View Full Version : [OT] 3dmark03 scores
[TgR]KILLER
31-07-04, 20:16
yay a pimp thread :p as i just orderd my new vid and ram. i dit a quick run with the free version of 3dmark03.. got a ub3r low score :p but it used to be 200 lower or so before i oced my proc and vid..
anyway.. attach a pic as proof any fool can say he got 300000 score :p
ow yes this is a pimp thread ofcourse.. and keep it alive for 1.5 week so i can add the score with the new vid..
Download of 3dmark03 if you don't have it heavy download tho ( 178 mb ) (http://www.futuremark.com/download/?3dmark03.shtml)
well belive it or not :p i dit the test 3 times now.. first 2 same score.. now it was lower :( but hell just 10 points :p should be 1520 tho.. anyway all laugh at the low score and pimp yours ^^
shodanjr_gr
31-07-04, 20:50
My system
Celeron 2.1 ghz
Intel 865 Chipset mobo
512 mb of DDR memory running on 400mhz (stock), 2.5ns latency (single dimm, no dual ddr).
X800 Pro gfx by HIS (running at stock frequencies)
Soundblaster Audigy 1 sound card
Using catalysts 4.7 (with overdrive disabled)
and latest creative drivers for soundcard.
3d Mark 2003 (using the free version) score of 8025 marks.
End result, me > you :P
shodanjr_gr
31-07-04, 21:35
Did another test. 4131 marks.
3d Mark 03 settings :
1280x1024, 4x AntiAliasing, 8x Anisotropic
[TgR]KILLER
31-07-04, 22:08
Did another test. 4131 marks.
3d Mark 03 settings :
1280x1024, 4x AntiAliasing, 8x Anisotropic
make that..
3d Mark 03 settings :
1024x768, no AntiAliasing, 4x Anisotropic[/QUOTE]
but i'm on a geforce 4 with all that shit on i aint getting above 1000 :p now i can't edit my starter post.. but i think everybody should use
1024x768, no AntiAliasing, 4x Anisotropic
that then.. so we get like the same results :p on older cards maybe that aint possible. but i don't see people with older cards run 3dmark cause they know it won't do high :p hehe *waits for new ram and vid*
james_finn
01-08-04, 00:00
last time i did this was with the following spec:
XP2800+ (Stock Speeds)
1 GB RAM
FX 5200 128MB
and I got around 1500 marks on 2003. Its not great but I was keeping track of the new nvidia drivers and the difference they made. I think that with the final result i recorded (before I reformatted) I got around 2000 score. So it proves that keeping up to date with drivers is important!
Delphi
MjukisDjur
01-08-04, 00:08
Please use default settings when running the test. Downloading it atm.
Post 2001 SE benchmarks instead :)
[TgR]KILLER
01-08-04, 00:24
got rid off 2001 when i installed 2003 got to much crap on my system already.. i think the settings i said above were standard on this one.. maybe it adjusts things automaticly don't know..
I'm Standing on 9975 marks , nothing is OC'ed .............. yet :eek: anti / anis off , 1024/768
Hmm. "Score: -1 , Die newbie".
Damn.
edit; 320x240 8bit colors.
landofcake
01-08-04, 03:58
My system
Celeron 2.1 ghz
Intel 865 Chipset mobo
512 mb of DDR memory running on 400mhz (stock), 2.5ns latency (single dimm, no dual ddr).
X800 Pro gfx by HIS (running at stock frequencies)
Soundblaster Audigy 1 sound card
Using catalysts 4.7 (with overdrive disabled)
and latest creative drivers for soundcard.
3d Mark 2003 (using the free version) score of 8025 marks.
End result, me > you :P
hehe, this proves how much less inflluential the CPU is in 3dmark03 as opposed to 3dmark01 :rolleyes:
..i..DemonX
01-08-04, 04:08
Ah gonna dl it.
15xx is pretty low or? :P
[TgR]KILLER
01-08-04, 10:37
Ah gonna dl it.
15xx is pretty low or? :P
hmm yea you can say that :p
i remember getting like 8000 on 01.. while everybody with new comps easy got 30000 already.. but those 8000 were on my old comp tho..
can't wait till my new vid gets here :(
MjukisDjur
01-08-04, 11:23
http://dukis.homeip.net/neocron/prec370cata47.jpg
Going to try with Omega drivers also and see what happens... And maybe put in a sound card instead of using the integrated soundmax.
6197 3d marks with the free version.
..i..DemonX
01-08-04, 19:21
Only get 4500 points :( damn i think the new generation of GFX outscore my GF5950U badly :P
(w00t) 1428 im so uber o_O
System:
P4 2.4C @ 3.12 Ghz
ASUS P4C800 Deluxe motherboard
1024mb Corsair XMS Twinx DDR-400 memory
ASUS V9950 GeForce FX5900 (non-Ultra) videocard
3dmark2001: somewhere around 15000
3dmark03: somewhere around 5800
All with default settings
I'm planning on buying a nForce 4 mobo at the end of this year with two GeForce 6800 GT cards @ Ultra in SLI formation... :) 3dmark03 score should be around 20000 I guess... :)
[TgR]KILLER
02-08-04, 00:17
maarten geld teveel ofzo ? :P
like i said.. you got to much cash on your hands ? :p
Only get 4500 points :( damn i think the new generation of GFX outscore my GF5950U badly :P
Aye, outscore, but not outrun.
I have a 5950U also, i only just bought it recently instead of one of the better ones because i knew although they score shows different, in games my gigabyte 5950U would do just as well/ very close on, as my friends powercolor X800pro, bios modded to X800xt, and it does.
My score below. Mah friend gets over 10k with his card....
2003 is a pants benchmark, 2001 is far better.
2003 relies too much on the graphics card & not much else, 2001 does a better test of the whole system.
2003 is a pants benchmark, 2001 is far better.
2003 relies too much on the graphics card & not much else, 2001 does a better test of the whole system.
err you tool, 3dmark is really for testing graphics only, name says it all.
And the first four tests are the ONLY ones that give anything to the "official score".
None of the HHD tests do, nor do any of the latter Gcard tests, only the first 4! :P
aquamark is much better tbh, but i'm downloadin 2003 now, so you can all laugh at my geforce 440mx :p
Dribble Joy
02-08-04, 03:21
The 2nd CPU test crashed my comp.....
The 2nd CPU test crashed my comp.....
your not supposed to use it on a macintosh :p
wtf?
http://service.futuremark.com/compare?2k3=2870585
193 Marks O_o
err you tool, 3dmark is really for testing graphics only, name says it all.
And the first four tests are the ONLY ones that give anything to the "official score".
None of the HHD tests do, nor do any of the latter Gcard tests, only the first 4! :P
No, its supposed to test game performance, my old Pentium 4 1.7 was only 500 points behind my Athlon XP overclocked to 2.5GHz in 2003 because the CPU doesnt mean much there, yet in 3D Mark 2001 the score was nearly doubled by my Athlon.
With 2001 only the 1st 4 tests (7 if u count high & low seperate) go towards ur score, but at least there Front side bus, CPU & RAM actually mean something.
..i..DemonX
02-08-04, 04:13
Aquamark i got around 30000 :P
Any help to get better scores on 3DMark03?
I mean i got a
Athlon 64 3200+
1.5 GB DDR
GF5950 Ultra
Installed newest Drivers and newest DX.
Aye, outscore, but not outrun.
I have a 5950U also, i only just bought it recently instead of one of the better ones because i knew although they score shows different, in games my gigabyte 5950U would do just as well/ very close on, as my friends powercolor X800pro, bios modded to X800xt, and it does.Go ahead and believe that if it makes you happy. O_o
psst stop postin, i dont want people to see my crap score :(
..i..DemonX
02-08-04, 04:27
psst stop postin, i dont want people to see my crap score :(
lol :) i think i score crappy as well for my sytem :wtf:
[TgR]KILLER
03-08-04, 10:48
psst stop postin, i dont want people to see my crap score :(
not even 200 lol.. welll yea.. sorry but.. thats crap :p
even when i push up the ress and put anything on max i still get 800! :p
/me ways for the new vid :(
The results of my test a few months back:
Score: 1985
Date: 2004-03-28
CPU: AMD Athlon(tm) XP/MP/4 1526 MHz
GPU: NVIDIA GeForce FX 5600 54 MHz / 100 MHz
OS: Microsoft Windows 2000
Res: 1024x768@32 bit
Memory 384 MB
and for those who have registered their score they can compare with mine at http://service.futuremark.com/compare?2k3=2292719
[TgR]KILLER
03-08-04, 12:29
The results of my test a few months back:
Score: 1985
Date: 2004-03-28
CPU: AMD Athlon(tm) XP/MP/4 1526 MHz
GPU: NVIDIA GeForce FX 5600 54 MHz / 100 MHz
OS: Microsoft Windows 2000
Res: 1024x768@32 bit
Memory 384 MB
and for those who have registered their score they can compare with mine at http://service.futuremark.com/compare?2k3=2292719
omg @ the clockrate.. totaly sick O.o
my card atm already runs Core: 280 mhz, Memory: 545 mhz. overcloaked but still.. and my new one gonna run like 10 times as fast as yours gary :p pwned :p
KILLER']omg @ the clockrate.. totaly sick O.o
my card atm already runs Core: 280 mhz, Memory: 545 mhz. overcloaked but still.. and my new one gonna run like 10 times as fast as yours gary :p pwned :p
How do i change the Clock rate :o everything on my graphics card has always been at the default settings. I know i need a new mother board before i can run at AGP 8x if that would make it better also.
Gary dude, you got some weird problems there, it looks like your running at AGP * 0 O_o
have you installed the latest motherboard drivers? is your cpu set up correctly, cause 66mhz for an Athlon is well off (should be about 133). Get ur mobo and CPU set up correctly for 4X and 133mhz and ur laughin (and not at my uber score, which is low coz it could only run like 1 test :( )
I've never ever changed any of the settings on the Mobo or Graphics card, so it is probably running at AGP 0 :-\
I've just completly re-formatted my PC so its the best time for me to get it all upto date correctly, will make the changes tonight and re-test to see what happens.
oh and i have no idea what my Motherboard is, will it say this in the Bios?
not the bios as such, when you load up your computer you get a long list of numbers at the very botton of the screen, that lists your bios number and mobo maker.
best bet though is to download sisoft sandra or something like that which will check your system for problems as well as tell you who made your motherboard, what speed your ram is at and stuff.
[TgR]KILLER
03-08-04, 16:06
lol din't even look that far.. but go into your bios with f1 or del.. or whatever it is on your comp.. and set the cpu @ 133 mhz.. so it would actualy work:p
Do you have to pay for BIOS upgrades?
I've just got mine and the official site directs me to a site where it appears i will have to pay to upgrade :-\
I'm in france now, so i can't realy test the 3dmark03 yet.
I did score on 3dmark2001 :
15600 with standard settings on test
Abit NF7-S
Mobile athlon 2500 @2535mhz
512mb ram 8-3-3-2.5
SP-97 cooler
Leadtek 5900XT bios flashed to 5950ultra @487/850 (needs a voltmod)
Athlon XP2500 @ 2205 = 3200
ASUS A7N8X Deluxe v2.0
1 gig TwinMOS TwiSTER PC3200
2 * Maxtor 80gig 7200 SATA drives running RAID 0
Grandmars 9800 non-pro 128meg + Artic VGA cooler @ 414/324 - Cat 4.4
Aquamark: 42044
3d Mark 03: -na-
These are a few months old and I never 3dm'd my final build but it was high.
This setup will have to do me till the Q4 release of nForce 4 socket 939 boards, then I shall build the beast :lol:
Cpu amd 2400+ at 2.0 (as soon as i unlock this.......)
Ram 512ddr running at 266 instead of 333
vid card radeon 9600np 351/245
sound card audigy value
hd 120 gig 8 meg catch seagate
ran it all in the demo and got 3026 on 3d marks 03. i use omega drivers and the card is over clocked slightly becosue it dousent seem to overclock well at all. i would through a new heatsink on but im buying a 5900fx to bios flash tonight :D. if anyone has any advice on that feek free to share with me plz.
http://service.futuremark.com/compare?2k3=2762165
And the guys x800 Pro with Celeron score shows that 3dmark does actually have some CPU limitation, as most x800 Pros would get over 10k ;)
Hey el m, you still playing neocron? :eek:
Do you have to pay for BIOS upgrades?
I've just got mine and the official site directs me to a site where it appears i will have to pay to upgrade :-\
usually not, if your system is really old though you may have trouble finding an up to date bios. really you want the motherboard ones though, like Via Hyperion (if ur board is via that is)
..i..DemonX
04-08-04, 04:19
Uh i think i score crappy on 3DMark but hey i play DOOM3 on 1280*1024*32 with Higest details and 16* Antialising realy good.
So i dont mind my 3mark score!
P.S.: Omg sorry for spelling ... im drunk!
i didn't score too well. what is it, 5099? i need a new graphics board methinks. and i regret not purchasing an athlon fx-52 cpu or whatever it is.
check out my comp stats at
http://tkershaw.netfirms.com/SI.xml
ahh here we go, my 3dmark 2001 was 18151.
MjukisDjur
04-08-04, 09:37
El Muerko, that was a very nice aquamark score.
What was the GFX/CPU results?
http://service.futuremark.com/compare?2k3=2762165
And the guys x800 Pro with Celeron score shows that 3dmark does actually have some CPU limitation, as most x800 Pros would get over 10k ;)
Hey el m, you still playing neocron? :eek:
I still pay for an account but I dont actually play, just bitch and whine on the forums.
El Muerko, that was a very nice aquamark score.
What was the GFX/CPU results?
I couldnt tell you off the top of my head, the benchmark was done about 3 months ago and the score stuck in my sig, I wont be near my computer again till the end of the month, then I'll update to the latest Omega drivers and run some benchmarks again and let you know :)
MjukisDjur
04-08-04, 11:29
With the Omega drivers installed:
2001 SE 18394
2003 10509
Aquamark 37916
The difference was very small between omega and Catalyst. Had hoped for more.
/me wants real drivers until doom is released here in Sweden. ATI FIX IT NOW
[TgR]KILLER
04-08-04, 11:39
/me wants real drivers until doom is released here in Sweden. ATI FIX IT NOW
and thats the reason i always bought nvid realy.. heard so much trouble with ati and drivers lol..
No, its supposed to test game performance, my old Pentium 4 1.7 was only 500 points behind my Athlon XP overclocked to 2.5GHz in 2003 because the CPU doesnt mean much there, yet in 3D Mark 2001 the score was nearly doubled by my Athlon.
With 2001 only the 1st 4 tests (7 if u count high & low seperate) go towards ur score, but at least there Front side bus, CPU & RAM actually mean something.
You just contridicted yourself. Of coaurse your CPU isnt going to make a difference, try both CPU's on software renderer, and see how they run..
As i said it tests graphic performance! you say "game performance", but to test that properly you need to be running an engine, which 3dmark03 DOESNT do!
Its a RENDERING, not a game, if you think its a game try looking any of them up.... there is a game called "wings of fury" but it isnt the one in the test!
If you want to test your whole PC get PCMark04 and use that.
http://service.futuremark.com/compare?2k3=2762165
And the guys x800 Pro with Celeron score shows that 3dmark does actually have some CPU limitation, as most x800 Pros would get over 10k ;)
Thats because your graphics card can be bottlenecked by your CPU.
Just like your CPu can be bottlenecked by your HHD's.
It has nothing to do with how much CPU 3dmark is using to help keep that render running.
With the Omega drivers installed:
2001 SE 18394
2003 10509
Aquamark 37916
The difference was very small between omega and Catalyst. Had hoped for more.
/me wants real drivers until doom is released here in Sweden. ATI FIX IT NOW The Omega drivers do boost performance a bit but their main use is easier overclocking and greater power over settings for the user.
Take my card for example, a standard 9800 OC'd to 2mhz beyond XT clock speeds and it could go higher but I had no need :D
KILLER']and thats the reason i always bought nvid realy.. heard so much trouble with ati and drivers lol.. I havent had driver trouble since the release of the 9700 besides neocrons problems which were fixed by KK.
The latest battle in the ATI -v- Nvidia war is Doom 3 and its impressive performance by nvidia but since nvidia specificlly designed the 6800 series to work well with D3 thats not very suprising.
i feel the need to buy a geforce 6800 GT now. 400 bucks woot.
which brand's the best?
tho i'm sorta afraid..i read comments about driver issues with mobo's, etc...
[TgR]KILLER
04-08-04, 18:32
tk when my 6800 gt gets here i'll info you ;)
AMD Athlon XP2500+
Jetway NPAP-Ultra Nforce2 Chipset
512MB DDR400
Sapphire X800Pro ViVo @ 475/450
Maxtor 80GB 2MB Cache HD
SoundBlaster Audigy
KILLER']tk when my 6800 gt gets here i'll info you ;)sux to be you...i'm getting mine after werk at best buy! supposedly, it's still in stock, so ima grab me one ASAP!!
Thats because your graphics card can be bottlenecked by your CPU.
Just like your CPu can be bottlenecked by your HHD's.
It has nothing to do with how much CPU 3dmark is using to help keep that render running.
Thats what CPU limited means ... it cannot keep up with another component. In 3d mark 03 GT1 is a balanced test between CPU and GPU as it is not shader intensive and is therefore much easier on the GPU causing it more likely to be limited by the amount of data the CPU can push.
GT 2 3 and 4 however make rather extensive use of Pixel Shaders and Vertex Shaders which are purely graphics card intensive, so only when these cards are able to pull the same 300fps as we are seeing in GT1 now are we likely to see those tests become CPU limited.
GT 1 = Balanced
GT 2 3 and 4 = Shader Limited
However GT1 makes up alot less of the final score then any of the other 3 as it is a simpler test, GT4 making up the most.
tbh i'm thinking about getting the 6800 ultra now. 500 USD, here i come! i've read a few reviews about how the GT is "upper middle class", but i prefer to have something that'll own up teh games for the next 2 yrs instead of one year. i'm already falling behind on this athlon 64 ;/
that'll definately get my farkin 3dmark 03 score WAY UP THERE!
sanityislost
10-08-04, 05:31
better than me lol i got 79 :/
SiL ..:..
Jesterthegreat
10-08-04, 05:35
aren't the newer GeForce cards made to have a high score in this, regardless of actuall performance?
i got a FX5900 XT and i got that score.. just put in a new AMD XP3200+ cpu today too.. hrmm
i score slightly better than you with my 9700 pro, kayne D: athlon 64 3200+ cpu tho. i will be expecting my 6800ultra on wednesday...can't wait to own it up in the marks.
sry for taking so long to get back to you guys, but i finally got my 6800 ultra. my score more than doubled the 9700 Pro. funny thing is, neocron maxes at about 71 fps..and it's not always constant ;/ why would it be so bassackwards? :( my 9700 Pro would get 250 in some areas and rarely below 60 unless it was gravis uplink or some large opwar.
anyway, here's the pic:
http://tkershaw.netfirms.com/3dmark_6800ultra.JPG
btw, doom3 freaking rocks. i got it on the ultra setting...barely any hickups. if only i knew how to view the fps measurements. D:
killer did your card get here yet lol. its been weeks! Mine took 3 days o_O
Promethius
15-08-04, 03:28
I've takn this and got 537X
athlon 3200+
1 gig ram (3200)
Geforce FX 5900SE
-Prom
I still prefer 3dmark2001 as a more accurate picture for the moment.
As someone correctly stated earlier, tests 2/3/4 on '03 are pretty much gpu hardware based (shaders etc) - and not overall system performance 'game wise' for todays market.
It's why there's such a huge jump on scores when changing from 9800xt's to x800 pro's etc - whereas 'in game performance' for the most part on the current range of games available wont be that noticeable.
A good illustration is a friend recently bought a 6800gt and o/c straight to an ultra. He was on a heavily overclocked 9800xt.
His 3dmark2001 score improved slightly (3 gig cpu) due to overall speed, but his 3dmark2003 score jumped several thousand marks.
Quite strange really - as he gets around 5-6000 more 3dmark '03 points, but farcry still gets very similar fps on my 4.5 gig rig with an overclocked 9800xt.
Moral of the story?
3dmark2003 is a poor benchmarking tool for gaming performance, 2001 is better for raw performance checking - whereas really for general performance testing - sisoft sandra, prime95 and aquamark are still the most reliable.
did aquamark:
Run0: DisplayWidth: 1024 DisplayHeight: 768 DisplayDepth: 32 AntialiasingMode: 0 AntialiasingQuality: 0 AnisotropicFiltering: 4 DetailLevel: 4 AvgFPS: 62.663971 MinFPS: 29.527481 MaxFPS: 134.000000 AvgFPSRender: 95.405327 AvgFPSSimulation: 182.592163 AvgTrianglesPerSecond: 18863870 MinTrianglesPerSecond: 2997568 MaxTrianglesPerSecond: 44878896 AquamarkScoreRender: 9540 AquamarkScoreSimulation: 9130 AquamarkScore: 62663
is that good? D:
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.3 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.