Printable View
Oh well you just installed 4.5's anyway...Quote:
Originally posted by mikead_99
Grrrr :mad:
ATI just had Futuremark de-certify Cat's 4.7, for the reason listed here: ATI Cat's 4.7 '03 issue. Note to all fan-boys waiting to claim cheats or whatever, read the linked page. That ain't the reason.
Guess I'll be waiting on 4.8's for any more '03 updates.
well i gain 1000 points per 100mhz and 10 FSB so while i doubt you'll get that much, you should gain considerably.Quote:
Originally posted by mikead_99
As it stands right now, I'm looking at just under 4k. I still think that'll be a stretch with only 400 MHz left in the cpu tank, but you know I'll be going for it. :D
27,061
lol, yeah, that's on my ex-dx8.1 partition though. I've been benching '03 and other 3d with newer cat's on my gaming partition. Since I'm not keeping a dx8.1 partition for cat 3.2's anymore I really have no need of 2 partitions for benches now, convenient for running multiple driver versions though.Quote:
Originally posted by eshbach
Oh well you just installed 4.5's anyway...
Re '01 gains: Yeah, I better just run this at something other then 4GHz before I really say squat. :)
Quote:
Originally posted by eshbach
well i gain 1000 points per 100mhz and 10 FSB so while i doubt you'll get that much, you should gain considerably.
I still stand by the 29k I believe he will get. p4s dont scale as well as a64s plus he has to drop his ram at 5:4 for 4.4GHz and this cancels out alot of the fsb gains. Looking at your bench, I can tell right away your car low is not close to 3x as fast as your car high while eshbash's car low is well over 3x his car high :confused:
current compare between my score and mikead_99
looks like car low and drago low just take a hit on P4 for some reason.
http://img66.exs.cx/img66/861/esvsad.jpg
I think I know why, not only is the p4 slower which is obvious, it only has 512k cache! People have reported that s939 a64s with 512k cache actually lose out to the 1mb s754 clawhammers in car low and drag low. I find this strange since its the lobbies that are normally bandwith intensive! Maybe the x800s are sooooooo cpu and memory limited that even drag and car low can behaive like lobbies in that situation? I may actually have been generous in my 29k estimate given the huge performance hit in car and drag low. It looks like car high will be the only test he will edge you, maybe nature if he can pull more gpu clocks. What about a p4ee? How cheap is the 3.2ee now? It might be cheaper and less trouble for him than upgrading everything and going fx53 and s939. I know this is strange of an amd fan to be saying this, but its his easy way to 30k without needing to remove anything nor reinstall windows all over. he can sell his champ 3.2c for like $300 and pay $600 for the 3.2ee and be at like 30k :D
who would pay $600 to get a high score in a 3 year old benchmark.....
Well I still stand by my estimate that Mikeed will be very close to Eshbach. I really think he still has a lot of tweaking to do. Do a compare with my 23K score and you will see I am beating him in all the CPU intensive tests and am only being overwhelmed in Nature. There is a lot of work to go and his 27K score has a ton of room to grow. Look at eshbach's dragon L score, now that is overwhelming and it also indicates to me the video card is not performing as it should in that test. Dragon is always where I see the greatest gains by VC overclocks. The 120 points he loses in that test to eshbach is not cause his CPU is that much weaker, it's a VC problem.
If he can bench at 4.2 Ghz and tweak his system right, you will see a very tight battle for first:D
Just a question for you Tbird, how do you explain the fact that he had the best score when he had an 9800XT and eshbach had a 9800 pro. The XT didn't make that big of a difference. You are putting to much stock into the power of the A64. Just my .02
actually with the X800XT Drago low is ALL CPU power... video clock is nigh.Quote:
Originally posted by ranger2992
Well I still stand by my estimate that Mikeed will be very close to Eshbach. I really think he still has a lot of tweaking to do. Do a compare with my 23K score and you will see I am beating him in all the CPU intensive tests and am only being overwhelmed in Nature. There is a lot of work to go and his 27K score has a ton of room to grow. Look at eshbach's dragon L score, now that is overwhelming and it also indicates to me the video card is not performing as it should in that test. Dragon is always where I see the greatest gains by VC overclocks. The 120 points he loses in that test to eshbach is not cause his CPU is that much weaker, it's a VC problem.
If he can bench at 4.2 Ghz and tweak his system right, you will see a very tight battle for first:D
Just a question for you Tbird, how do you explain the fact that he had the best score when he had an 9800XT and eshbach had a 9800 pro. The XT didn't make that big of a difference. You are putting to much stock into the power of the A64. Just my .02
There is no way you're gonna tell me it makes that big of a difference, 120 fps??....look at his overall score and each of his individual scores and you can see a pattern. He should be wiping the floor with me, yet I come out ahead in the CPU intensive tasks? There is no way that the only game that he see's a big jump in is nature??
Do a compare against my score with your best 9800 pro score and I think you will see the gap shouldn't be too big. I would say he is having driver problems in a big way
My CPU tests are down from my 9800pro scores too (except that i have an extra 100mhz now so they're not "down" literally)...Quote:
Originally posted by ranger2992
There is no way you're gonna tell me it makes that big of a difference, 120 fps??....look at his overall score and each of his individual scores and you can see a pattern. He should be wiping the floor with me, yet I come out ahead in the CPU intensive tasks? There is no way that the only game that he see's a big jump in is nature??
Do a compare against my score with your best 9800 pro score and I think you will see the gap shouldn't be too big. I would say he is having driver problems in a big way
The new GPU's are very CPU intensive and actually cause tets like car high to score WORSE than they did on the 9800 series.
You guys make me really want to jump back into the game. I really think if I had his hardware I would break 30K no problem. I am not trying to be an ego-maniac or anything. I just feel there is a lot of headroom there.
Both of your scores are very impressive and you should be very proud. Maybe someday I will jump back in and give you all a run for the money.
Quote:
Originally posted by JetForce Gemini X
who would pay $600 to get a high score in a 3 year old benchmark.....
3dmark is not the only game he plays, that extra cache would seriously boost his fps in all games. Lets see what he says when he wakes up tomorrow. I did my math and estimate at 4.2GHz on his 3.2c if his ram still can do 1:1 at 266fsb he should have low to mid 28k, maybe 28.5k then the p4ee should be worth 1.5k on top of that so a 4.2ee will be enough for 30k but barely.
"Well I still stand by my estimate that Mikeed will be very close to Eshbach."
I stand by my 29k as the best mike will get at 4.4GHz
"you will see I am beating him in all the CPU intensive tests and am only being overwhelmed in Nature"
you are 3.7fps ahead of him in car high and 2.4fps in lobby high. draw in lobby low. The x800s are SO cpu limited that car high suffers a little. your 280fsb may be another reason why your doing so well in the cpu tests.
"There is a lot of work to go and his 27K score has a ton of room to grow"
I think he knows how to tweak including PAT, t1 command rate, dual channel, 2-2-2-5 ram timings among OS tweaks like disabling useless services. I doubt you can pull more than 200 marks higher with his cpu at 4GHz
"it's a VC problem."
you must be unaware that with the x800s and 6800s that *every* test is 100% cpu limited except for nature and his nature is normal! Well drag low becomes like 98% cpu limited with VERY fast a64s north of 2GHz then gpu clocks add a teeny bit in drag low.
"If he can bench at 4.2 Ghz and tweak his system right, you will see a very tight battle for first"
He is not going to gain 4k marks with a 200MHz on the cpu clock. I say 1500 marks tops. You way underestimated the power of the a64, maybe you should give amd a chance and buy an a64 and youll be blown away! Eshbash broke 30k with his a64 at 2.4GHz and we can see mike's 4GHz p4 isnt even close. He may still lose to the 2.4GHz a64 even at 4.4GHz!
"how do you explain the fact that he had the best score when he had an 9800XT and eshbach had a 9800 pro."
those cards were slightly gpu limited in car low and both dragons. eshbash did not have even close to the clocks Mike had, also eshbash's a64 was 2.4GHz to boot. At same gpu clocks, of course eshbash would have easily beat mike. With the x800s, we now have 6 tests that rely on pure cpu power, giving the a64 much more opporunity to shine over the p4.
"There is no way you're gonna tell me it makes that big of a difference, 120 fps??...."
appearently it seems so. If we look at mike's gpu clocks, it is only 8fps slower in nature to eshbash's so we can conclude that perhaps 118 of the 120fps in drag low is all cpu. even drag high experiences a massive gain. both dragons are as cpu intensive as any other test, including car high. Its crazy, I know but dragons=car with x800.
"There is no way that the only game that he see's a big jump in is nature??"
Thats because his cpu is about equal to yours and he is totally bottlenecked except in nature. he does beat you by some in both dragons but not even close to the margin hes ahead in nature.
"Do a compare against my score with your best 9800 pro score and I think you will see the gap shouldn't be too big."
your 9800 pro is clocked way higher than eshbash's old 9800 pro so while eshbash beats you in car and lobby, he gets owned in drag and nature. 3dmark 2001 has become the opposite of 2003 now with the latest cards. 2003 is almost all gpu save for the first game test which uses some gpu power while 2001 is almost all gpu except for nature which uses a little cpu power but is almost all gpu. You can see that Mike is ahead of eshbash in 2003 cause mike has a faster gpu, but loses out in 2001, even in nature although by not much cause nature, like I said uses very little cpu power.
Your welcome back anytime Ranger. :)
This discussion tonight has been great, but in the end, pointless. I still stand by > 30k, > 31k. No question. I've had this rig a while and I know what I can get out of it. Benches posted so far where with all different configs, some worse some better. Nothing to pick apart though. :p
It's all pointless discussion though because I learned a costly lesson tonight; don't f**k with a rejected core.
I'd seen several guys at XS claiming dead VIVO cards after 1 day, 2, even a couple weeks. I noticed last night the thing was dropping like .05V under heavy loads, so even though I knew I should baby this card, I added the over-current resistor. Ran 1 run of '03, stock voltage, core dipped only .02V. Looked good. That's all it took. I was curious if clocks got any better, so I bumped up to 1.5V. That's only .07V more then stock on my card. Started AtiTool, hit find max core...instant artifacts. Took the o-c mod out, still f***ed. If all it took was a little more current at 1.43V to die, this pig wouldn't have held up long to my upcoming abuse anyway. I'm going to try to let it limp along in my case until I can get a bona-fide XT, but I'm expecting to see the dreaded "Power Connector Missing" message any re-boot now. :eek:
I hope after all this talk I can find an XT before I move on to A64, but it better be quick. I've had an A64 prom kit since the day nVentive went bankrupt....I wanna use it. :)
...and hey! My last score was with a 9800 pro, not an XT!
Thank got I still have that sitting on stand-by. :D