_/N$@N!TY_
2003-02-11T14:51:29Z
Do I really need to explain????
SOLIDSNAKE
2003-02-11T21:57:39Z
im still waiting to download arrgg
FiYoG
2003-02-11T22:06:11Z
ERRRRRRRRRRR! :mad: I now hate FileShack! I just waited 2 hours to start the frickin' download, and it gets to 400 KB and the download stops and thinks it's done. WTF is up with that! I'm going to try somewhere else now...

BTW, /N$@N!TY, check your PM...
clee
  •  clee
  • 50.25% (Neutral)
  • Member
2003-02-12T01:43:59Z
I have far more important stuffs to do with my PCs than running benchmarks, nevertheless I love the benchmark numbers

I've spent the past 5 hrs to tweak 2 rigs ( 1 with 9700Pro, the other with Ti4400 ) for this benchie and IMHO Winmark2003 is ..........ssssssssspooky.
- I ran it at 3.4 gHz, 3.2 Ghz, 3.Ghz, and the difference in score is neglectigble, ====> theis benchmark is pretty much independant of CPU speed
- I ran the 9700 Pro at stock speed vs highest OC it can attain w/o failing the test ====> over 850 points, this benchmark relies heavily on GPU clock
- despite similar CPU clocks bwtewn my 2 rigs I used, same mobo, same ram, the GF4 scores "LESS THAN HALF" of the 9700Pro ==> based on the infos I got from others, nVidia uses older pixel shader, a "HUGH" disadvantage
- with the 9700 Pro, the game "Troll's Liar" dips down to as low as 2 fps ====> I don't believe any games in the near future ( including Doom 3 ) will be that demanding
- well I'm done with it and IMO the graphic isn't mind boggling at all

okay, I'll bite first in this thread:

http://service.futuremark.com/compare?2k3=29740 
etsd311
2003-02-12T05:53:25Z
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

my comp is so cool...it could only run the first demo.


http://service.futuremark.com/compare?2k3=37750 
SOLIDSNAKE
2003-02-12T07:21:52Z
Well this score just sucks although I couldnt run all tests because I don't have the pro

Hua Luo Han
2003-02-12T10:13:57Z
everything max-out

clee
  •  clee
  • 50.25% (Neutral)
  • Member
2003-02-12T14:08:23Z
LoL. IMHO, it's the very first demo that actually means something in this goofy benchmark.

I wasted 7.5 friggin' hrs last night on tweaking this damn thing & I even missed my dinner ( hehe, I'm so glad that I'm away from my family at the moment and taste the freedom on my own ).
I'm disappointed not by the numbers( actually my score is among the top 30 or so at ORB last time I checked ), but the way how the individual tests are being conducted. The textures aren't that eye appealing and no matter how good the 9700Pro is,
an old Willy 1.8 ( with 9700P ) beating out a Northy 3.5 ( with Ti4600 ) is a joke. 2 fps in 1 of the demos is nonsense. It still dazzles me why the heck they assemble 3 tests just for the sound.
I swear that my Ti4400 ( a little bit @ over 4600 speed) is jst as fast as the 9700P in "real life" games when AA/AF is not used but it crumbles in 3DMK3 cuz the vertex shader issue keeps it from runnin' the Nature and V. Shader tests.

btw. Can someone tell me how good the graphic in demo run is ( not the benchmark run),I forgot to run it . I deleted the software and all the tweaks off my rigs b 4 I went to bed & don't feel like re-installing it again .
pcthuglife
2003-02-12T14:20:25Z
1428!!!!! man im smooth.... the second test and the nature tests were freakin sexy!!! If doom3 looks anywhere near as good as the second test then life is good
clee
  •  clee
  • 50.25% (Neutral)
  • Member
2003-02-12T17:55:28Z


If Doom III looks anywhere near as good as the ATI demos, life is good. At least the ATI demos dropped my jaw, that 2nd test didn't. ----> my opinion only.


Han: If you use Catalyst 3.1, your score should be in the 2k range even with AA/AF, well, for whatever the score's worth.
Hua Luo Han
2003-02-12T20:17:41Z


Thought I scale down the resolution and see what I can score with everything at stock. (2.8GHz & 9700pro).

Dante
2003-02-12T23:46:09Z
Quote:

Originally posted by clee2000
LoL. IMHO, it's the very first demo that actually means something in this goofy benchmark.



Well, I just downloaded and ran this sucker...

Goofy benchmark is right! I got a 1,666 in this thing :mad: ! How do you go from 14,000 in the previous to 1,666?!?!

Whatever, I'm not really upset . I just think it's funny that on the second and third tets I was doing like 10-20 fps. What kind of game is going to be that demanding? I have loaded up pretty much every PC game out right now on my Ti4600, maxed out all the settings, and have ran everything perfectly. So while the benchmark might say my card sucks, real life gaming proves that I don't even really need to upgrade anytime soon (maybe nVidia had some valid points in their complaints).

Anyhow, I am pretty dissapointed with this version. Like clee2000, I was expecting some jaw-dropping demos. I think the previous version was far more enjoyable to sit through. This one was pretty bland. The flight sim was decent, but they use it way too much. Other than that I liked the trolls committing suicide... that was cool. The other stuff was unimpressive.
FiYoG
2003-02-13T00:34:05Z
errrr, I still can't get it. :mad:
clee
  •  clee
  • 50.25% (Neutral)
  • Member
2003-02-13T01:03:18Z
Quote:

Originally posted by Dante
....... I just think it's funny that on the second and third tets I was doing like 10-20 fps. ......



hehe, that's the average FPS m8. It's the "lowest" fps that bothers me. In my case it's 2 fps on a OC 9700P sitting in a highly overclocked 3+ GHz box.

But don't worry 'bout it, your GF4 will last 4 a while unless IQ candy is important to U.

check this out:

http://www.overclockers.com/tips00286/ 

quote from Ed.
" If your system was perfectly good until you ran the benchmark, don't toss the system. Toss the benchmark. "

and that's exactly what I did.
g. nite
FiYoG
2003-02-14T20:10:34Z
Anyone read the Overclockers.com article titled "The Delusion of A Single Number"? I like the closing remark "The more puppets there are, the more powerful the puppeteer" Are you a puppet?