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

**crashed13** · 03-26-2003, 06:24 PM

Originally posted by CadetLee
I hit 10k

My RAM is actually underclocked (PC2700 running at 133mhz)..think I could kick the timings to a more aggressive setting w/o any problem? Or..should I push my FSB?

I have a stick of Crucail and a stick of OEM "Exir" generic brand. Both sticks run fine at 2-2-2-5 from their stock settings of 2.5-3-3-6. So give it a try.

**CadetLee** · 03-26-2003, 06:42 PM

I'm catching you...maybe eventually..

Got 10324 this time

Updated screenshot on page one.

**Thunderbird1GHz** · 03-26-2003, 07:42 PM

if you oc your cpu and video card you can hit 12k

**CadetLee** · 03-26-2003, 11:28 PM

Originally posted by Thunderbird1GHz
if you oc your cpu and video card you can hit 12k

lol..already at 2.133Ghz on a 1.6a

**lonewolfroger** · 03-26-2003, 11:36 PM

Have you checked out Pyro`s 3D Mark guide http://www.sharkyforums.com/showthre...hreadid=184058

**Thunderbird1GHz** · 03-27-2003, 08:44 AM

Originally posted by CadetLee

lol..already at 2.133Ghz on a 1.6a

this is sad, I am getting 7930 marks at stock 250/445 ti4200 speeds on a 1GHz thunderbird at 143fsb, your cpu should perform 50% better since p4's are crap anyway but yours is more than twice the core speed. This means 12k marks if you oc the video card, go easy on the core, it locked up before artifacting

**CadetLee** · 03-27-2003, 10:11 AM

Originally posted by Thunderbird1GHz

this is sad, I am getting 7930 marks at stock 250/445 ti4200 speeds on a 1GHz thunderbird at 143fsb, your cpu should perform 50% better since p4's are crap anyway but yours is more than twice the core speed. This means 12k marks if you oc the video card, go easy on the core, it locked up before artifacting

Please tell me why a Northwood Pentium 4 is crap.

You're just jealous..

..and ask anybody..I used to be die-hard AMD. I'll now use either one -- they're both fast.

**crashed13** · 03-27-2003, 10:31 AM

Originally posted by Thunderbird1GHz

this is sad, I am getting 7930 marks at stock 250/445 ti4200 speeds on a 1GHz thunderbird at 143fsb, your cpu should perform 50% better since p4's are crap anyway but yours is more than twice the core speed. This means 12k marks if you oc the video card, go easy on the core, it locked up before artifacting

Here is the best score for a TB 1Ghz with a 4200 "9066"
Compare link AMD 1ghz/w4200

This is a P4 1.6(not O/ced) with a 4200 "9984"

P4 1.6 with 4200 compare link

A P4 @2ghz is "12682"

Compare link P4@2ghz

**Thunderbird1GHz** · 03-27-2003, 10:38 AM

Originally posted by CadetLee

Please tell me why a Northwood Pentium 4 is crap.

You're just jealous.. ..and ask anybody..I used to be die-hard AMD. I'll now use either one -- they're both fast.

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

**crashed13** · 03-27-2003, 10:53 AM

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

God I hate the AMD clock per clock arguement and better price BS.

P4 3.06=$543 XP 3000+=$555(No HS/fan)

P4 2.8=$345 XP 2800+=$360

P4 2.66=$233 XP 2600+=$246

P4 2.4=$160 Xp2400+=$130

All the P4s above can overclocked much much higher without effort if you want.Then their performance is not even close any longer.

**CadetLee** · 03-27-2003, 11:23 AM

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.

**CadetLee** · 03-27-2003, 11:30 AM

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.

**Thunderbird1GHz** · 03-27-2003, 05:17 PM

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

**CadetLee** · 03-27-2003, 05:38 PM

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.

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

Thread Tools

Display

Posting Permissions