3DMark2001se score of 13,000 on a 9800 Pro?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Chrisr
  • Start date Start date
C

Chrisr

Hey all,

I recieved my new Sapphire 128 Mb 9800 Pro recently and I'm trying to
get a feel of how it performs. As a start I tried using 3DMark 2001 se
and only came up with 13,000 points which seems kinda low, even for my
older MB? On the other hand 3DMark03 gives 5544 which is more what I'd
expect. I'm using a fresh install on Win XP, fresh everything driver
wise, killing background apps, turning of AA/AF and so on for
performance and using balanced settings.

What are some good benchies that will allow me to see whats going on? I
know the 3DMark series are a little frowned on currently.

Thanks.


System
Abit KR7A KT266a with 786 Mb DDR PC2400
Sapphire 9800 Pro 128 Mb default clock, AGP x4, FW
Athlon XP 2600
3.10 Dets
 
3.10 dets as in detonators? :)

I'd say the limiting factor on 3dmark2001 is your memory speed
since you have just a 266fsb and pc2400(?) memory.
 
Hey all,

I recieved my new Sapphire 128 Mb 9800 Pro recently and I'm trying to
get a feel of how it performs. As a start I tried using 3DMark 2001 se
and only came up with 13,000 points which seems kinda low, even for my
older MB? On the other hand 3DMark03 gives 5544 which is more what I'd
expect. I'm using a fresh install on Win XP, fresh everything driver
wise, killing background apps, turning of AA/AF and so on for
performance and using balanced settings.

What are some good benchies that will allow me to see whats going on? I
know the 3DMark series are a little frowned on currently.

Thanks.


System
Abit KR7A KT266a with 786 Mb DDR PC2400
Sapphire 9800 Pro 128 Mb default clock, AGP x4, FW
Athlon XP 2600
3.10 Dets
Click to expand...


I think we may be in a similar situation. I also just got a Sapphire
9800 Pro/128, and in 3dMark 2001SE I'm "only" getting about 14200. I
have an AMD 2600+ CPU, running with slight overclock at 16x139. I'm
using the 4.1 catalyst drivers. For some reason, I was expecting
15000-16000 range with a 2.2 ghz Athlon and a 9800 Pro. I think we
both are getting killed by our low FSB. Unfortunately I can't go
higher due to motherboard & memory limitations.
 
the hell with bench marks how is it in real testing like games?
do we buy a video card to play bench marks?
any number of things can slow it down in benchmarks. but what realy maters
is how it looks and plays todays games and software.
 
I think we may be in a similar situation. I also just got a Sapphire
9800 Pro/128, and in 3dMark 2001SE I'm "only" getting about 14200. I
have an AMD 2600+ CPU, running with slight overclock at 16x139. I'm
using the 4.1 catalyst drivers. For some reason, I was expecting
15000-16000 range with a 2.2 ghz Athlon and a 9800 Pro. I think we
both are getting killed by our low FSB. Unfortunately I can't go
higher due to motherboard & memory limitations.
Click to expand...

Could be... or your video settings for the card (qualty vs
performance)...

I get over 15,000 on my NON OC AMD 2500.
 
for the record i get around the same score on my sys with a 9700 pro and 1
gig ddr 3200 ram and a barton 2500 if i tweak it and overclock i get a lot
better but why do it? it play's everything just fine at stock settings. we
get stuck on this bench marking thing and forget why we buy new video cars
in the first place "games" if it plays the newest games and plays them great
why even bench mark it? just so we thing the new card we just got is total
crap and we need more hard ware so we can have a high score like the rest of
the guys overclocking and tweeking the hell out of a sys? screw that im
playing a game while they tweek and overclock.
 
I agree. People like to tweak too much and piss around with this setting or
that setting just trying to squeeze out that last little bit of performance
for a better score, for what? It's a waste of time.
 
I take your point concerning benchmarking, I share it.

But I also believe that benchmarking is useful to determine initially if
you machine is performing roughly where it should be. My score of
13,000 in 3DMark immediately tells me that something is not quite right.
It seems that my low memory bus on the Kt266a is going to cause more
performance problems than I would like. You see, when I buy a new card,
I want to make sure its performing at its best, not just providing 'fast
frames' in games. I want it to be the very best it can be, the best for
my dollar. Once I've established that, I'm happy. And I don't just use
3DMark of course, thats just an indicator. Use real games!
 
You're right about the memory and motherboard. I have a reasonably
overclocked 9700 Pro with a 2600+ at 200 x 11.5 (A7N8X Deluxe 2.0) and that
achieves around 16,500 in 3DMark 2001 SE and about 5,500 in 3DMark03. In
each case, the screen is set up to avoid noise in dark areas such as Troll's
Lair.
 
I take your point concerning benchmarking, I share it.

But I also believe that benchmarking is useful to determine initially if
you machine is performing roughly where it should be. My score of
13,000 in 3DMark immediately tells me that something is not quite right.
It seems that my low memory bus on the Kt266a is going to cause more
performance problems than I would like. You see, when I buy a new card,
I want to make sure its performing at its best, not just providing 'fast
frames' in games. I want it to be the very best it can be, the best for
my dollar. Once I've established that, I'm happy. And I don't just use
3DMark of course, thats just an indicator. Use real games!
Click to expand...

I just got a 9800 Pro 128. It blows extremely high FPS in any game,
any res, full graphics, yadayada. P4/2.66. this puppy will be good
enough for gaming for quite some time.
 
Back
Top