PDA

View Full Version : Your 3DMark03 Score.



Gohan
11th February 2003, 11:13
Oh man! I get funny 873 points :)

KeiFront
11th February 2003, 11:29
XP 1800@1800
Parhelia A128R not overclocked

812 without FAA
GT1 - Wings of Fury: 60.6 fps
GT2 - Battle of Proxycon: 4.1 fps
GT3 - Troll's Lair: 4.6 fps
CPU score: 255 CPUMarks
CPU Test 1: 28.3 fps
CPU Test 2: 4.5 fps
Fill Rate (Single-Texturing): 666.7 MTexels/s
Fill Rate (Multi-Texturing): 2106.4 MTexels/s
Vertex Shader: 6.0 fps
Pixel Shader 2.0: Not supported
Ragtroll: 1.9 fps

Sound Tests
No sounds: 17.0
24 sounds: 14.2
60 sounds: Not supported

682 with FAA
GT1 - Wings of Fury: 50.8 fps
GT2 - Battle of Proxycon: 3.5 fps
GT3 - Troll's Lair: 4.1 fps
CPU score: 254 CPUMarks
CPU Test 1: 28.3 fps
CPU Test 2: 4.5 fps
Fill Rate (Single-Texturing): 676.7 MTexels/s
Fill Rate (Multi-Texturing): 2147.4 MTexels/s
Vertex Shader: 5.6 fps
Pixel Shader 2.0: Not supported
Ragtroll: 1.7 fps

Sound Tests
No sounds: 17.0
24 sounds: 14.1
60 sounds: Not supported

Unfortunatly there are graphical glitches in test 2 and 3 :( and test 2 and 3 are slide shows.

edit: added FAA score and detailed scores.

103er-Fan
11th February 2003, 12:01
I just tested it:

1957 points

System is in my signature, settings used:
Default in 3dMark, driver settings 4xFSAA, 8xAF (performance), texture and Mipmapping sliders to maximum.

lecter
11th February 2003, 12:13
P4@2.5 (FSB 125), 512 DDR266, ASUS P4B533, Parhelia bulk@220/580

Grand total: 905

I wonder if performance will be improved with DX9 drivers...

WyWyWyWy
11th February 2003, 12:14
Come on Itchi show us your vol-mod Parhelia score!! :p

Tempest
11th February 2003, 12:54
64 MB Radeon 8500 LE @ 250/250 (default), Athlon XP 1800+, 512 MB of DDR333 and a SB Live! Platinum.

No AA: 1041 3DMarks

dbdg
11th February 2003, 13:04
4573 on my Machine.

The only thing that really impressed me this time was the pixel shader 2.0 test.

P5ycho
11th February 2003, 13:15
What's with the ultracrappy performance in test 2 and 3? no dx9 drivers?

Lots of corruption too by the way...

CaineTanathos
11th February 2003, 14:03
800 :)
http://service.futuremark.com/compare?2k3=6518


jup P5ycho

, the good old 0 frames are back :)

/update just noticed my faa was forced , I am gonna run it again :)

/update2 : mpar... yup a crash, screen was black , it froze

MetalCartman
11th February 2003, 14:17
1043 w/ ATi standard settings for D3D, see sig for system config

Novdid
11th February 2003, 16:01
4163. It stutters like mad, but I reckon that won't be a fact with the next driver update from ATI!:)p

Cat 3.1
Radeon 9700Pro
Athlon 1.5GHz
512MB SDRAM

WyWyWyWy
11th February 2003, 16:07
Got 871 non-overclocked....
But I can't submit at all!? Looks like FutureMark is down!
Deserve it? Countdown lol countdown.

Faramir1966
11th February 2003, 16:15
Cant install on my system
Keeps telling me that there is not enough free space.....
Well...i got more than 3GB free.........
Is it possible that the file is damaged?

Jon P. Inghram
11th February 2003, 16:24
Uber, got 910 Lamemarks(tm)!

Celeron Tualatin 1.2 @ 1.38, 512 megs SDRAM @ 115 MHz, Asus TUSL2-C
Radeon 8500 64 meg @ 275/275 (full retail 8500) flashed with 9100 BIOS.

WyWyWyWy
11th February 2003, 16:50
Hehe :D
With some "enhancements", I got 926 marks! With a whopping 4.3fps on Proxycon!!

Currently fastest Parhelia on FutureMark? Until tomorrow MURCers all got 3DMark03 that's it!

The AngeL
11th February 2003, 16:53
Mhhh.. let's bench with ma little sweet G550.

Moosmutzel
11th February 2003, 18:02
got 820 3DMarks

Standard-Settings @ non-overclocked XP1800+ System with noAA

http://service.futuremark.com/compare?2k3=16636

Edit: with the new 1.3.1.2 Driver i've got 823 3DMarks ;)

http://service.futuremark.com/compare?2k3=39114

Chrono_Wanderer
11th February 2003, 18:59
Originally posted by The AngeL
Mhhh.. let's bench with ma little sweet G550.

Same here. :D

Let's hope we get above 10 pts. :D

Now... a whooping of 50 pts will be nice

And let's hope Matrox make the dx8-INCOMPETIBLE VS/T&L to work. :D

... that is if the hardware supports any of the 3d feature caps...

i have a feeling that full software emulation will be faster :eek:

Chrono_Wanderer
11th February 2003, 19:00
Originally posted by Moosmutzel
got 820 3DMarks

Standard-Settings @ non-overclocked XP1800+ System with noAA

http://service.futuremark.com/compare?2k3=16636


aaHHH!!!! A7A266. ALi M1647 sucks *%^(* :o

i burnt that stupid board up :rolleyes:

K6-III
11th February 2003, 19:11
970 3dmarks with the parhelia at 232/614 and the cpu at 1.91ghz...

http://service.futuremark.com/compare?2k3=21711

WyWyWyWy
11th February 2003, 19:20
Damn... I need to OC some more to beat you K6-III :D

EDIT:
mine
http://service.futuremark.com/compare?2k3=14968

Chrono_Wanderer
11th February 2003, 19:38
lol. nothing works with G550. gotta wait for 3d analyze :D hehe

gonna try it on my R8500 :D

Helevitia
11th February 2003, 20:45
I got 4436

http://service.futuremark.com/compare?2k3=26190

SuRGV
11th February 2003, 22:35
I got 1128.
I think faster Videocard results in much higher score than a faster CPU does.

Kosh Naranek
11th February 2003, 23:01
Just remember ....

For non DX9 cards the score will be low since they cannot run the Mother Earth test which affects the score BIG time.

The same thing was the case when 3Dmark2001 came out.
GF3 didn't score very well in 3DMark 2001 because they couldn't run the Nature test.

Jon P. Inghram
11th February 2003, 23:06
Ooh, ran it again on WinXP and got 974! I'm l33t, your Parhelia suxorz!!! What a PoS benchmark. People were thinking they were going to biased towards nVidia, but it seems they were bought out by ATI instead. I'd link my scrore, but whata know, they're having "technical difficulties", I.E. someone probably found a bug that lets their Matrox Mystique get 300,000,000 3DFarts or something. :)

K6-III
11th February 2003, 23:21
Just watch me break 1000 tomorrow...

Novdid
12th February 2003, 00:24
Originally posted by Kosh Naranek
The same thing was the case when 3Dmark2001 came out.
GF3 didn't score very well in 3DMark 2001 because they couldn't run the Nature test.

That would be the GF2 my friend.:)

Kusa
12th February 2003, 02:13
574 3DMarks here.
some tests showed me 0 fps heh.

http://service.futuremark.com/compare?2k3=36761

JaG
12th February 2003, 03:37
Incredible - 885 (1st run) :confused: & 886 (2nd run) :p points.

Specs: Ph-A128R (@ default clocks, without FAA, 16.8 mio. colors, 1.3.0.43 drv), P4 - 2.667 gigs, 512 MB DDR-SD (@266 MHz, latencies: 222-5), i845G chipset, SB Audigy and Win2k SP3 with DX9

Hope the upcoming DX9 drivers will fix the troubles in gt2, 3 and vertex shader tests. More comparable results would be better for matrox and all of us.

DukeP
12th February 2003, 04:29
4565
http://service.futuremark.com/compare?2k3=36092

Its more like a system mark now, even includes the effects of ones soundcard.

~~DukeP~~

JaG
12th February 2003, 04:45
DukeP, represents the 'Radeon 9500 (np)' in your Futuremark profile a 'non pro' card?

WyWyWyWy
12th February 2003, 05:53
http://service.futuremark.com/compare?2k3=40920
Lol 8500 got 8747 points? Cheating or just some accident? Lol...

Tempest
12th February 2003, 07:04
Dunno, could be an error since the score sounds about right for a 8500LE in 3DMark 2001...

Gohan
12th February 2003, 08:11
Originally posted by WyWyWyWy
http://service.futuremark.com/compare?2k3=40920
Lol 8500 got 8747 points? Cheating or just some accident? Lol...

Or 3D Analyze User? *g*

Guru
12th February 2003, 08:32
25462 http://service.futuremark.com/compare?2k3=49603

WyWyWyWy
12th February 2003, 08:49
In the mean time...
http://service.futuremark.com/compare?2k3=47263
Score of 2 :D

SteveC
12th February 2003, 09:08
Without any cheating my Parhelia get just over 9000. Thing is the 3rd 3D Test and the 2nd CPU test are just black screens.

roadie
12th February 2003, 09:14
lol i am not even going to bother downloading and trying this new benchmark on my laptop. i think i would be able to run one test or something. i will just have to wait until the m10 comes out :(

Jon P. Inghram
12th February 2003, 09:59
Dang, my 8500 (flashed with 9100 bios) just doesn't want to o/c. :) Bumped it up just 5 MHz to 280/280 and was able to get 999 3DBarfs, although started showing some o/c'ing artifacts during the last sound test. Backed it back down to 275/275 and managed to get 981 : http://service.futuremark.com/compare?2k3=33581

WyWyWyWy
12th February 2003, 10:26
Submit it Steve! :D
Just for a bit of fun.

Jon P. Inghram
12th February 2003, 11:05
After running it a bit, I think the artifacts I was getting at 280/280 weren't really from the video card after all. Used powerstrip to make 640x480 the highest resolution the monitor would support and got my score over 1300 at the default 275/275, but it started glitching on the silent part of the sound test... the program isn't all that stable it seems. No heat problems at all, case temperatures are only 75 degrees (24c).

TdB
12th February 2003, 12:48
so, do you guys think it is a good benchmark?

I would personally like more dx9 tests and a bit more variety,technological speaking (test2 and test3 are basically run on the same 3d-engine, AFAIK), especially if this is going to last until dx10 arrives.

they only uses dx9-exclusive features in one test, and only a little, and what about ps3.0 and vs3.0 (yeah, i know there isnt any hardware that supports it yet, but I thought futuremark would make it a bit futureproof, and it is in the dx9-spec afterall)

do you think it is advanced enough for future dx9 cards?

borat
12th February 2003, 13:21
i think when parhelia dx 9 drivers are out we will see slightly better scores from it , ie 1500 - 2000

DukeP
12th February 2003, 15:35
Originally posted by JaG
DukeP, represents the 'Radeon 9500 (np)' in your Futuremark profile a 'non pro' card?

Yes.

~~DukeP~~

albatorsk
12th February 2003, 16:27
Hmm.. 897 3Dmarks on an AthlonMP 1800+. I've seen worse.

thop
12th February 2003, 17:18
~1

JaG
13th February 2003, 02:35
Originally posted by DukeP
Yes.

~~DukeP~~

Interesting. :)

That's a great result for this Radeon card with four pipes.

With your slightly overclocked R9.5k card you reach the level of comparable systems, using a R9.7kPro. - That's impressive.

I agree. It's more like a system bench, now. By the way, which sound adapter do you use? (It's not shown in your futuremark profile.)

DukeP
13th February 2003, 03:01
Weeeeell, there IS a reason for the rather good performance of my saphire radeon 9500 128mb. Its software unlocked to perform identically to a radeon 9700.

Actually I can clock it to about/above radeon 9700 pro levels (350core/310(620)mem). I have chosen to clock it slightly less than this, at 324/300 - since I have greatly reduced the cooling of my pc (due to noise).

And yes, the performance of my sub $200 card is quite adequate.

~~DukeP~~

Edit: Im using the Hercules game theater xp 7.1.

chhfchhf
13th February 2003, 03:21
hehe ! my score is 749 points!
my parhelia is an OEM

borat
13th February 2003, 07:25
930, parhelia 220/600 athlon xp2200@1823 with 192fsb. 512meg ddr.

Tom
13th February 2003, 09:45
Exactly 5000 points...

borat
13th February 2003, 12:36
anyone have time to benchmark a 9700 or 9700 pro with non dx9 drivers just out of curiosity?

mmp121
13th February 2003, 12:42
Originally posted by borat
anyone have time to benchmark a 9700 or 9700 pro with non dx9 drivers just out of curiosity?

I can, but I think my score may be skewwed in that my CPU is still a P3 (I am in the middle of an upgrade) just waiting for parts to arrive.

Edit:

Woohoo, no longer a mini!

Mikko
13th February 2003, 12:43
Good idea, I'll second that!
Anyone, please?

borat
13th February 2003, 12:44
cheers mmp121 but your result will not be representative due to the cpu.

Admiral
13th February 2003, 13:01
1126

mmp121
13th February 2003, 13:37
Originally posted by borat
cheers mmp121 but your result will not be representative due to the cpu.

Well, whatever you say, I just ran it, and I got a score of 2444 (it was run on System 1 in my sig). Hope that helps.

I'm kinda blown away by the score. :eek:

Compare URL: http://service.futuremark.com/compare?2k3=112835

borat
13th February 2003, 13:44
wow that really is an interesting point, thanks very much.

Maggi
14th February 2003, 05:15
FYI ... The Tech-Report (http://tech-report.com/etc/2003q1/3dmark03/index.x?pg=1) posted a comparing 3D Mark 2003 benchmark which also includes a Parhelia.

Evildead666
14th February 2003, 15:02
http://service.futuremark.com/servlet/Index?pageid=/orb/projectdetails&projectType=10&projectId=149351
3500 points-ish:)

Admiral
15th February 2003, 10:53
1318 with the new 3DM2003 optimized 42.68 detonators.

Though I'll probably go back to 42.01 since all revisions above it make OpenGL games clip mad and the only way to make it right is to use block transfer for the buffer-flipping mode, which cuts performance.

WyWyWyWy
15th February 2003, 12:00
Now where is Itchi we (I) want to see his vol-modded Parhelia score :D

(Gohan you know where he is?)

Or has his Parhelia died already...

Gohan
16th February 2003, 03:26
Originally posted by WyWyWyWy
Now where is Itchi we (I) want to see his vol-modded Parhelia score :D

(Gohan you know where he is?)

Or has his Parhelia died already...

The last time he posted something on 3dcenter.de was the 25. january...

Scratchi
16th February 2003, 07:32
Itchi is in the house...
i hope the benchmark result comes next week. I want revise my P cooling strategy...

cu Itchi

K6-III
16th February 2003, 09:36
Good to have you with us again. I trust your card is still alive???

Indiana
17th February 2003, 15:41
5339 3DMarks03
http://service.futuremark.com/compare?2k3=222807

EPoX 8RDA+
AthlonXP 2400+ @2173MHz (189*11.5)
Radeon9700PRO @385MHz Core - 337MHz Mem (regardless of what 3DMark03 claims :rolleyes:
Catalyst 3.1 - D3D settings to high quality (but no FSAA or aniso)

typedef enum
18th February 2003, 01:19
Speaking of which...

Did anybody catch Beyond3D's article on 3DMark2003? They basically compared all 3D boards to the 9700 Pro, to see how it stacks up. Clearly, the 9700 beat the crap out of everything out there...

However, the Parhelia _really_ did extremely poorly, as compared to pretty much everything. In some ways, I'm not terribly shocked...But, it was shocking, nonetheless.

I'm not really expecting any sort of magic in the near term, but somebody really should take a look and see where optimizations can be made.

On a sidenote...Is anybody else considering ATI's R350? It's going to be a tough deal, because I really like the screen real estate that the P affords...But, I've run into some games (IE Unreal2) that are extremely slow on the P...and I'm _really_ looking forward to Deus-Ex2. The bandwidth that this thing is going to be bringing to the table is going to be mind blowing (in comparison to the dog ....that would be the FX), and will really allow for maximal IQ settings.

Tom
18th February 2003, 15:13
Originally posted by Indiana
Radeon9700PRO @385MHz Core - 337MHz Mem [/B]
Did you have any extra cooling for your Radeon 9700 Pro?
...mine seemed to max out at 351/351...
5180 marks.... 5180 3DMarks (http://service.futuremark.com/compare?2k3=121462)

K6-III
18th February 2003, 21:04
Try taking off that shim. Should aid in cooling...

Indiana
19th February 2003, 12:51
Originally posted by Tom
Did you have any extra cooling for your Radeon 9700 Pro?
...mine seemed to max out at 351/351...
5180 marks.... 5180 3DMarks (http://service.futuremark.com/compare?2k3=121462)

No extra cooling, just the crappy standard BBA fan.
BTW, I think what stops your oc'ing is more the Ram than the Core.
When I tried to stay synch the highest I could get was about 350/350 and that was not really stable anymore.
Leaving the Ram at 337Mhz I can push the core up to 385-390MHz, without getting visual artifacts (depending on case-temp, ~25C here atm).

And do not forget: Ram-bandwidth is not a big problem with the Radeon 9700, the card "lacks" (if you can really claim that the R300 does lack anything) more fillrate than bandwidth and thus gains a bit more due to Core oc'ing than raising the Ram clock.

Tom
19th February 2003, 16:10
Indiana,

Thanks for the info!:)

fleabus2
22nd February 2003, 10:40
My results:

3D Mark 2001SE 3DMark Version 330
3DMark Score: 14614

3Dmark03 Results: 4632

System Info:
WinXP HE SP1/DirectX 9
P4 2.8b/533MHz FSBus
1GB PC 1066 RIMM
Asus P4T533-C (s478/i850e)
Promise Ultra133 controller:
2x80GB Maxtor 740x 7200RPM ATA133 HDDs
Enermax 550W PSU
Desktops:
VGA1: 21 ViewSonic P817
VGA2: 22 VewSonic P225f
Both Desktops @ 1600x1200 32bit 85Hz
ATI Radeon 9700 Pro retail (AGPx4/64MB Aperture) Catalyst 3.1 drivers
No overclocking. All system, video card and 3D Mark settings at defaults.
Vsynch: ON, TrueForm:ON etc

All I did do was defrag my HDDs in Safe Mode and run the tests immediately when back to the desktop.

Happy trails,

Riddlewire
22nd February 2003, 17:52
Pardon my ignorance, but why defrag in safe mode?

WyWyWyWy
11th March 2003, 10:00
Originally posted by Scratchi
Itchi is in the house...
i hope the benchmark result comes next week. I want revise my P cooling strategy...

cu Itchi
Hello Itchi?
Still waiting for you to break KHXP's (i.e. MatroxMania's) record :D

Scratchi
12th March 2003, 08:09
:(
The Card (two IC's) broke during the cooling revision.

Now, i have to find those IC's ...

... it's not funny.

oh s***

cu Itchi

WyWyWyWy
12th March 2003, 18:53
Because of too much voltage getting it blown?
Or just destroyed by carelessness when attaching/removing cooling?

Scratchi
12th March 2003, 22:28
Fallen down -> from the clamping block. The weight of the copper was too much for the IC's, in the case of the impact.

Never touch a running system...

cu Itchi

borat
13th March 2003, 04:25
something tells me that card will not be making a comeback.

Chrono_Wanderer
16th March 2003, 07:27
Who says G550 can't do fps????

Chrono_Wanderer
16th March 2003, 07:31
And my G550 can do something that your Parhelia can't :p

Chrono_Wanderer
16th March 2003, 07:36
Okay let's get serious.... but I just found this odd..

see attachment...

note 3 textures in single pass! What is that about?

WyWyWyWy
17th March 2003, 00:10
Anymore overclocked Parhelias?
I want to break KHXP's score 1029...

Kuriton
10th May 2003, 10:16
Hi WyWyWyWy.

I've also attached memory heatsinks!

http//www.geocities.co.jp/SiliconValley-Oakland/8833/3.jpg (http://www.geocities.co.jp/SiliconValley-Oakland/8833/3.jpg)

But I don't take benchmark tests yet, because I'm very sleepy now. :)

WyWyWyWy
10th May 2003, 21:32
Looks very good :D
You cut old heatsink and attach using thermal tape?

I will be going water cooling soon, I'll post more on my website later ;)

Oyasumi...

Kuriton
10th May 2003, 22:57
Hello WyWyWyWy.

It's 14:00 p.m. in Japan now. :)

Looks very good

Thanks.

You cut old heatsink and attach using thermal tape?

Mmm.
I didn't cut old heatsink, but I attached a new heatsink to the Parhelia core.
Its heatsink is bigger than old that one, but it must have a more space!
It made my 2 PCI slots lose face. :(
And I bought else some heatsinks to attach to memories.
If I have attached them by thermal adhesive, I couldn't remove them again.
So I use thermal conductive tapes to attach them.
Some of tapes are hanging out of memory heatsinks, but they also take a job of interruptions of electric conductance themselves.
I had trouble attaching them because the space around memory is very small!

I will be going water cooling soon, I'll post more on my website later

Oh, I cheer you! :D
Let's try Parhelia's performance limits.

K6-III
10th May 2003, 23:01
I think Ichi already tried pulling the Parhelia to its limits.

I hope he rejoins us with his Uber-modded Parhelia.

Kuriton
10th May 2003, 23:46
Hi.

I got 908 points on 3DMark03 at 224/620.
It was increased 5 points than the last result.

Is it a error? :confused:

WyWyWyWy
11th May 2003, 01:41
Originally posted by Kuriton
Hi.

I got 908 points on 3DMark03 at 224/620.
It was increased 5 points than the last result.

Is it a error? :confused:
With new driver, my 30Mark03 score is 20 points behind old driver. 242/650

EDIT:
I mean 200 points

Kuriton
11th May 2003, 08:24
Oh!

I got 938 points on the 3DMark03 at 228/620. :D

I'll try for a more high score.

And WyWyWyWy, I want to reach in front of your score 10XX. :)

bsdgeek
11th May 2003, 20:25
Originally posted by Scratchi
Fallen down -> from the clamping block. The weight of the copper was too much for the IC's, in the case of the impact.

Never touch a running system...

cu Itchi
I know it's been a while, but any luck repairing it? Dead? :(

Cool work with your cards WyWyWyWy and Kuriton

K6-III
11th May 2003, 20:39
I'm also interested as to what's happening with that card.

WyWyWyWy
12th May 2003, 03:47
I'd be more interested in the performance of Skee^'s custom-waterblock made by BladeRunner :O

Kuriton: Too hot in Tokyo now. You need cold weather to overclock more :D When my exams finish, I will make my own waterblock and go back to driver and be #1 in 3DMark03... :)
(May be new motherboard too!!)

DukeP
12th May 2003, 22:56
Eh?
A bit out of topic, me thinks...

~~DukeP~~

Edit Ah. I can se the offending message have been deleted.

NetSnake
13th May 2003, 08:14
did anyone use the patched version of 3dmark 2003 (the one maggie was talking about) with the Parhelia? It would be interesting to see if it makes a difference.

WyWyWyWy
14th May 2003, 01:08
Originally posted by NetSnake
did anyone use the patched version of 3dmark 2003 (the one maggie was talking about) with the Parhelia? It would be interesting to see if it makes a difference. Yes, but no, doesn't make a difference.

Marshmallowman
14th May 2003, 05:52
got 1356 3dmark 03


2400xp @2200mhz (147fsb)
64mb 8500 @280/290
ecs k7s5a
512mb corsair ddr cas2

gotta try extra cooling on my 8500

Kuriton
1st June 2003, 06:01
Hi WyWyWyWy. :)

I have a question.
Do you raise the AGP voltage of Parhelia?
Or 1.60V, normal voltage?

If I raise the AGP voltage, my Parhelia would be able to work at high frequency.
But I feel too scary to do it. :(

Che Guevara
16th August 2003, 04:51
got funny 751 points in 3dmark03 :)

Ssin
16th August 2003, 11:28
Was at +/- 1500 with GF4 Ti4200 AGP8x 128MB.
Now +/- 2600 with Radeon 9600Pro 128MB.

System remains the same :
P4T533-C, P4 2.26 (FSB533), 2x256 RDR 1066, WDC 80GB 8MB Cache. Is the rest important?

Che Guevara
16th August 2003, 14:18
@Ssin: No, not really :). Very good system, comrade.

Chrono_Wanderer
16th August 2003, 15:24
~1500 on the GFFX 5200
~800 on the R8500
~25 on G550 :D

Chrono_Wanderer
16th August 2003, 15:28
@Che Guevara

Saw your sig :D


Parhelia PCB is a work of art

Let me add, Banding is also a work of art, it creates awesome 2D overlay effects for the well known Matrox High Fadility (TM) desktop. :D



just kidding :p

bsdgeek
16th August 2003, 21:18
The Parhelia PCB is a work of art man, seriously. When I got mine, I stared at it for a couple of minutes. It was cool, and I was a little stoned, but it was cool. :p

Che Guevara
17th August 2003, 08:00
@Chrono_Wanderer:

800 points with R8500 and 1,4 Ghz + DDR?
I got 751 points, think my system is perfect configured by hard- and software, eh (like I always say, rambus boosts a p3 too, of course just a little bit but it definitly does :D).


I meant just the look of the PCB, I have seen many agp- and pci-cards yet but I stared at the P like bsdgeek did :).

About banding: Of course that's a little bit dissapointing, but the banding issue was 'blowed up'.
And didn't you read about banding on G-FX and actual Radeons too?

read more @:
http://www.nvnews.net/vbulletin/showthread.php?s=&threadid=16032

Althought, the parhelia chip is a work of art too and it deserves a second chance (P750 is a great card, isn't it? A Parhelia with the P-series fixes would be wonderful...).

Chrono_Wanderer
18th August 2003, 06:07
ok let's get serios... Parhelia does have a good looking PCB. Gotta agree on that. And they use top notch semi conductors to achieve that too.

Yes I know ATI cards have banding issues. :)

GeForce 5900s also have some interference issues too!

Good thing about nVIDIA is they actually told people on nv News to get to the bay area so nVIDIA can regenerate the problem as they cannot regenerate the problem themselves.

where as... Matrox... *sigh*

They really need to pull themselves together.

Gotta talk to the management about that!



oh yea... about the R8500 3dmark... its kinda disappointing...

yea... 3dmark03 is very GFX independent... I gotta tweak the R8500 a bit when i have time.

Che Guevara
19th August 2003, 10:01
Good luck with this, what fan are you going to use for the tweaked R8500?

jeuda
11th October 2003, 01:53
Originally posted by 103er-Fan
I just tested it:

1957 points

System is in my signature, settings used:
Default in 3dMark, driver settings 4xFSAA, 8xAF (performance), texture and Mipmapping sliders to maximum.

that is very low.... for a 9700pro.

I got 4500 for my system (home desktop)


Home desktop
AXP 1600+ Palomino | Alpha 8045
Asus A7V333-R | 1GB PC2700 Kingston
ATI 9700 Pro | Vantec Iceberq 4
Audigy DE | Hauppage Wintheater
3com 3C905B-TX | Agere V.92
Sony CRX175A1 | IBM 120GXP 60GB
Mitsubishi RTD176M

[Office desktop]
Pentium 4 1.8GHz | 512 RDRAM
Dell precision 340m | Matrox G550
SCSI 160 36GB | Mitsubishi 21inch

monitor

Novdid
12th October 2003, 13:35
Look at what settings he were running, that 1957 points will make sense then, jeuda.

gangster
6th November 2003, 15:42
Originally posted by Kuriton
Hi WyWyWyWy.

I've also attached memory heatsinks!

http//www.geocities.co.jp/SiliconValley-Oakland/8833/3.jpg (http://www.geocities.co.jp/SiliconValley-Oakland/8833/3.jpg)

But I don't take benchmark tests yet, because I'm very sleepy now. :)

Do you really have that fan attached to the Parhelia tap?

Kuriton
7th November 2003, 05:24
Hi gangster.

I show you an interesting picture.

http://www.geocities.co.jp/SiliconValley-Oakland/8833/23.jpg

I attached the heatsink by some screws and some nuts.

gangster
7th November 2003, 06:38
Originally posted by Kuriton
Hi gangster.

I show you an interesting picture.

http://www.geocities.co.jp/SiliconValley-Oakland/8833/23.jpg

I attached the heatsink by some screws and some nuts.

That's pretty awesome!

DukeP
7th November 2003, 07:06
nice!

~~DukeP~~

gangster
7th November 2003, 07:48
Originally posted by Kuriton
Hi gangster.

I show you an interesting picture.

http://www.geocities.co.jp/SiliconValley-Oakland/8833/23.jpg

I attached the heatsink by some screws and some nuts.

What oc's are you getting?

Kuriton
8th November 2003, 06:29
Hi.

There are in my profile text.

Parhelia Core 226MHz Mem 630MHz

But, I don't think Parhelia is fit to overclocking.

I can't run completely 3DMark03 in now setting. :(

gangster
8th November 2003, 07:48
Originally posted by Kuriton
Hi.

There are in my profile text.

Parhelia Core 226MHz Mem 630MHz

But, I don't think Parhelia is fit to overclocking.

I can't run completely 3DMark03 in now setting. :(


I'm at 225/605 with an oem P. I did replace the thermal tape with as3, but that's it so far.

NuGGeTTi
9th November 2003, 12:34
around 1500 with out O/C on XP2400+ and Radeon 8500 with MSI K7N2 DelTa L Nforce 2 motherboard with hyperX Dual Channel 512mb Memory :P

Fluff
3rd August 2004, 15:36
A wholesome 1367 on my Xp1700 with a MSI KT266A and a Geforce FX 5600 .

I feel sorry for all these hardware review sites, who sit through this sort of thing when reviewing graphics cards hundreds of times.

PAugustin
28th August 2004, 09:07
Just scored 1292 with my P8X !

http://service.futuremark.com/compare?2k3=3022923

Mehen
28th August 2004, 23:48
6016 is what I get the way my system is right now.

My cousin just got a BFG 6800ultraOC edition in his p4 2.6C. Everything stock, he got 11.5k.

Admiral
29th August 2004, 01:23
I get 10004 with my current system.

P4 2.4@3.2
1GB ram
Leadtek 6800 @365/900

Evildead666
29th August 2004, 05:06
6152 marks

its my MAIN rig.
Finally stable at 2.57GHz

9800pro can go a bit further tho...
;)

Indiana
29th August 2004, 15:45
13163 (http://service.futuremark.com/compare?2k3=2935763)

AMD64@2300MHz, 512 MB RAM CAS2.0-5-3-2
X800Pro VIVO @XT @540/574 (GPU/RAM)