3dmark 01se score

[AkuraII]

is a benchmark score of 7631 good on a 1800+ (200x10)? Dont know much about score results.

 

[jonspd]

Yea but 3dmark2001 is mainly for video card scoring not system. You should try pcmark2002 and sandra they are really good proggy's for testing you overclocked system not just vcard.

P.S. what vcard do you have?

 

[AkuraII]

i only got a 9000pro 128mb its runs solid! i like it

 

[Pikachu_Mommy]

jonspd, the 3dmark2001 is the one that does test out the performance out of your system, both video card and the system. the 3dmark 2003 is the one that is mainly measured in video card's performance.

Akurall, 7600 score range is not bad for a 9000pro with that setup..

 

[AkuraII]

thanks a lot. Quick question when i play counters-strike i get lag spikes often can it be the onboard abit lan? or what? Can i test my overall bandwith and if it spikes or not?

 

[jonspd]

Well if you choose to base a benchmark built for video card scoring on your whole system then thats your own doing I dont. As for 3dmark2001 I use it but IMHO sandra and pcmark or more for the system.

P.S. Pikachu_Mommy do you post anything positve from the look's of it ya dont.

 

[Pikachu_Mommy]

Well if you choose to base a benchmark built for video card scoring on your whole system then thats your own doing I dont. As for 3dmark2001 I use it but IMHO sandra and pcmark or more for the system.

P.S. Pikachu_Mommy do you post anything positve from the look's of it ya dont.

nah man.. i didn't mean to be negative and wasn't a negative post. Hope ya're not holding some kind of grudge.. coz I saw the information that is just simply, wrong.. I was actually surprised you said that the 3dmark 2001 is a mainly a video card benchmark. I should've posted rather than . Maybe I didn't use the right face expression.


Just to let you know tho.. I wasn't picking on you. I don't want to pick on a nice guy like jonspd. I've seen quite a posts in the past and you are no noob. I would've gone more aggressively if it was somebody else making that statement you did... and I hate to say it but .. Sandra and PCmark is just lame benches.. not accurate and awefully synthetic. Go with more realistic benchmarks such as SETI, folding, SuperPi, PiFast series, Q3, UT2003, and 3Dmark 2001.

 

[jonspd]

Ok whatever he said I guess being is he is the great 2.8 prommy guy. I'am not wasting my time on this anymore.

 

[Pikachu_Mommy]

i don't got... prommy..

i'm on DIY phase change cooling method..

 

[Naeleros]

AkuraII, ignore Pikachu. jonspd is right...3DMark2001 is almost strictly a video card benchmark. Don't believe me? Its easy enough to test. Simply drop in an old video card and watch your scores plummet.

Honestly, I don't know how anyone could get the impression that PCMark was a system/cpu benchmark. Maybe they turn off the monitor while its running.

3DMark2001 will be affected by what your processor can do.. just like any game will be affected by your processor. But, it is mainly testing your video card, and on a system like yours.. simply dropping in a bigger video card would result in a much higher score. I would speculate that if you dropped in a 9800XT, you would see scores in the 17,000 range. That's without changing your processor at all.

Nael

 

[Pikachu_Mommy]

AkuraII, ignore Pikachu. jonspd is right...3DMark2001 is almost strictly a video card benchmark.

???..

and then...

3DMark2001 will be affected by what your processor can do.. just like any game will be affected by your processor.

are you confused? at first you say ignore Pikachu and the 3dmark is almost strictly a vid card benchmark.. and then you say 3Dmark2001 is affected by what procssor can do??.. and games as well?

Didn't I mention games earlier, too?



I tell you what tho, you haven't run enough of type of processors and at differently overclocked systems. This also explains that you haven't run 3Dmark 2003. You seem lost which is which.

 

[Pikachu_Mommy]

Care to explain why I got 13,542 on the Tbred@ 2.5ghz & Nforce2 and a little over 10,000 on a Morgan Duron@ 1.48ghz & nforce2? Both at similar GF3 video clocks. that's almost 3,500 points difference. URLs will be posted if you want to compare. Care to explain? How come higher FSBs gives me immidiate jump in scores? Doesn't higher FSB makes the system go faster?.. and clearly shows it in 3dmark 2001?... even just a notch up on a multiplier by 0.5 boosts 110 points at same vid clocks in the scale of GF3? Care to explain? Why did I get lower score with the KT333 and KT266a system than the nforce2@ higher fsbs and DC? Isn't that a system performance, too?

 

[z3r0]

I got 14k with my system. Specs in sig, is that good for that system?

 

[Gautam]

AkuraII, ignore Pikachu. jonspd is right...3DMark2001 is almost strictly a video card benchmark. Don't believe me? Its easy enough to test. Simply drop in an old video card and watch your scores plummet.

Honestly, I don't know how anyone could get the impression that PCMark was a system/cpu benchmark. Maybe they turn off the monitor while its running.

3DMark2001 will be affected by what your processor can do.. just like any game will be affected by your processor. But, it is mainly testing your video card, and on a system like yours.. simply dropping in a bigger video card would result in a much higher score. I would speculate that if you dropped in a 9800XT, you would see scores in the 17,000 range. That's without changing your processor at all.

Nael

I'm sorry to say this, but you guys are mistaken. While 3DMark2001 is heavily dependent on the video card, it is equally dependent on the processor. Examples of my own:

Radeon 9800 + 1.5ghz AXP = 14900 3DMarks
Ti4200+2.5ghz AXP=14408 3DMarks

As you can see, the superior video card did perform slightly higher. However, there are those with Geforce4's for example, reaching in excess of 20k when paired up with highly clocked P4's and Athlon64's. This is due to the system upon which they are based.

In 3DMark03 on the other hand, the first system got 5486, and the second 1666. A vast difference. Bumping up to 2.5ghz only delivered 600 pts more or so. 3DMark03 provides nearly no chance for an inferior card(as defined by itself) to outperform a superior one. 3DMark01, however, evens the playing field in a sense by allowing processors to play a huge role.

01 is a DirectX 8.1 benchmark, thus does not stress the newer video cards of our day enough, blurring the line between, say, Geforce4's and Radeon 9700+'s. It would not blur the line between, for example, a Geforce SDR and Radeon 7500, as it bottlenecked those by enough. In the future, 3DMark03 will "evolve" as a system-wide benchmark as well, as video cards progress.

 

[Pikachu_Mommy]

depends on what you mean by guys. There are two. Two guys are mistaken, not all of us.


Get this,

system = comes from the processor

system = comes from the mainboard/ fsb/ timing... and vid card.

system = processor

system = mommy board

same damn thing.

if you read my messages here, you will see where I said "system", meaning both CPU processing power and the system as a whole. Just in case if you haven't read all my messages. Read more carefully before jump into conclusion saying "you guys are mistaken".


Yes, I'm not saying you are wrong. What you said about the CPU processing power is also useful in 3dmark '01. You did correctly on that part.


This is rediculous tho... I was surprised there still people saying 3dmark 2001 is a sorely the video card benchmark and not the system as a whole. This had been talked about a long time ago and really, it's old.. VEry old.. I feel even rediculous arguing with this stuff. This shouldn't even have been talked about here. Please don't make me raise my voice. okay?

 

[Naeleros]

To each, his own. If you guys want to convince yourselves that a high 2001SE score is somehow indicative of high overall system performance.. then all the power to you.

Even though Gautam tried to show a difference between what he is saying and what I said.. I believe he showed my point. He showed how you can put in a fast video card into an old machine and outperform a slow video card into a fast machine.

That's because its a video card benchmark. The faster video card always has the advantage. The faster CPU can be pulled down by a slower video card. <first sentence in paragraph>

 

[Bon3thugz43v3r]

pickachu is right...

3dmark2001SE = whole system
3dmark 03 = all video card

All you have to do is watch your score in 3dmark 03 barely change when u change ur cpu from 11 x 166 to 11 x 200. Ive done it...In 3dmark 2001 that raises my score by about 5k from 10k to 15k then overclock the card, tighting the ram timings and you got close to 17k. 3dmark 2003, bottom line, is all videocard, minimal cpu.

 

[Pikachu_Mommy]

To each, his own. If you guys want to convince yourselves that a high 2001SE score is somehow indicative of high overall system performance.. then all the power to you.

Even though Gautam tried to show a difference between what he is saying and what I said.. I believe he showed my point. He showed how you can put in a fast video card into an old machine and outperform a slow video card into a fast machine.

That's because its a video card benchmark. The faster video card always has the advantage. The faster CPU can be pulled down by a slower video card. <first sentence in paragraph>

wrong again.... even worse...

I think you need to re-read what Gautam said in his post. He may not have put the words together very well but what he was trying to say was that the 3dmark 2001 is based on the processor power, as well as the system as a whole, which agrees with what the hell I've been saying all this time. You are trying to team up with Gautam when his point is not the same as yours. Please don't get that confused. Read this.... quote below.

I'm sorry to say this, but you guys are mistaken. While 3DMark2001 is heavily dependent on the video card, it is equally dependent on the processor.

He was talking to you. Refering to you that you are mistaken. So you teaming up with Gautam doesn't make much sense at all i'm afrad... just because I sounded like I was arguing with Gautam doesn't mean I disagree with what he was saying. What he said about the processing power also affects 3dmark is correct. Let's keep this clear here shall we?


I really suggest you need to get more hardware with differently oc'ed systems and types as well as lots of benching in 3dmark 2001. Also, sounds like you haven't run 3dmark 2003 before tho.. even if you did, you sound like you only ran few benches with a single system, not various types of systems and video cards and all the oc'ed settings.

 

[Pikachu_Mommy]

Thank you....... Bon3thugz43v3r.

 

[Naeleros]

LOL

You are trying to team up with Gautam when his point is not the same as yours.

LOL. I just had to come back and laugh at your comment about trying to 'team up'.

It could be that English is not your native language <no insult intended if its not> ... or that you just didn't understand my post. But, I assure you that this is not 3rd Grade Soccer.. I'm not trying to establish a 'team'. (Man.. I'm still actually laughing out loud at that comment.. heh)

So.. it doesn't matter to me. I am sure that if you think about it hard enough.. you could use a combination of HDTach, 3DMark2001, Minesweeper, and a timed typing test from an accredited Typing Teacher to get a 'true' performance benchmark on your CPU.