PDA

View Full Version : 3Dmark2000 v1.1



Lucas Zanatta
28th December 2000, 11:39
My score for the default benchmark test was a 2652. I was wondering if that was a good score for my system?

My system is:
Athlon TB 800
Matrox Millennium G400 32meg Ram
256 PC133 SDRAM
CD-RW 8*4*32
Sound Blasters Live

running at:
1024*768, 16bit color, 16bit textures
16bit z-buffer, triple frame buffer
Have all the latest drivers

I have nothing over-clocked, 2652 seems like a low score from what I hear. Or is it a good score for my system? and if not what can I do to improve my score?

Oh and my MotherBoard is an Asus A7v
and I got my g400 running at agp 4x

Lucas

Electric Amish
28th December 2000, 12:30
Nope. That is about the right score as long as you aren't using a G400MAX.

What OS are you using??

amish

Greebe
28th December 2000, 12:36
Please post in a single forum instead of cross posting in multiple.

Lucas Zanatta
28th December 2000, 19:24
I am using win98 SE

aaroncgi
28th December 2000, 22:50
Sounds like a good score to me. I get 2485 or so in the default benchmark.

I'm also not overclocking, have a G400 32M DH, Athlon 650 on a KX133 board. I can really up that score (to 2800 or so) if I use MGA Tweak to overclock my G400 to 150 core, 200 memory. I don't have the cooling to support that overclock long term however, nor do I seem to need it in games, but it's there if I ever do.. http://forums.murc.ws/ubb/smile.gif

Cheers,

Aaron

Toecutter
29th December 2000, 02:23
Dis any good?
http://www.dreamwater.org/toes/3D2K.jpg

Dunno...I need to refresh the page after clickin` on it for it to pull up...friggin` free servers...
http://www.madonion.com/compare.shtml?1010819

[This message has been edited by Toecutter (edited 29 December 2000).]

Ant
29th December 2000, 02:32
As this is a common question, ie "does my 3Dmark score look right" I think it's about time we got our own performance chart on the site. What we should do is decide on a set of test conditions for example if we take 1024x768 @ 32-bit etc. People can then mail them over to me and I'll draw up a performance graph.

Borg
29th December 2000, 02:54
good score..!
I get around 3100 but havy OCed
(PIII650 @864,G400 @ MAX settings FSB133 dont use this for LONG TIME palying UNSTABLE)

light OCed inrange 2800-2900

normaly @ the same range as you on MILL-G40032SGRAM PIII650 ASUSP3BF 128mb

default Mark settings

Barbarella
29th December 2000, 06:40
hi all,

first merry Chrismas (i know I'm late, but doesn't the matter http://forums.murc.ws/ubb/smile.gif )

Don't forget the "16 Mo BOARDS !!! (G200/g400)" a 1024 at 32 bits is fine for 32 Mo.

So i suggest 800*600 at 32 Bits and 1024 at 32 bits

Seaspray
29th December 2000, 07:54
Sounds like a good idea to me. For your info I have the following (approx) scores with various processors I have had over the last year and a G400 MAX. Default benchmark settings (1024x768x16) with no overclocking:-

p3500 ~2500
p3667 ~3000
TB1G ~3400

Hopefully this will give others some idea of the scores they ought to get with different processors.

Incidentally the Intel processors seem to score better than AMD in 3DMark. I think its because the program makes better use of SSE than 3DNow, but I could be wrong!

In 32 bit colour the difference between the scores with the faster processors was much less

p3500 ~2150
p3667 ~2350
TB1G ~2500

Does anyone know why this is?

Thanks!

Venturer
29th December 2000, 09:49
I get 3189 with G400MAX on ATHLON 1000 (not TB)!
How can i reach 3400? I don't think that the difference between classic ATHLON and Tbird at the same speed is 200 points, but more less!

My system:
ATHLON 1ghz (Magnolia core 512KB L2 1/3 core speed)
ABIT KA7-100 (TY BIOS)
256MB PC 133 KINGMAX SDRAM Tiny BGA
Matrox G400MAX (deafult clock)

My system isn t overclocked!

Greebe
29th December 2000, 10:11
Ant, my Athlon 500@850 (1:3 cache latency) G400Max scores ~3200... OC'd 3335

Electric Amish
29th December 2000, 10:31
Ant- Might I suggest that the default bench be one of the stipulations, since not everyone out there has purchased it.

Also, full descriptions of systems, drivers, bios', and misc tweaks made...

amish

pepe
29th December 2000, 11:36
PIII650@820
G400max
tweakted with mga
Pll:428,gclk:171.45mclk:214.31
dividers:2.50;2.00;2.50
sgram optomization:
3;2;3;9;4;1;fast;1;1;1;1.0;1.0;2433
default test 3Dmark:higest 3629 marks
Mobo Abit be6-II
256MB pc133 ram
trying to run mem at 216/pll at 432
placed bigger koeler;heatsink;ram heatsinks
temp between 29c and 32C

SteveC
29th December 2000, 14:44
Operating system is very important too here!!!

------------------
Cheers,
Steve

"Life is what we make of it, yet most of us just fake"

Lucas Zanatta
29th December 2000, 15:00
I downloaded the Matrox Tweak Utility v1.2 and it doesn't work with the december 22nd drivers. Does any body know what I can do to get it to work with my G400?

pepe
29th December 2000, 15:08
Driver version the latest non certifite 6.21.037
Bios latest 1.9-3.3
operating system w98 first edition.
Yust played collin mcrea on 32 bit in 1280X1024 resolution.Everyting high.
No problem at all. mem on 216.
(unbelieveble,verry nice)

Seaspray
29th December 2000, 16:36
To Venturer: My actual score with a TBird 1000 (first try) no overclocking or tweaking was 3,371. I don't know why the classic Athlon would score less, but I expect it has something to do with 3DMark being set up to take advantage of the newer processors.

I would agree with the default bench being the one to use since everyone ought to be able to run it.

With tweaking and oclocking with MGA tweak I got my old P3667 from just under 3000 to just over 3100 so I expect if I tried the same with the TB1000 I could get >3500.

Sorry to say I won't be trying since someone bought me a Hercules 3D Prophet (GF2 MX twin view) for Chrimbo and that scores ~ 5000 on default with the TBird and I think a lot more is possible with a bit of overclocking.

Incidentally I still have the G400MAX and an old (OEM) G200 so if anyone is interested let me know, I would like to see either of them go to a good home. The Prophet will go in the bin just as soon as the G800 (or whatever its called) is in the shops. (the DVD playback is pants compared to the G400).

Take care, everyone.

Seaspray
29th December 2000, 16:43
PS The rest of the system is as follows:-

Memory 128Mb Crucial ~7E PC133@CAS2
Hard disc Diamond Max 20Gb UDMA66 7,200rpm 2Mb cache
Pioneer 6x DVD
SB Live 1024
OS WinMe (previously Win 98v1)

I don't think any of that makes any difference with 3DMark except maybe the memory, but if anyone else has any different experiences I would be interested to know.

Thanks again.

Jon

Venturer
30th December 2000, 02:35
Seaspray what motherboard do you have?
My G400MAX is running at 2x AGP speed because at 4x the system is very unstable!
Perhaps the differece is made by your G400 AGP trasfer speed!
Is it 4x?

THX! http://forums.murc.ws/ubb/smile.gif

diuby
31st December 2000, 05:21
Duron 700 not overclocked RAM 128Mb RAM PC133
G400Max not overclocked
Win98 DirectX7a pd6.01 AGP2x

3dMark: 2966
(default bench 1024x768 16bit)

diuby
31st December 2000, 05:25
With latest pd6.21 my system was unstable both Agp4x and 2x and frame during 3dmark200 test was slow too!!!

Michel
31st December 2000, 10:26
P3 1 Ghz 512MB 133mhz Abit Sa6r(i815e) G400MAX WinME DirectX 8 pd6.21

default 3dmark test (1024x768x16):3460 3dmarks.

[This message has been edited by Michel (edited 31 December 2000).]

Bohrn
31st December 2000, 13:08
I get 2903 with 1024x768x16x16, triple buffer
Intel opts.


------------------
AsusP3B-F,P3 880 Slot1, 256mgsPC133,G40032megSH, Diamond MX300,13.5gigs of HD's,52X CDrom,WinME, PD 5.41 w/ 6.10ICD,Altec Lansing ATP3Subwoofer,
Envision 17",Terrayon Cable modem w/D-Link nic,1 grey cat,1 black cat & 1 calico

Tesko9
31st December 2000, 16:20
I just scored 3330 on default...

My System...
P3-700 @ 784 MHz
112 FSB on ASUS P2B-D
256 PC-133 RAM
G400 Max running Stock
2 Maxtor 30 Gig 7200 on Promise Fasttrak 100 Raid
SB Live
Etc...

Tesko9
31st December 2000, 16:21
Oh Ya....

Windows ME
DirectX 8
6.21 Drivers

Liquid Snake
31st December 2000, 16:50
My system:
P3-750@825
256MB of Micron PC133 at 2-2-2
Abit BE6-II (110 FSB)
G400 MAX (no OC) 5.31
SBLive! Platinum 5.1 (Live!Ware is installed)
Win2K SP1
DirectX 8

Default bench gets me 3266.

Now, my friend's system seems slow:
ThunderBird 1GHz (no OC)
256MB of Micron PC133 at 2-2-2 (Memory speed is 133MHz)
Asus A7V (100Mhz FSB)
G400 MAX (no OC) 5.31
SBLive! Value (no Live!Ware, only drivers)
Win2K SP1
DirectX 8

Default bench gets him 2866.

Our systems are similar, except for the CPU and mobo. From some of the scores posted here, he should be getting a higher score. Any optimisation tips? He's peeved that my "slower" machine is much faster (and stabler) than his. Or is it just that 3DMark takes more advantage of SSE than 3DNow!?

[This message has been edited by Liquid Snake (edited 01 January 2001).]

Seaspray
31st December 2000, 17:55
To Venturer: My current motherboaord is a Gigabyte GA7ZX (VIA KT133). My G400MAX ran at AGP4x but I only used it for 3DMark testing before I installed my new graphics card.

Prior to that I was running a Tyan Trinity 400 (VIA Apollo 133A). Setting to AGP 4x was one of the 'tweaks' I used to increase my 3DMark score (amongst others) that got me from ~2900 to ~3100. However, I found that in general use 4x wasn't 100% stable so I switched back to 2x. Maybe if your MAX only runs stable at 2x that explains your low(er) score? Could be. If you have a motherboard with a VIA chipset, try installing the latest VIA AGP driver, maybe that will help.

Good luck

Jon

Seaspray
31st December 2000, 18:01
To Liquid Snake:
I agree that your friend's system seems 'slow' compared to yours, and that this is probabaly because 3DMark works better with Intel processors than with AMD. However, the reason for his 'low' score compared to mine is probably because he is runnign win2k when I am running Me.

As far as I know, 3DMark runs MUCH better with Me (or any 9x windows) than with 2k (or NT, if it runs at all with NT).

From what I have seen, I would say ~2900 is a v good score with 2k.

Thanks.

dZeus
31st December 2000, 21:17
I've played with AGP 1x and 2x settings and 3DMark2000 v1.1:

WIth my G400 vanilla in Win2k (PD5.31) those modes don't make a single difference in real world performance, and only the AGP texture tests in 3dmark benefit a few percentages... the total score is exactly the same in agp 1x as in agp 2x mode:
about 2773 when I don't overclock my P3-700
overclocked at 933 it does 3000

I think PD5.20 or 5.14 was faster, so I'll check soon, and will benchmark all the g400 win2k drivers startiing today http://forums.murc.ws/ubb/smile.gif

dZeus
1st January 2001, 13:40
Ok, I've put up a first impression on my website http://dzeus.student.utwente.nl/g400
look in the menu for benchmarking

Yet there is not much on it, but the coming days I will test some of the older driver releases (at least 5.14 and 5.20). Of course this is only valid for relative driver performance on a fixed machine in Win2k, so for real good graphs other users should also test with different OS platforms, CPU speeds and driver versions, and as Ant says we can collect those results somewhere here on murc.

First of all we should have a fixed testing methodogy, trying to minimalize the effect of difference in benchmark settings of the different users. Can anyone comment on the benchmarking methodogy I've used?

SCompRacer
1st January 2001, 20:46
My just finished Athlon T'bird with no tweaks gets 2,781 with the default benchmark, 2,145 in 32 bit.

Ant's idea is pretty good. Be nice to see something on this site for one stop shopping. Some tweak ideas needed here for the new territory I am in.

------------------
ABIT KT7 non-RAID * 900MHz Athlon T'bird * 128MB Micron PC/133 RAM * Two Cheetah LVD's * Barracuda UW * DiamondMAX IDE * Plextor Ultraplex 40max/Plexwriter 12/4/32 * Hitachi IDE DVD * 2940U2W * SB Live * 3Com 905B-TX NIC * 3Com Courier V. Ext. * Hollywood + * Win 98SE, Win 2000 *

diuby
2nd January 2001, 13:11
Now with G400MAx 155/207Mhz + SGRam optimization Duron 700 not OV PC133MHZ with min latency allowed by bios:
default bench:
3dmark 3131
CPU 195
Win98 - DirectX7a - pd 6.01

I think it is pretty good for a low-end system STABLE with a little optimization.

Barmaleus
3rd January 2001, 01:48
Well... with my PIII450@495 i got 2570 3DMarks... now @558 i get some 2757 3Dmarks...all this with 3DMark2000 v1.1... the other specs are in my sig...

Radu

------------------
My system:
PIII 450@558
Abit BE6
128 Mb Hitachi PC100 RAM
OEM G400SH 16MB@160/180
(MGA Tweak Sys clk 360/2.25/2/2.25)
IBM 10 Gigger
SB Live! value
Hyundai 17" monitor

Oh yeah, PD6.10+TGL1.30+DX7.0A, all this on WIN98SE...

hoppergrass
10th January 2001, 20:01
Hey Lucas,
That's about right on the 3D Score. I was getting a 2750 Score with my Duron @ 900Mhz with G400 non o/c. I put a small 486 fan on the Heatsink and o/c my G400 to 150core/188mem with MGA Tweak and the PD6.10 drivers (6.21v sucks too bad) and I get a 3DMark Score of 3114 using the default test and DX8 using Win98 SE.

Epox 8KTA+ Mobo
Duron 650 @ 900Mhz (100x9.0) @ 1.825v
128MB Memory PC100 CAS2 @ PC133 CAS3 Interleave2
Mini Chrome Orb H/S & Fan
Matrox Millenium G400 32MB AGP S/H @ 150core 188mem with Fan
Acer 50X CD-ROM
Maxtor DiamondMax Plus 40 15.3GB 7,200rpm Hard Drive
Sound Blaster Live Gamer Sound Card
NetGear FA310TX NIC
U.S. Robotics 5690 56K Mod

[This message has been edited by hoppergrass (edited 11 January 2001).]

[This message has been edited by hoppergrass (edited 11 January 2001).]

Lucas Zanatta
11th January 2001, 01:00
Thanks, that helps alot. I was wondering what kind of score I should be getting.

nady
11th January 2001, 05:20
My hardware config:
ABIT KT7/Raid Bios WZ01
AMD TB 900 Mhz
Matrox G400 DH32Mb
256 Mb Memory
Directx7

My results under Windows 98se measured
Driver
Powerdesk
(6.21) 2670
(6.10) 3076

Ask to all of them these also use the new driver 6.21, is this really slower than the driver 6.10

Ask for help

drzaius
11th January 2001, 18:19
i've got a couple expect most of them the G400 is o/ced. 3dmark 2000 ver. 1.1 1024x786x16 system is Abit ZM6, and 128meg cas2, and win98se, and display drivers 6.21 (unless otherwise specified).

celeron 366@550 (5.5x100) G400 160 180 Directx 7.0a PD 6.04 score: 1881

celeron 566@707 (8.5x83) G400 160 180 directx 7.0a, score: 2600

celeron 566@707 (8.5x83) G400 150 200 directx 7.0a, score: 2687

celeron 566@707 (8.5x83) G400 126 166 directx 7.0a, score: 2688

celeron 566@707 (8.5x83) G400 170 190 directx 7.0a, score: 2900

celeron 566@707 (8.5x83) G400 150 200 directx 8.0, score: 2993

celeron 566@707 (8.5x83) G400 170 190 directx 8.0, score: 3004

celeron 566@850 (8.5x100) G400 126 166 directx 7.0a, score: 2757

celeron 566@850 (8.5x100) G400 160 180 directx 7.0a, score: 2961

celeron 566@850 (8.5x100) G400 160 180 directx 8.0, score: 2995

celeron 566@850 (8.5x100) G400 170 190 directx 8.0, score: 3240

celeron 566@850 (8.5x100) G400 170 190 directx 8.0, 3dmark 32-bit score: 2550

i haven't done any scores with my CPU @566, as you can see, but if you needed them i could get them done.

------------------
Slow people as easy to pass, it's people who drive fast that are hard.

[This message has been edited by drzaius (edited 12 January 2001).]

Kruzin
11th January 2001, 19:05
WooHoo!
Ant set up a forum JUST for benchmark threads.

Guess where you can now find this thread http://forums.murc.ws/ubb/wink.gif

Himself
11th January 2001, 22:31
I'd like to see a chart showing any speed increases in benchmarks in general due to driver updates. This would give people an idea how Matrox updates their drivers when it comes to tweaking for speed.

Overclocking the video card when you have a somewhat fast cpu gives quite a boost in 3dmark scores, so video card clock rates should be listed with any scores as well as the cpus.


[This message has been edited by Himself (edited 26 January 2001).]

DosFreak
12th January 2001, 02:53
MidTower Case w/ 300W PSU (Ordering New Case/PSU very soon)
2XP3-700E@868 124Mhz bus X 7 1/4
Abit VP6
4X128m=512M PC-150 Mushkin Rev3 @HCLK+PCICLK
Hercules 3D Prophet 2 GTS 64M 220C/360M Bios v3.15.00.12
PCI2/SoundBlaster Live! X-Gamer (Going to be 5.1)
PCI3/Hauppauge WinTV Theatre
PCI4/Creative Dxr3 Decoder (Going to be a H+)
PCI5/NetGear FA310TX
SM/Pioneer 16X Slot DVD-105F
SS/Ricoh MP7040A@7060A CDRW (Soon to be Plextor 12/10/32A)
Floppy 3.5"
PM/Maxtor 27.2G DMA/66 92732U8 (Going to be 1X40g & 2X75G Soon. Thinking about SCSI)
Windows 2000 Professional
Nvidia 7.17 Drivers
Directx 8
Via 4.27 AGP & INF (NO BUSMASTER!!!)

3DMARK 2000 v1.1

1024X768 32bc 32bt 24bz Triple Frame Buffer

HARDWARE T&L/P3/SOFTWARE T&L

3DMARKS=5100/4330/2946

HELICOPTER
Low =101.5/79.7/50.0
Med = 74.2/56.9/33.8
High= 40.0/31.9/20.4

Adventure
Low =105.6/100.8/79.0
Med = 63.8/ 56.8/40.0
High= 39.7/ 34.8/22.3

DuRaNgO
12th January 2001, 06:50
kinda crummy software t&l score isn't it? http://forums.murc.ws/ubb/smile.gif

DosFreak
12th January 2001, 06:55
Nvidia 7.xx drivers are extremely beta. I was getting ALOT better software T&L scores with 6.34 drivers but FAR worse hardware T&L.

DuRaNgO
12th January 2001, 07:41
still good overall scores though http://forums.murc.ws/ubb/wink.gif

SCompRacer
13th January 2001, 22:58
After making adjustments in BIOS and no overclocking of CPU or G400MAX, I get 3,219 now in the default benchmark.

This is with Direct X 7 and the 5.41 drivers on my IDE games drive. My SCSI drive had the 5.52 drivers with Direct X 8, and best there in default benchmark was 3,025.

ABIT KT7 non-RAID * 900MHz Athlon T'bird * 128MB Micron PC/133 RAM * Two Cheetah LVD's * Barracuda UW * DiamondMAX IDE * Plextor Ultraplex 40max/Plexwriter 12/4/32 * Hitachi IDE DVD * 2940U2W * SB Live * 3Com 905B-TX NIC * 3Com Courier V. Ext. * Hollywood + * Win 98SE, Win 2000 *


[This message has been edited by SCompRacer (edited 14 January 2001).]

Electric Amish
15th January 2001, 07:36
I get 2909 marks on the default bench.

System:
Athlon classic 700 @ 884 (105FSB x 8.5) 1/3 cache.
Alpha P7125 HS w/ 2 sunon 60mm fans
Abit KA7 mb w/ TY bios all RAM tweaks in BIOS
Mushkin PC133 SDRAM 256mb
Maxtor Diamondmax 40+ 7200rpm HD
AOpen 52x CD-ROM
Matrox G400 32mb SH, 6.21 drivers no OC
Aureal SQ2500 sound
Ovislink 10/100 NIC
Lucent Winmodem
Win98SE
Directx 8

amish

The_Wrench
16th January 2001, 03:48
I downloaded 3Dmark2000 yesterday and did a quick benchmark...
I've got a C566@850 and a G400 32mb(not max).
I wanted to see what actual difference overclocking the G400 actually makes using the new MTU 4.11.
I ran it once at 100%, 115% and then at 118%.

Here's what happened...

100% ---> 2841
115% ---> 3168
118% ---> *Crashed before it gave a value*

(I've fixed an old K6-300 CPU fan to the heatsink of the G400!)

Barbarella
18th January 2001, 09:19
hi all,

pIII 700@933 P3B-F Win98 latest drivers. G400 16 Mo MTU 4.1 SDRAM hyundai PC133 222

116% = 3479 (i usually play with 116)
120% = 3590 (no crash, but i'm not sure i could play Q3 10 hours with that setting http://forums.murc.ws/ubb/wink.gif )

It's time to buy a new GC. A 4% more on my G400 give me a 3.2% in the benchmark !

Topha
20th January 2001, 08:04
Hi

Athlon 750, 128 PC100 RAM, G400Max, Windows ME, ~3100 (+/- 30 points) in default benchmark, no overclocking

roadie
25th January 2001, 08:02
hi
i have the best score up to 660mhz. with my athlon classic 660 and g400max @165/220 my score is 3170. i have noticed that this beats alot of people with much higher processor speeds ie athlon 1000mhz. surely these people should be getting around 4000 points

------------------
-------------------------
athlon classic 666
asus k7m @111fsb
128mb pc100 cas 222
g400max @ 165/220
win98se
pdesk 6.21

Himself
26th January 2001, 11:42
I should be getting a new video card in next week, so for the sake of keeping track this is probably the best I'll see out of my V3 2000. Texture scores omitted because they vary from mode to mode, see other threads if you want them.


<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" size="2">
TEMPLATE
Display:
Type: Internal
Width: 1024
Height: 768
Depth: 16-Bit
Buffering: Triple
Z-Buffering: 16-Bit
Refresh Rate: VSync Off
Texture Format: 16-Bit

CPU Optimization: D3D Hardware T&L

Platform: Internal
3DMark Result: 3217 3D marks
CPU Speed: 234 CPU 3D marks
Game 1 - Helicopter - Low Detail: 65.8 FPS
Game 1 - Helicopter - Medium Detail: 46.2 FPS
Game 1 - Helicopter - High Detail: 20.7 FPS
Game 2 - Adventure - Low Detail: 63.6 FPS
Game 2 - Adventure - Medium Detail: 45.1 FPS
Game 2 - Adventure - High Detail: 26.8 FPS
Fill Rate (Single-Texturing): 172.7 MTexels/s
Fill Rate (Multi-Texturing): 340.2 MTexels/s
High Polygon Count (1 Light): 2770 KTriangles/s
High Polygon Count (4 Lights): 2441 KTriangles/s
High Polygon Count (8 Lights): 2166 KTriangles/s
Bump Mapping (Emboss, 3-pass): 104.5 FPS
Bump Mapping (Emboss, 2-pass): 141.4 FPS


SYSTEM
Software Versions:
Windows Version Windows 4 A , Build 2222
DirectX Version 4.08.00.0400
Bios Version Award Modular BIOS v6.00PG
Bios Date 09/19/00

Memory:
Total Physical Memory 128MB
Free Physical Memory 74MB

PROCESSOR
CPU Information:
Processor Type AMD Duron(tm) Processor
Processor Speed 833MHz
Processor Caps Enhanced 3DNow!/MMX

Cache Memory:
L1 Cache Size 128KB
L2 Cache Size 64KB

DESKTOP
2D Display Adapter:
Name 3dfx Voodoo3
Driver Date 11-10-2000

Desktop Size and Color Depth:
Width 1600
Height 1200
Color Depth 16 bit

INTERNAL 3D CARD
Information:
Name Voodoo3 AGP
</font>

Barbarella
27th January 2001, 16:07
hi roadi,

well not exactly. For example if i use a 116% for my G400 and boost my P3 to a 7*140 MHz = 980 MHz, the score goes from 3479 to 3500. So a 5% boost on the procesor give me less than 1% boost in 3Dmark, While a 4% boost on my G400 give me a 3,2 % boost in the 3Dmark.

But sure you have a really good score http://forums.murc.ws/ubb/smile.gif

Neomagic_Twist
28th January 2001, 05:15
Using the new 6.33 drivers in Win98se, I get a score of 3288 on the default benchmark in 3Dmark2000. With the 6.10 drivers (I think), I got over 3300, but ah well, I like having the latest drivers, and 4X agp is working fine now, at last. http://forums.murc.ws/ubb/smile.gif

P3 450 @ 600 Golden Orb
Soyo 6VCA Apollo Pro 133A mobo
320MB PC133 CAS2
Matrox G400MAX DH 32MB @ 175/235Mhz
IBM 75GPX 45GB 7200rpm HD
WD 136AA 13.6GB 5400rpm HD
Soundblaster Live! 5.1
Hitachi 12x/40x DVD
2x Realtek 8139 NICs

dZeus
29th January 2001, 06:04
I got a new memory module (replaced my 128MB PC100 with a 128MB PC133 module, now totalling 256MB PC133 RAM) and my 3DMark scores now are much more consistent.

My Vanilla G400 overclocked to 120% (i.e. @G400MAX speed), I get 3439 in 3DMark2000, with the PD5.33 drivers in Win2k. G400 is running at 1x AGP.

P3-700@933MHz, Intel BX chipset (Abit BX6 r.2)

Greebe
30th January 2001, 22:56
I just luv them links!

DuRaNgO
30th January 2001, 22:56
sorry, your lynx don't work so good http://forums.murc.ws/ubb/smile.gif

Himself
31st January 2001, 07:16
The Madonion project manager actually shows these links but has different ones when you copy them.

Try these: Duron 833MHz, Radeon 32MB 200MHz, exact same config as my V3 2000 scores so it should be an interesting comparison.

Soft TCL: 1024x768x16
http://www.madonion.com/compare.shtml?1293246

Athlon TCL: 1024x768x16
http://www.madonion.com/compare.shtml?1293205

Hard TCL: 1024x768x16
http://www.madonion.com/compare.shtml?1293130

Hard TCL: 1024x768x32
http://www.madonion.com/compare.shtml?1293172

Hard TCL: FSAA 4x 1024x768x16
http://www.madonion.com/compare.shtml?1294799

Using WPCREDIT to set one 64dimm to 2 way interleave and both to 2 cycle timings:
http://www.madonion.com/compare.shtml?1295805

Older V3 2000 scores at 176MHz 1024x768x16

Hard TCL:
http://www.madonion.com/compare.shtml?1269787

Soft TCL:
http://www.madonion.com/compare.shtml?1269877

Athlon TCL:
http://www.madonion.com/compare.shtml?1269841

Summary:

<UL> AGP 4X works, fast writes work on my KT133 OpenGL issues in Alice, lines along some polygons, random spurts of triangles showing up. Converting games to use D3D from glide. 2D quality is the same as a V3 or G400 at 1600x1200x16. Bump mapping is the same as G400 just faster. FSAA 4X works well enough to use it at 800x600x16 and makes a difference in games like Deus Ex. AGP texturing has to be turned off in Deus Ex, way too slow. Similar to live drivers, just install the basic drivers and you are ok, you get into trouble with the whole kit and kaboodle. The new mscrt.dll is not as robust as the earlier ones. V3 drivers set the standard, the ATI drivers are similar to the Matrox drivers when I had a G400. Bought V3 for $70 CDN, sold it for $50 Bought Radeon for $265 CDN (no tax/$15 COD), same as I paid for my G400 32MB SH oem way way back when. ATI driver install was hampered by bios settings for V3, since the V3 isn't AGP 4X and barely AGP at all. 2D speed of V3 seemed a tad faster than Radeon, noticed a lot more redrawing at first at 1600x1200x16. Change over issue probably. AGP texturing is a no no unless you have gobs of ram, 128MB is not enough to avoid disk activity after exiting a game. The emboss bump mapping of 3DMark2K comes a lot closer to EMBM when you have FSAA 4x enabled. Most settings require a reboot to take effect.
[/list]

Some Comments:

<UL> Much higher scores in the low detail game tests. I attribute that to the higher fillrate/architecture. Little difference in the medium detail game tests. I suspect the V3 drivers are just that much better. 10fps in the high detail tests is nothing to write home about, it's nice but I've seem P3/G400 scores as high, this is probably TCL related, but 26 vs 34 doesn't impress me. Fillrate is naturally higher. 32 bit mode is infinitely faster. http://forums.murc.ws/ubb/smile.gif FSAA actually works well, within limitations. It turns itself off at higher resolutions/bit depths and I'm not sure but it could turn itself on and off during game play as well. Deus Ex really needs FSAA, I much prefer 800x600x16 with FSAA 4X than 1280x1024x32, you could cut logs with the chick's legs otherwise. http://forums.murc.ws/ubb/smile.gif I have EMBM back, still no use for it. http://forums.murc.ws/ubb/smile.gif Lots of new features I doubt I'll ever use. TCL seems to help with rotating torusi, not sure what else it's good for. I get better texture scores, whatever they are good for, I find that games that support AGP texturing suck at it. I really don't like AGP. My bios setting for fast writes is enabled, but PCIlist doesn't show it enabled. The arc demo is overated, jerky and takes up way too much ram/swap file space. Overall, it was a realistic upgrade from a V3, didn't expect a lot, didn't get any surprises.
[/list]

PS. I can't do the FSB trick with 3DMark2K, I only have PC100 ram and my KT133 doesn't go over 104MHz. Besides which SoftFSB doesn't work for me and cheating would be pointless for me in figuring out what I actually bought. http://forums.murc.ws/ubb/smile.gif

Here is one with rendering disabled though:
http://www.madonion.com/compare.shtml?1302193

http://forums.murc.ws/ubb/smile.gif


[This message has been edited by Himself (edited 02 February 2001).]

Himself
2nd February 2001, 16:08
Tried the Radeon drivers under win2K, no issues whatsoever, ran around a bit in DuesEx, nary a hitch.

Himself
2nd February 2001, 20:14
GDISPy5 from matrox:


<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" size="2">
FUNCTION INDEX ENTER LEAVE STATUS
BITBLT 0 49059 49059 PASS
COLORINFO 1 27459 27459 PASS
CONTROL 2 0 0 PASS
DISABLE 3 0 0 PASS
ENABLE 4 0 0 PASS
ENUMDFONTS 5 2 2 PASS
ENUMOBJ 6 0 0 PASS
OUTPUT 7 1714 1714 PASS
PIXEL 8 0 0 PASS
REALIZEOBJECT 9 5182 5182 PASS
STRBLT 10 0 0 PASS
SCANLR 11 0 0 PASS
RESERVED 12 0 0 PASS
EXTTEXTOUT 13 4762 4762 PASS
GETCHARWIDTH 14 0 0 PASS
DEVICEBITMAP 15 0 0 PASS
FASTBORDER 16 0 0 PASS
SETATTRIBUTE 17 0 0 PASS
DIBBLT 18 40 40 PASS
RESERVED 19 0 0 PASS
DIBTODEVICE 20 471 471 PASS
SETPALETTE 21 0 0 PASS
GETPALETTE 22 0 0 PASS
SETPALETTETRANSLATE 23 0 0 PASS
GETPALETTETRANSLATE 24 0 0 PASS
UPDATECOLOR 25 0 0 PASS
STRETCHBLT 26 2262 2262 PASS
STRETCHDIBITS 27 1811 1811 PASS
SELECTBITMAP 28 9357 9357 PASS
BITMAPBITS 29 1367 1367 PASS
REENABLE 30 0 0 PASS
GAMMARAMP 31 0 0 PASS

PASS 32
FAIL 0
</font>

Himself
2nd February 2001, 21:26
Tried the Matrox Tech demo, read the log saying go buy a Matrox card, lame.

Radical Fish looks like a fish out of water it twitches so fast, quite funny. http://forums.murc.ws/ubb/smile.gif

That bumped earth demo with the lights around it runs at 150fps at 1600x1150x16.

Joel
3rd February 2001, 05:30
To answer the poster's original question,


<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" size="2">My score for the default benchmark test was a 2652. I was wondering if that was a good score for my system?</font>

Yes I think that is a good score. Just check out my run below. Also my G400 is using the MAX settings and has 32MB.

http://members.home.net/gilchrist.joel/3dmark1200.jpg

Joel http://forums.murc.ws/ubb/smile.gif

For some really interesting scores involving benchmarks check out the following thread.

forums.murc.ws/ubb/Forum13/HTML/000015.html (http://forums.murc.ws/ubb/Forum13/HTML/000015.html)

prkl
4th February 2001, 03:42
Abit KT7A / TB 800@958 (7x137) / 128MB / G400 32MB DH "vanilla"
Win98se/PD v.6.10/VIA 4-in-1 v.4.28/2xAGP transfer/G400 oc'd 252@307.8 PLL MHz

Default test: 3602 3DMarks
for details: http://www.madonion.com/compare.shtml?1285266

-Mikko-

Himself
4th February 2001, 06:56
I wish I could get my ram that high, too bad you can't overclock using multipliers or you could show the difference between FSB settings while keeping the cpu frequency the same. I may pick up a stick of PC133 in the next few weeks just to see, just ordered a new hard drive though.

EDIT:

Duh! I thought you had a P3. http://forums.murc.ws/ubb/smile.gif



[This message has been edited by Himself (edited 05 February 2001).]

prkl
5th February 2001, 08:20
I sold already my G400 vanilla, but I'll do some serious benchmarking a.s.a.p when the replacement - The Mighty MAX arrives. It supports 4xAGP transfer and should overclock +115% so the next target is 4000 3DMarks http://forums.murc.ws/ubb/smile.gif
For the comparison, I got 3114 3DMarks on default test with my previous system (MSI 6167 mb, Classic Athlon 7x100MHz, 384MB SDRAM, Win98se).

-Mikko-

Himself
5th February 2001, 14:22
Picked up some PC133 today for $88, one 128MB stick, sold my PC100 for $55. Bit disappointed, seems my FSB won't go over 104MHz no matter what, could be the PCI overclocking aspect and my hard drive or just a chipset that doesn't like anything higher.

Anyway I get this at 200MHz, about the only difference is that I am using the +33 option in the bios to set to ram:

http://www.madonion.com/compare.shtml?1324285

Seems that running the test 3 times in a row (setting the benchmark option to do that) is good for a bit of a boost.

Good luck with the Max. http://forums.murc.ws/ubb/smile.gif

Jammrock
6th February 2001, 09:59
This is interesting. My system seems to be running slightly faster than other Athlon 650/G400 systems. My motherboard is currently 'broken' (go to The Soap Box if you want to see pics) so I can't post 3DMark reports, but I've been scoring in the 2700 range.

Athlon 650
256 MB RAM
G400 32 MB vanilla
SB Live!
WD/IBM 7200 RPM drives, etc.

It's odd how mine is scoring 200 points higher.

Jammrock

------------------
Athlon 650
256 MB PC133 CAS3 from Crucial
87 GB storage from WD & IBM
Matrox G400 (it's not dead yet!)
SB Live! the original full retail, still going strong
Klipsch ProMedia v.2-400, the PC speakers that goes BOOM!
Hope Matrox releases the G800 before rebuild time, becuase the end is near!

Greebe
6th February 2001, 10:12
FYI all of the MadOnion links you guys have posted, are linked to your cookies... ie no one else can see these results and end up being redirected here http://gamershq.madonion.com/profile/?login.shtml

dZeus
6th February 2001, 13:56
after you logged in, you can see them (that is, IF you can log in http://forums.murc.ws/ubb/smile.gif http://forums.murc.ws/ubb/smile.gif )

Indiana
6th February 2001, 13:57
<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" size="2">Originally posted by Greebe:
FYI all of the MadOnion links you guys have posted, are linked to your cookies... ie no one else can see these results and end up being redirected here http://gamershq.madonion.com/profile/?login.shtml</font>

Yeah, and if you actually login on this page you can compare your own submitted results side by side with the posters one - so in the end the links posted here ARE working.

EDIT: 1 minute too late...

[This message has been edited by Indiana (edited 06 February 2001).]

Greebe
6th February 2001, 14:28
Just what I need, submit more info to MadnVidiot especially when running beta drivers not released to the public... How about a screenshot or two please

dZeus
6th February 2001, 15:06
You've got a point there http://forums.murc.ws/ubb/smile.gif

but the info is upload automatically when you run the benchmark as far as I know, not when you log in the madonion site... or am I wrong on this one?

D1G1T4L
6th February 2001, 15:30
My best 3d mark result is 1630 with winME on PII450 with 192mb ram latest drivers. my normal result though is 1530-1540, varies.

i have also done the test in win2k as i have a Dual PII Mobo, and it made no difference, but then 3dmark doesn't support the dual pros so nothing unexpected there.

need any more info just msg me, im nearly always online

D1G1T4L

Himself
6th February 2001, 15:53
I won't be providing 11 snapshots, I don't have the desire or the web space. It also not a very modem friendly thing to do to this thread, I remember what that is like.

mirp
7th February 2001, 01:23
Default benchmark:

2928 (CPU @ 700 MHz and 128 MB PC100)
3084 (signature-settings)
3415 (same but G400 @ 141/188)

yepitsme
7th February 2001, 01:38
Those madonion links should work if you
are logged in or have submitted test over there, at lesat they work for me.

I get 3086 with G450, decent for a business
card?

Greebe
7th February 2001, 05:56
Last time I submitted a benchmark to MadnVidiot was back when 3DMark 99 Max was current... I have no need or desire to submit additional info to them for their profit and only run it to help you guys.

FYI I am registered and have several high level contacts with them. Remember this thread (http://forums.murc.ws/ubb/Forum3/HTML/003057.html)?

mirp
7th February 2001, 06:24
Oops. Why can't I enable the signature with "edit"? So here it is.

------------------
ASUS P2B-B rev. 1.02, Intel Pentium III 700@933 MHz, Micron 256MB PC133-222, Enermax EG351P-VE, Western Digital WD450AA, Toshiba SD-M1212, Matrox G400 SH 32MB 126/168, PowerDesk 6.23, CTX VL950T, Creative SBLive!, Windows 98, IE 5.00, DirectX 8.0