Discussion in 'Overclocking, Benching & Modding' started by Dyre Straits, Oct 16, 2011.
finished a vantage mark run of the HD3000 intel iGPU on the intel i5 2410M
I decided to see what 3D 2K1 would do if I cranked everything up to the max that it would allow.
I do remember when I was running this originally that I felt good if I could see 50 FPS during the Nature bench.
oh your just a smidge high 3dmark score..
but i'm still running everything 100% stock settings...
i find our results interesting when compared side by side... and looking at our system specs..
DYRE's score on the left and My score on the right
Notice that i score a significant amount more in the folliwing:
Game 4 Nature ~> 57.3FPS faster ~> 12.5% Faster
High polygon count (1 light) ~> 87.8 MTriagles/s Faster ~> 8.5% Faster
Environment Bump mapping ~> 34.7FPS Faster ~> 12% Faster
Dot3 Bump Mapping ~> 33.9FPS Faster ~> 6% Faster
Pixel Shader ~> 11.2FPS Faster ~> 3% Faster
Advanced Pixel Shader ~> 120.6FPS Faster ~> 6% Faster
And a huge amount in the Point Sprites ~> 104.4 MSprites/s Faster ~> 27% Faster
The only thing I am OC'ing at the moment is my CPU. I do, however, have lower RAM timings than what you show in your system specs. The only other thing that kind of gets my curiosity up is that I "upgraded" to HD 6870's from a HD 5770 primarily for the increased bandwidth of the GPU...from 128-bit to 256-bit.
I wonder if there's anyway to tell if the test is being affected by that?
well that's the thing.. the 6870's.. crossfired.. are supposed to be a good deal faster in everything.
but using an outdated test is likely going to show more of the other system specs advantages.. but it should't considering the design of the tests in place... which are purely 3D graphics and shouldn't be considering the rest of the machine's performance figures..
BTW.. i set my DDR3 to 1067mhz... and reran with litterally zero change to the score just to see.
For some reason, over the past two sessions I hadn't been able to get 3D 2K to even run. It would show up in Task Manager as "Running" for a little while and then disappear. And, nothing at all was showing on the screen. So, I tried extracting the downloaded file into another folder and went through the Compatibility settings again. Nothing worked!
Just a little while ago I went through the extraction process once again. I also created a desktop shortcut for it. And, this time, I right clicked on the shortcut and ran the Troubleshoot Compatibility option. I don't recall ever having used it before. But, this did the trick! I opted to used the Recommended Settings and it ran fine.
Here's the test result...
After a little overclocking on the CPU and bumping up the Radeon 5770's from 850 core to 900 core on both.. (of which now they peak at 73*C under full load which is STILL WELL below typical)
A nice 10,000 3DMark01se boost isn't anything to scoff at most definitely... lol
And finally got 3DMark2000 to complete without "program encountered a problem" crash issue..
shits and giggles..
3DMark03 (This clearly doesn't make use of crossfire... i didn't back when i had x1900's in crossfire, when i had HD3870's in crossfire, when i had HD4870x2's.. and even those in crossfire for 4gpu...and now with the hd5770s)
3DMark05 ATI Radeon HD 5770 video card benchmark result - Intel Core i7-930 Processor,ASUSTeK Computer INC. P6X58D PREMIUM score: 31513 3DMarks
Hey.. has anyone ran Vantage mark recently...
is it just more.. or is that program royally screwed up.... i got a score of 0 3dmark.. even though a gpu/cpu score was reached..
and then looking at the scores.. i'm just outright confused.... and then i tried to compare to similare systems.. and while thye got a score... all of them look like they are just as screwed up in their scoring as well as mine is... actually one guy has a score that says he has like 18,000fps in one of the tests.... wtf?
ATI Radeon HD 5770 video card benchmark result - Intel Core i7-930 Processor,ASUSTeK Computer INC. P6X58D PREMIUM score: 0 3DMarks
Well, did you miss this on top?
Then I see on your data:
Default settings used
This is why.
Only time you get a score is when you run the default settings. This is perfectly logical if you want to compare your system with others.
Yeah, but I thought that he should still get a score, at least the other versions give you one even if you don't use default settings.
no no.... look at the details of the tests... even add it to compare and then do a search for a nearly similar machine running extreme....
How/why the hell are the fps/ops so royally screwed up....
I should get at LEAST a 3DMark score of some sort though imo...
No you won't get a score. It says that you need to run default settings for a score to be computed. If that's unique to Vantage or not I don't know but it's clearly why. Try to run with default settings to see if you get a score or not.
It's unique to Vantage.. because being a pro user of the others.. they all give a Score regardless of the settings used
But i'm not so much taking issue with getting a score or not (i can just look at the cpu/gpu scores) i'm taking issue with the CPU scores which are undoubtably messed up from system to system or even the same system but different times it's been tested.
No idea how you guys got this to install, tried every setting and compatibility but it always says Could not create direct 3D device during the texture unpacking phase of the install. Is there no download for an unpacked no installer version of 3Dmark2001se?
Man, I really wanted to make a trip down memory lane! I remember the first time I ever saw a Gaming Rig on display at a computer store running 3DMark2001 on a loop and it blew me away how fast it was compared to my HP desktop. Now that comp store is a sex shop, it was way sexier filled with gaming hardware
i could see if i can get 2001 uploaded somewhere...
but the 2000 edition is here still
3DMark2000InstallWin7.exe | Game Front
not sure why it's not unpacking for you...
i didn't have to run the installer in capability mode.
That would be great, 3dmark2000 came out before I got into PC gaming so I didn't grow an attachment to it. I've lost many hours of my life in front of 2001
Here's my 2000 score, it didn't run in 3D clocks though so might be lower than it should.
I can't run 3DMark 2000:
Looks like I need to upgrade...
I got that too set to XP SP3 compatibility and it should lower quality settings to make it run.
Separate names with a comma.