YES! I finally have a good video card....

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Thunderbird1GHz




you paid 3 times for your cpu as I did mine(free, took from bros old comp actually) and p4's do less MHz per MHz. If a p4 was underclocked to 1GHz it would get well below what my Tbird does. also your cpu at stock is 60% faster, but you get ~25% more marks, make that ~15% after ocing my video card. If I had an athlon XP 1600+ I would get like 14k marks

---

Actually, you don't know what I paid...I bought the processor and 256mb PC2700 RAM (months ago..when it wasn't cheap) for $160.

The Mhz/Mhz argument is quite immature..the P4's high clock speeds are there for a reason. Nobody's saying its more effecient..and if you can't afford a P4, so be it. You don't have to complain about mine. ;) :D

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Thunderbird1GHz




you paid 3 times for your cpu as I did mine(free, took from bros old comp actually) and p4's do less MHz per MHz. If a p4 was underclocked to 1GHz it would get well below what my Tbird does. also your cpu at stock is 60% faster, but you get ~25% more marks, make that ~15% after ocing my video card. If I had an athlon XP 1600+ I would get like 14k marks

---

Forgot to mention...if my P4 was underclocked to 1Ghz, I'd be running at what..62.5Mhz FSB? That FSB is slower than a Celeron.

I could turn this around and say that if you overclocked your Tbird to 2.133Ghz, you'd fry it. ;)

I did own a 1Ghz Tbird at one time...also a Duron 750..XP1600...K6/2 475..PII 233..PII 450..and the list goes on.


Who said you'll hit 14k 3dMark 2001 with an XP1600? 640x480, maybe...but the top score found on MadOnion's database using WinXP Pro, AXPs from 1400 to 1600Mhz & Ti4200s was 12192.

The *best score* for a Ti4200 was 17663...on..guess what? A Pentium 4 @ 3484Mhz! I doubt an XP1600 is going to give you 14k.

you can get an XP 1700+ for $55 and OC it to 2GHz real performance, making it equivelent to an XP 2400 or better. also if a faster cpu doesnt help much, then 3dmark is video intensive. I cant say that for all games though. Why would doom3 use directX 9 as it wasnt out when doom3 was being made. I doubt there will be any sinficent differences unless you have a dx7 card

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Thunderbird1GHz
you can get an XP 1700+ for $55 and OC it to 2GHz real performance, making it equivelent to an XP 2400 or better. also if a faster cpu doesnt help much, then 3dmark is video intensive. I cant say that for all games though. Why would doom3 use directX 9 as it wasnt out when doom3 was being made. I doubt there will be any sinficent differences unless you have a dx7 card

---

Or you can buy a P4 1.6a for $75 (just saw one today) and o/c it to 2.4.

Of course 3dMark is video intensive..that's the whole point. Of course, it's not exactly the greatest benchmark around..

FYI -- if you want to slam another company, you'd be better off doing research first..because this might happen before an XP1600 w/Ti4200 breaks 14k on 3dMark2001SE. ;)