- Joined
- Jun 23, 2005
- Location
- Green Bay, WI
from what i can tell a 8 pipe 128meg 9800pro can do as good as this 16 pipe 256meg x800xl i havent really noticed a difference yet im going to try it on 3dmark 05 here pretty soon though
-
Welcome to Overclockers Forums! Join us to reply in threads, receive reduced ads, and to customize your site experience!
just got my x800xl...and im not to impressed
- Thread starter JasonM
- Start date
- Joined
- Nov 13, 2001
- Location
- Moderating
Try a favorite game & use FRAPS.
or run AquaMark
or run AquaMark
OP
- Joined
- Jun 23, 2005
- Location
- Green Bay, WI
- Thread Starter
- #3
hmmm well i just got dont running 3d mark 05 and with a 9800 pro oc'ed to about 405 i think it was i got a 2900 or so now running a x800xl not oc'ed at 400 i get 3643 so its a little better but not much
oh and i did try running a bunch of different game included doom 3 ROE, far cry, bf2, and half life 2 and i really only noticed a frame rate jump in doom 3 ROE so honestly im not very impressed with this $280 purchase..
oh and i did try running a bunch of different game included doom 3 ROE, far cry, bf2, and half life 2 and i really only noticed a frame rate jump in doom 3 ROE so honestly im not very impressed with this $280 purchase..
- Joined
- Jun 28, 2004
- Location
- redding, California
What is the rest of your system?
- Joined
- Dec 3, 2004
- Location
- Northern Ohio
A very useful tool.
http://www.fraps.com/
Anyways, back to the subject.
While not top of the line, the jump between those two cards is a pretty big one. I ask two questions. 1. What is the rest of your system like, and 2. What resolutions and detail levels are you running your games in?
I'd either wager you're either being bottlenecked somewhere else in the system, and as we all know, a chain is only as stong as it's weakest link. That, or you're running 1024x768 or lower which really guts the newer cards performance difference. These new cards were made to shine doing higher resolutions with more AA/AF/eye candy enabled with less of a performance hit then using an older card. If you look at a lot of published benchamrks, you'll see most older generation video cards can keep up quite well with the newest cards. Right up to the point when you start hitting 1280x1024 and enabling visual effects like anti-aliasing and anisopteric filtering. While older cards will take a straight nose dive at this point in performance, the newer cards make a much stronger showing.
Or you don't have a driver installed right, or something ;p
http://www.fraps.com/
Anyways, back to the subject.
While not top of the line, the jump between those two cards is a pretty big one. I ask two questions. 1. What is the rest of your system like, and 2. What resolutions and detail levels are you running your games in?
I'd either wager you're either being bottlenecked somewhere else in the system, and as we all know, a chain is only as stong as it's weakest link. That, or you're running 1024x768 or lower which really guts the newer cards performance difference. These new cards were made to shine doing higher resolutions with more AA/AF/eye candy enabled with less of a performance hit then using an older card. If you look at a lot of published benchamrks, you'll see most older generation video cards can keep up quite well with the newest cards. Right up to the point when you start hitting 1280x1024 and enabling visual effects like anti-aliasing and anisopteric filtering. While older cards will take a straight nose dive at this point in performance, the newer cards make a much stronger showing.
Or you don't have a driver installed right, or something ;p
Last edited:
- Joined
- Oct 18, 2004
- Location
- Seattle, WA
Seriously dude, Google is there for a reason.zer0nix said:i've been out of the scene a while... what's 'fraps?'
Jason have you tried doing a clean driver install, including the use of Driver Cleaner?
Also, your CPU could be holding you back, whatever it is.
- Joined
- Jun 27, 2004
You should break 5k. I think something maybe bottlenecking your card. Slow CPU? Help us all, and put your full system specs in your sig! Please and thank you!
OP
- Joined
- Jun 23, 2005
- Location
- Green Bay, WI
- Thread Starter
- #11
ACK im being bombarded! hehe
ok rest of the system
ncch-dl mobo
2.4gig xeon (thats right one)
1 gig pc3200 ram
x800xl
i was using a version of omega drivers so i decided to install the newest catalyst 5.7 i think. once i really though about it i realzed that once i get my new xeons all good to go im sure the performance will jump. i havent tried 3d mark since i put the new drivers in, i suppose i should try that.
ok rest of the system
ncch-dl mobo
2.4gig xeon (thats right one)
1 gig pc3200 ram
x800xl
i was using a version of omega drivers so i decided to install the newest catalyst 5.7 i think. once i really though about it i realzed that once i get my new xeons all good to go im sure the performance will jump. i havent tried 3d mark since i put the new drivers in, i suppose i should try that.
OP
- Joined
- Jun 23, 2005
- Location
- Green Bay, WI
- Thread Starter
- #12
ok just got done with another round of 3d mark and this time i made it up to 4124
im sure with two xeons and another gig of ram (when i get the chance) this should get better.
im sure with two xeons and another gig of ram (when i get the chance) this should get better.
OP
- Joined
- Jun 23, 2005
- Location
- Green Bay, WI
- Thread Starter
- #13
oh...hehe...did i mention this was an agp card..whoops
- Joined
- Jul 26, 2004
- Location
- Somewhere in Washington State
agp really shouldn't matter on the scores that much if any its usally the cpu ram hdd or mobo that will cause bad scores but you never know maybe some one can tell us if im wrong or not lol
- Joined
- Oct 18, 2004
- Location
- Seattle, WA
Yup I'de say that 2.4GHz Xeon is the problem.
OP
- Joined
- Jun 23, 2005
- Location
- Green Bay, WI
- Thread Starter
- #16
ok played some games with the new drivers and doom 3 worked great even on 1280x1024 with AA 4x sadly i can only play BF2 on medium with no AA in multiplayer. now i just need to run far cry and see how that holds up.
- Joined
- Oct 14, 2001
Your scores are still pretty low ....
My rig is far from new (2 1/2 yrs old) and at stock my first run on 05' was 4908 ; slightly OC'd my XL made it too 5300 . Granted mu cpu overclock does help , along with the RAID0 , but I still think you should be in the 4500-4800 range minimum . You should also be able to play BF2 with all or most settings on high .
My rig is far from new (2 1/2 yrs old) and at stock my first run on 05' was 4908 ; slightly OC'd my XL made it too 5300 . Granted mu cpu overclock does help , along with the RAID0 , but I still think you should be in the 4500-4800 range minimum . You should also be able to play BF2 with all or most settings on high .
well one question is do you want to just use the card for games or do you want to become a professional benchmarker? If it's the latter then head to link at the bottom of my page and you'll get all kinds of tips on how to get the most out of the card. My first suggestion would be to move the sliders for your drivers over to the performance side and see what that does. You should be able to get over 5000 points in 3DMark05 with no problem.
If it's the latter then head to link at the bottom of my page and you'll get all kinds of tips on how to get the most out of the card. My first suggestion would be to move the sliders for your drivers over to the performance side and see what that does. You should be able to get over 5000 points in 3DMark05 with no problem.
OP
- Joined
- Jun 23, 2005
- Location
- Green Bay, WI
- Thread Starter
- #19
hmm this is strange indeed, well i will be getting dual newer xeons that i will overclock so im sure that will increase performance a little but i can imagine it brining it up to 5000 in 3dmark 05
err...and as far as joining this co mark thing....i dont really care THAT much i just want my card to perform the way it should
err...and as far as joining this co mark thing....i dont really care THAT much i just want my card to perform the way it should
