyst 5.6's come out, download those but make sure you clean out the ATi Cats first using a program like Driver Cleaner (i think can be found on the Omega Drivers site).

BUt the reason I'm suggesting using the Omegas is because I myself find my desktop screens and boot up screens and just normal 2D programs running much smoother w/ the Omegas (the 5.4 based Omegas beat my 5.6 Catalysts score in '05 by a tiny tiny bit, but the Omegas run much smoother in 2d and 3d), plus their highly tweaked so they should improve your 05 score even a bit more. I also hear using Omegas over Cats allow slightly more OCing in some cases.

And do u notice that weird black screen flashy thingy after booting into WIndows? THat will go away if you use the Omegas, i've switched between the Omegas and Cat's several times and the Omegas dont do that, I dunno i just find it easier to look at once i boot up lol.
 
jcw122 said:
And do u notice that weird black screen flashy thingy after booting into WIndows?

helz yes! every time it happens i think "oh my god it's dead!"

more benchies, ut2k4 is still running slower, but, as far as doom3 is concerned, i was absolutely engrossed with the game at medium quality, 800 res fullscreen on a 1280 native lcd. it's unbelievable but i really couldn't notice the resolution difference, although 1024 was unplayable. long story short: (these are all ctrl-alt-`, timedemo demo1)

medium quality, 800x600, no AA
9800pro = 54.1 fps
x800xtpe = 56.9 fps

medium quality, 1280x1024, AAx2
9800pro = 27.1 fps
x800xtpe = 55.2 fps

high quality, 1280x1024, AAx4
9800pro = 18.7fps
x800xtpe = 43.8fps

for playablity, here we go:
9800pro: med qual, 800 res, no AA = 54.1 fps
x800xtpe: hi qual, 1280 res, AAx2 = 55.2 fps

note: 9800pro overclocked to 386/370; x800xtpe stock...
 
axhed said:
helz yes! every time it happens i think "oh my god it's dead!"

more benchies, ut2k4 is still running slower, but, as far as doom3 is concerned, i was absolutely engrossed with the game at medium quality, 800 res fullscreen on a 1280 native lcd. it's unbelievable but i really couldn't notice the resolution difference, although 1024 was unplayable. long story short: (these are all ctrl-alt-`, timedemo demo1)

medium quality, 800x600, no AA
9800pro = 54.1 fps
x800xtpe = 56.9 fps

medium quality, 1280x1024, AAx2
9800pro = 27.1 fps
x800xtpe = 55.2 fps

high quality, 1280x1024, AAx4
9800pro = 18.7fps
x800xtpe = 43.8fps

for playablity, here we go:
9800pro: med qual, 800 res, no AA = 54.1 fps
x800xtpe: hi qual, 1280 res, AAx2 = 55.2 fps

note: 9800pro overclocked to 386/370; x800xtpe stock...

yo, im in sorta the same situation as u. i upgraded from a 9800 AIW to an X800XT AIW and i notice no performance gain in game at all.

CS:source
9800 AIW : 40-70 fps
X800XT AIW: 50-70 Fps sometimes dropping in the low 20-30's with ppl onscreen.

this is at 1024x768 Resolution at high details with 4x AA and 8x AF

but the thing is im not cpu limited as you are. before i had a P4 3.2GHz 800 FSB then i changed to an A64 3400+ and still no noticeable gain.

It's sad how ATi claims my card was designed for Counter Strike Source yet my buddies with same CPU and nvidia 6800GT gets a constant 100+ fps at same setting and resolution as me :/
 
halflife2 timedemo: res 1280, max detail, 6xAA 16xAF

9800pro: 52fps
x800xtpe: 114fps

chingy: crank up the resolution and filters a notch.
 
axhed said:
halflife2 timedemo: res 1280, max detail, 6xAA 16xAF

9800pro: 52fps
x800xtpe: 114fps

chingy: crank up the resolution and filters a notch.


actually, it works decently at 1280x1024 6x AA 16x AF, ur using the HL2 stress test? but i like to play my games in window mode and window mode :/ damnit its aggrovating me, makes me want to get an Nvidia card for my next card. at 1280x1024 my fps is very ranged it goes from 30-110. which is not playable at all because of the wide jumps!
 
Last edited:
A1Killer said:
then you have an task thats running invisable it could be a viruse spam trojan horse so on try an viruse scan spam scan and every other scan you can think of that way you can count any of those probs out

The CLI.exe is the Catalyst Control Center. Normal (although it's rubbish IMO).

axhed your 3d mark scores are way off, even with that CPU (I run one myself). Make sure you don't have vsync on for starters (vsync with triple-buffering is great for IQ, but not for benching). Also I personally wouldn't bother with the Omegas, they're just standard ATi drivers with some tweaks, nothing you can't do yourself.
 
Actually, CLI stands for Command Line Interface (???), I remember it trying to access the internet and ZA alerted me.
 
jcw122 said:
Actually, CLI stands for Command Line Interface (???), I remember it trying to access the internet and ZA alerted me.

I am perfectly aware what CLI normally stands for. In this instance, if axhead has installed the CCC version of the display drivers, it's the Control Center process that shows as CLI.exe (up to 3 instances of).
 
The reason that UT's FPS didn't change is that the program has a FPS cap that limits your FPS to 80 or so. I've seen guys with 6800U's in SLI and A64's at 2.8 gigs that still get 80 FPS in UT2k4....... the only difference is that he was able to run 1600x1200 16xAF 8x AA and still run 80 FPS.
 
mtb856 said:
The reason that UT's FPS didn't change is that the program has a FPS cap that limits your FPS to 80 or so. I've seen guys with 6800U's in SLI and A64's at 2.8 gigs that still get 80 FPS in UT2k4....... the only difference is that he was able to run 1600x1200 16xAF 8x AA and still run 80 FPS.

Isn't UT quite CPU bound as well, that wouldn't help matters.
 
i dunno bout the 80fps cap, i benched some dm maps maxxing out at 225fps on my 9800p. i rolled back to the 5.4's to get rid of all the cli.exe nonsense.
i went back and forth between 6xaa 16xaf and none, and there was a huge difference in IQ while losing only .5 fps average.
i'm a little disappointed that the min fps on both the 9800p and x800xtpe are in the low teens and even single digits in the ons maps. that might only be right in the beginning, when everything is spawning... seems to smooth out once in the game, though.
 
i've since rolled back to the cats 5.4, and disconnected an old 40x burner (ata66) that was on the same cable as my hard drive.... also running the x800xtpe at 621/601 here's where i'm at:
3dmark01 = 22062
3dmark03 = 12978
3dmark05 = 6582
 
i think there is a fps cap on ut04, there is a command to raise it i believe, the minimum fps is probably dictated by the cpu, i saw a nice gain in performance when i upgraded from my barton to this winchestor when i was running a 6800GT
 
This is not out of character with UT2004, where a single 6800gt outperforms 2 7800GTX's in SLI. I believe this game relies VERY heavily on your cpu. Everything else should see a huge improvment though.
 
Back