Ruin Posted April 19, 2003 Share Posted April 19, 2003 Can some one explain this to me pleaase. I see lots of people talkinga bout how their computer performs on 3D Becnhmark tests etc etc. And I see numbers of 14,000 or 20,000... and I can't figure out how it works, what the signifigance is and how to rate mine. Last I checked, scores were given over 100... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rocky Posted April 19, 2003 Share Posted April 19, 2003 It depends what they are using to benchmark with, there are 2 or 3 tools that are popular, but not one accepted "standard". Card maunfacturers even argue about it. 3DMark is the most popular, but I am not the best person to ask, I have only basic experience of these things. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
magnumkp Posted April 19, 2003 Share Posted April 19, 2003 I think there are 3 versions currently banging about. I think the latest version is using a lower score for a reason complelty unknown to me (version 2003 iirc). The test is really a way to compare the 3d 'ness of a computer, by running exactly the same thing on all the different computers. The "better" it runs, the higher the mark, which you probably knew already. Check out madonion.com for more details. (And to brag like a kid with a new toy, my new one has a benchmark of 14,000 .) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ruin Posted April 19, 2003 Author Share Posted April 19, 2003 Thanks for the help. I downloaded 3DMark03 now to see what happens when I try and run it... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ruin Posted April 20, 2003 Author Share Posted April 20, 2003 Ufff, maybe I shouldn't have. I was getting 120FPS in the first test, and barely reached 15 on all the rest. 807 IIRC... jeeze Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snakebite1967 Posted April 20, 2003 Share Posted April 20, 2003 ruin 3dmark 03 is a dx9 benchmark not many ppl ive ehard of got much over 1400 i myself benched 1200 somthing last time and some of the tests were little more than screen shows. dl mad onion 2000 or 2001 run those for a more realistic test of your system , also go to www.pcpitstop.com and run their free complete system test tho this isnt a gaming test its takes a very short time and give you a more comprehensive system health and fitness benchmark with plenty of tips and fixes to tweak a system easily, hope this helps Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WhiteKnight77 Posted April 20, 2003 Share Posted April 20, 2003 I just run the benchmarks at PCPitStop and scored 1242 with my PC being in scored as: Area YourPC Database System AMD Athlon, 1996MHz 100 Memory 512 MB 95 Disk 102.48 GB 97 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snakebite1967 Posted April 20, 2003 Share Posted April 20, 2003 nice score White best i can get is 1130 and thats after quite a lot of tweaking Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ruin Posted April 20, 2003 Author Share Posted April 20, 2003 With PCPitStop my score was 1212 with: System: AMD Athlon, 2004MHz Memory: 768MB RAM Disk Drives: C, D Video: RADEON 9700/9500 SERIES Internet: MSIE 6.0 Windows: Windows XP SP1 This is a fast system that should meet all your computing needs. Pretty cool. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dark Ranger Posted April 20, 2003 Share Posted April 20, 2003 My first score(no OC'ing) was 1348 3D Marks... DX9.0a NVIDIA Driver 41.09 1024x768x32 Then I OC'ed my video card a bit, and received 1441 3DMarks. It's a tough benchmark, but mark my words: In about one year, new 'puters will start receiving benchmark scores nearer to 5000-6000. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rocky Posted April 20, 2003 Share Posted April 20, 2003 That pitstop is pretty clever. Told me what I already knew though, I need another HD. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ruin Posted April 20, 2003 Author Share Posted April 20, 2003 6433 for 3DMark2001 SE. I like that score better than 807. lol! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rocky Posted April 20, 2003 Share Posted April 20, 2003 6433 for 3DMark2001 SE. I got over 7000 somehow. http://www.agr-s.com/html_pages/upgrade.htm Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NYR_32 Posted April 20, 2003 Share Posted April 20, 2003 With my old computer, I ran 3dMark 2003 and got a score of below 100, I could only run the first test. lol Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stinger Posted April 20, 2003 Share Posted April 20, 2003 I can nail 5000 about on 3DMARK 2k1, but on 2k3 my system always has one problem or another. First it loves to completly shutdown and restart the computer, another time it wouldn't run cause of my gfx card's low or maybe it was too high IRQ number. And then most recently when I installed and ran it all it did was show a purple screen for about 3 minutes then reboot. I have no idea why it seems to be such a pain in the ###### Ill just stick with 2K1 its better anyways. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snakebite1967 Posted April 20, 2003 Share Posted April 20, 2003 I use pcpitstop a lot nice way of making sure a system is running smooth, madonion 2001 i usualy get around 9755 i dont clock anything never seen the point in risking hardware Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ruin Posted April 20, 2003 Author Share Posted April 20, 2003 i dont clock anything never seen the point in risking hardware I agree... There's really no point in having to break down and buy a new CPU to get the extra couple hundred of MHz Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stinger Posted April 20, 2003 Share Posted April 20, 2003 i dont clock anything never seen the point in risking hardware I agree... There's really no point in having to break down and buy a new CPU to get the extra couple hundred of MHz If you know what you're doing that almost never happens. Out of all the people that OC that I know, none of them have ever fried a cpu. Its very rare. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dark Ranger Posted April 21, 2003 Share Posted April 21, 2003 I will agree with not risking hardware, however, I am only OC'ing my video card right now. I will not risk the FSB or CPU increase, at least not yet. I am also a conservative OC'er. I only upped the core/memory speed 4MHz at a time, as well as run Artifact Tester 5.0, and 3DMark'01. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Urban_Tiger Posted April 22, 2003 Share Posted April 22, 2003 LOL...... PC Pit stop is kinda useful isn't it hehehe....As someone said it doesn't really tell ya anything that you may not already know but it's useful to know how well ya system is running ! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stinger Posted April 23, 2003 Share Posted April 23, 2003 (edited) I found this very interesting, I have XP Pro and 2003 Server on dual boot. They have most all same software and Hardware is the same on the tests the XP Pro system (tuned forgaming) got 1072. But on the 2K3 Server the system got 1172. And I had Longhorn a bit ago and tested it and got a 1297. What the heck? Seems odd to me, as the OS gets newer (though all very new OS's)the Scores gets higher. This was on PCPITSTOP. Edited April 23, 2003 by Stinger Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
supasniper Posted April 23, 2003 Share Posted April 23, 2003 i just tested my rig and got 1673 on 3DMark03 the specs are: AMD XP 2100+ @ 1.733ghz NVIDIA GeForce4 Ti 4600 ASUS A7V333 Mother board 2x 256mb PC2700 DDRAM 56k modem IBM 40gb HDD 19" Iiyama vision master 1451 52x cdrom 1.4mb fdd IEEE card 10/100 Ethernet card XP Home Dx9.0a Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Urban_Tiger Posted April 23, 2003 Share Posted April 23, 2003 (edited) Stinger......Don't know if you had time to read some of the little snippets of info there along with the scores etc, but one that just caught the corner of my eye more by accident than looking at it was they claimed that the FAT32 system runs drives a heck of a lot faster than NTFS. Thus newer OS's may seem slower if you have gone from FAT32 to NTFS blah blah!! My 40 gig Maxtor which ultimately isn't as good as the 120 gb still scored higher and the speed differences were actually damn frustrating as you say. The 40 gig is still formatted in FAT32 after I just bunged it in this sytem from the old one lol!! They also said just cos you may score slightly less with that happening don't immediately reformat using FAT32 lol, keep it with NTFS if thats what it's at (just in case you were about to rofl) ! Just seems that there can be many little things that can make very small differences here and there from that one example and ultimately it's going to influence the final outcome or scores rofl!! Good huh lol?????? NNOOOTTT!!! Edited April 23, 2003 by Urban_Tiger Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stinger Posted April 23, 2003 Share Posted April 23, 2003 (edited) Yeah I think its stupid though. FAT and its variants are archaic. Both partitions are NTFS which is much better but my External HDD is on FAT32 since it can't be formatted into NTFS. Oh and those scores in my last post were on PCPITSTOP not 3D MARK. Edited April 23, 2003 by Stinger Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snakebite1967 Posted April 24, 2003 Share Posted April 24, 2003 its tru check the forums out there youl see most of the guys that bench to get the highest run 98se totaly stripped down just to get a few extra points Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.