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

Gonna try Longhorn and 3dMark 2001...

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

Quattro

Member
Joined
Nov 30, 2003
Any ideas, comments questions before I give it a go.

(Assuming it'll work)
 
OP
Quattro

Quattro

Member
Joined
Nov 30, 2003
First bench. It looked very smooth, but I only got 13k.
But I don't know what drivers i had.

So I'm downloading omegadrivers and 4.6 Windows 2k version.

I'll let you know what happens
 
OP
Quattro

Quattro

Member
Joined
Nov 30, 2003
Hmm.... Can't seem to update the driver...

Thats a bit stupid. It's say something video driver not found, but that was with a Windows ME driver, I'll try the 2k omega version in a second.
 

f00t

Member
Joined
Oct 20, 2002
id have to disagree with that. i have always had better experience with the 3.7's. no matter what, they alway came out on top by atleast 100 points for me
 

ColtIce

Disabled
Joined
Nov 20, 2002
Location
9 months 43202 summer months 98951
f00t said:
id have to disagree with that. i have always had better experience with the 3.7's. no matter what, they alway came out on top by atleast 100 points for me

I have to agree with f00t here.while the 3.5's do give high scores I have always got slightly higher 2k1 scores with the 3.7's
 

Gautam

Senior Benchmark Addict
Joined
Feb 4, 2003
Location
SF Bay Area
f00t said:
id have to disagree with that. i have always had better experience with the 3.7's. no matter what, they alway came out on top by atleast 100 points for me
Different configs perform differently with different drivers. What's good for you may not be "the best." 100 points is within the margin of error anyways. Personally I just follow OPPAINTER and use Cat 3.1. No one else likes them, but they wreck 3.7 and even 3.5 for me. 3.7's are solid but they've never been the quickest in my experience.

Omegas are a waste of time.
 

ColtIce

Disabled
Joined
Nov 20, 2002
Location
9 months 43202 summer months 98951
thank you! I will give this a shot on a win2k drive next week when I have some more time.maybe with these and the various other tweaks as well as the increased vga clock speeds I can finally break 20k.~195xx is my current best
 

ColtIce

Disabled
Joined
Nov 20, 2002
Location
9 months 43202 summer months 98951
Gautam said:
Have you tried changing your test order?
More marks always exist, you just gotta find em. ;)

I did that run back in Feb.but the order I normally run in is DL,DH,LL,LH,N,CL,CH.
that was on 2ksp4,cat 3.7,dx8.1.believe it or not I got most of the tweaks from you but by reading your numerous posts on the matter and not posting questions myself
 

Gautam

Senior Benchmark Addict
Joined
Feb 4, 2003
Location
SF Bay Area
OPP says to go with DL-LL-CH-DH-LH-N, CLx10-15.

Pkrew swaps DL and LL. I think I like Pkrew's order the best. Either way, you want the higher quality tests towards the end usually. LL especially likes being done early.

Funny thing I usually just go with whatever the top benchers say and use it myself. Don't do much testing, lol. I compiled some of it here.

Quattro, that's sweet how you got it to work, it doesn't show an OS though...hehe
How was it compared to XP?

The 03 looks rather low, and the 2001se looks about 4k too low, even compared to WinXP. Guess you can't ask too much from an alpha OS though.
 
Last edited:

Mr.Guvernment

Member
Joined
Feb 26, 2003
why use win 2k drivers with longhorn - why not use XP drivers? i would think the XP kernal would be closer to longhorn then 2k would be....