everyone-------say hello to my new ti4200 for $22 shipped

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Colossus
So you score over 10,000 in sandra around 2.55????

But that is just Sandra.. what about a real benchmark like games? :)

---

Ya I scored around 10100 in sandra... I lost the screenshots though... forgot to backup those before formatting...

Not sure about real benchmarks because sandra and 3dmark are the 2 that I run most of the time... because of the stupid hype over 3dmark and IMO Sandra is pretty accurate, at least IMO

I remember benching with UT2k3, botmatch was around 58fps and flyby was around 145fps (or something like that, don't remember, it was like half a year ago) CPU was at 2.3ghz vid card at stock

Oh and Tbird, I'll post some of my own screenshots of far cry and see if the GF4Ti sucks in IQ or if its just yours.

I will not post the fps however, because:
1) my NF7-S bios is not fixed... on my KT333
2) running 12.5x166 instead of 11x219 on my abit
3) I don't overclock video card when I play games... strange but true...

So what I'm trying to say is, it's gonna lag like hell... I will admit

Quote:

---

Originally posted by mikeysg
LOL!:D I can't believe this thread's grown to 14 pages with >200 posts!:eek: One thing about T'birdy's thread, it's seldom short or boring...:D Fire away guys, LOL!:D

---

Fair point...and we still haven't heard anymore about the graphics card this thread was started for! It's not getting much of a welcome here oddly enough!

John

Agreed. How's the new Ti4200 Tbird?:confused:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by icecube_of_death
Ya I scored around 10100 in sandra... I lost the screenshots though... forgot to backup those before formatting...

Not sure about real benchmarks because sandra and 3dmark are the 2 that I run most of the time... because of the stupid hype over 3dmark and IMO Sandra is pretty accurate, at least IMO

I remember benching with UT2k3, botmatch was around 58fps and flyby was around 145fps (or something like that, don't remember, it was like half a year ago) CPU was at 2.3ghz vid card at stock

---

Sandra Arithmetic is actually pretty innaccurate as far as CPU performance is considered. It relies almost solely on CPU external frequency. It makes very little consideration for internal frequency (FSB) and cache.

Here's a 9600 something that owns T-bird's 4200 in 3DMark01. Of course, it's a little extreme. This is only because he touts his 4200 so much!

http://service.futuremark.com/compare?2k1=7595285

The guy whos putting that card up on his wall... u sir are a fat mess nerd. I mean the fact that i like electronics a bit even only a bit makes me feel geeky sometimes... but u will be a virgin for life, enjoy dieing alone.

People like u give people interested in tech a bad name.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by adslegend
Sandra Arithmetic is actually pretty innaccurate as far as CPU performance is considered. It relies almost solely on CPU external frequency. It makes very little consideration for internal frequency (FSB) and cache.

---

I kind of agree and disagree with what you're saying. Yes I agree that it doesn't take the cache into consideration, however, it should not take FSB into account. After all this is a CPU benchmark, not a motherboard chipset benchmark. If it takes the FSB into consideration then the score will alter according to the overall system performance (memory bandwidth, FSB, CPU clocks, etc) therefore it'll not be a benchmark made solely for the CPU

But the FSB is an integral part of the CPU performance, albeit in more of a multimedia sense. 10x100 will find Pi to a million dp as fast as 5x200 as long the CPU is the limiting factor, but 5x200 is a much better performing CPU overall. I haven't done any benching myself, but I'm guessing a P4 2.4B would score very similarly to a 2.4C, which would you choose knowing other stuff about them?

edit- sp

I don't know... any experts to clarify this? :confused:

In terms of PURE arithmetic, the FSB makes absolutely no difference. A P4 @ 2Ghz, whether it has a 1Ghz or a 100mhz FSB would do pure calculation at exactly the same speed. Only when the memory subsystem comes into play will FSB make a difference. Then, the higher the FSB, the faster the CPU can load data from main memory, and the better the performance. Of course, this is assuming that your RAM can keep up.

wow I just played the far cry demo... and realized that it looked like crud :( I'll stick with my LineageII :D

Quote:

---

Originally posted by icecube_of_death
wow I just played the far cry demo... and realized that it looked like crud :( I'll stick with my LineageII :D

---

Great to know.. I'd try the other thread.. ;)

You guys are so snobby. I wish I had a computer like tbirds that could get scores like that on 3dmark:p Mines is total weak sauce.

Quote:

---

The guy whos putting that card up on his wall... u sir are a fat mess nerd. I mean the fact that i like electronics a bit even only a bit makes me feel geeky sometimes... but u will be a virgin for life, enjoy dieing alone.

---

OMG!! LMAO:D you have a really good point there

You want "weak sauce"?

How about my:

P3 1Ghz
Ti4600
512mb PC133 SDram

:D