17812 first fun 3dmark06 SINGLE CARD!

[cale]

http://img171.imageshack.us/img171/4410/bestqu7.th.jpg (http://img171.imageshack.us/my.php?image=bestqu7.jpg)

stoked
:D

[zanzabar]

wow u did that on vista, do u have a validation

[cale]

how do you get one?

[Envydia007]

I think that is just about right score for that set up.

[Envydia007]

how do you get one?
click the Submit Your Result button amigo

[cale]

i dont have a legit copy of 3dmark? :(
is that a problem

[oanvoanc]

this result is insanely good.

i think it is caused by the high shader clock.

well done cale :up:

[7499richard]

no, i think its cause of the ram speeds. With my quad clocked at 4GHz, and my 8800GTX clocked at 729/1836/900 I am only able to get 17062 (or around there). My memory on my card will not clock worth :banana::banana::banana::banana:, and I think that is where he is seeing the higher scores as his core/shader is slower then mine, but memory is clocked much much higher...

edit: I also see his system ram is faster, though that is not a huge thing in 3dmark I have read. I also see he has the .exe for 169.25 drivers, as I am on 167.26, would that make a big difference?

[dengyong]

I think it's run at lower resolution, like 1024x768. The left pic is my test at that res with settings like his but in xp64 thus the higher cpu score, the right pic is his.
6888868891

He can run the free version and get a link.

And in vista. :clap:

warboy tried to pull this one also with the "cracked 17k in 06 with a single 8800GTX" thread.

Prove me wrong and I'll apologize.

[7499richard]

ok that makes sense, because I actually had my gpu clocks much higher then reported earlier, and my memory was OC a little bit also.

here is a link to mine.

http://service.futuremark.com/compare?3dm06=3968862

[7499richard]

I hope you are right about that, because I am really peed off mine can't compete with much higher clocks then his, I was at 759/1890/979 and 4GHz quad core. see link in previous post...

[Turrican]

nice result bro. :toast:

[dengyong]

I hope you are right about that, because I am really peed off mine can't compete with much higher clocks then his, I was at 759/1890/979 and 4GHz quad core. see link in previous post...

I'm confident.

Nice card, is it vmoded ?

[7499richard]

yes vmodded
I have WC setup as seen in sig.
I took my computer outside a couple weekends ago in -20C weather and was able to push it that high, it won't do it inside with 20C ambiants. It runs at 729/1782/900 (this morn i upgraded to 169.21 drivers and my ram seems to clock much nicer :) ) regularly indoors.

But like I said my card was screaming then, and I am also very confident in your conclusions about lower resolutions being used by OP because I should be destroying his scores with the setup I had on that day...

But I am getting a SS Phase Change cooler built right now and I will be picking it up over the Xmas break. I am hoping to be able to run my quad at at least 4.5GHz 24/7 and bench at close to 5GHz with it. So then I will really be screaming :)

[dengyong]

yes vmodded

I took my computer outside a couple weekends ago in -20C weather and was able to push it that high

Now thats Xtreme ! :rocker::guitar::rocker:

[flesheatinvirus]

Here is my 06 score at default res with my quad at 4132mhz. http://service.futuremark.com/compare?3dm06=4064391:)

[itslogz]

Thats good stuff. Congrats

[oanvoanc]

cale can you re-run this 06 bench?

upload it please, so we can take a look at the compare link. that would be great :)

[flesheatinvirus]

Im not buying it myself. With that quad speed and the core and shader clocks that Ultra was running you would have to have one hell of a incredible card to pull 17,8 and change.

[dengyong]

He said he gets 15800 in another section, wich would be about right for 3dmark06 default settings.

[Warboy]

The Screenshot is 1680x1050, If thats the max res for the screen he is using, the Points are voided, Because the benchmark normally runs at 1280x1024

I had the same problem, for awhile i couldn't use the 1280x1024 settings, so 3dmark06 defaulted to a lower setting.

[MuffinFlavored]

Just please re-run the benchmark, show the resolution, and make an ORB link.
:)

[BTK]

yeah the resolution thing is covered up make sure its @ 1280x1024

[elgoog]

The Screenshot is 1680x1050, If thats the max res for the screen he is using, the Points are voided, Because the benchmark normally runs at 1280x1024

I had the same problem, for awhile i couldn't use the 1280x1024 settings, so 3dmark06 defaulted to a lower setting.

think about what you just said...

[flesheatinvirus]

I was waiting for that one.:rofl:

[BTK]

think about what you just said...

Do you think he said the test was run @ 1680x1050? I think he was saying since the max res of his monitor is 1680x1050 and the 3Dmark06 default res is 1280x1024 3dmark reverted to running the benchmark in 1024x768 which means more fps and more points therefor voiding the points.

[Warboy]

Do you think he said the test was run @ 1680x1050? I think he was saying since the max res of his monitor is 1680x1050 and the 3Dmark06 default res is 1280x1024 3dmark reverted to running the benchmark in 1024x768 which means more fps and more points therefor voiding the points.

Very good. You just pwned a 8 post newbie.

If there was a E-Cookie, I would so buy you one:clap:

[BTK]

Very good. You just pwned a 8 post newbie.

If there was a E-Cookie, I would so buy you one:clap:

I didn't mean to? Just saying what I thought he meant unless your trying to be sarcastic.......

[Simps]

That score is just wrong.
We are not stupid you know?

No way that was done @ deault resolution. If it was, then no way this is single card.
3DMARK's score without an ORB link are :banana:

[]'s
Simps

[dengyong]

Do you think he said the test was run @ 1680x1050? I think he was saying since the max res of his monitor is 1680x1050 and the 3Dmark06 default res is 1280x1024 3dmark reverted to running the benchmark in 1024x768 which means more fps and more points therefor voiding the points.

Since 1650x1050 is larger than 1280x1024 there is no way or reason 3dmark06 would default to a lower resolution. :eek:

I'm not trying to give BTK a hard time, I'm just stating the facts.

[flesheatinvirus]

The entire screen pic reeks of shad when put under the microscope. Im done with it.

[Warboy]

Since 1650x1050 is larger than 1280x1024 there is no way or reason 3dmark06 would default to a lower resolution. :eek:

I'm not trying to give BTK a hard time, I'm just stating the facts.

No, That res normally be accessed sometimes, Becauses of timings or the connection its based around, and For awhile since i was using a HDMI connection with my HDTV, It wouldn't let me access 1280x1024 no matter what, but then i hooked up component and i got 1280x1024 easy

[dengyong]

That might float if he hadn't posted in another section that he gets 15,800 in 3dmark06 which is about right for his specs @ 1280x1024.

He's using a computer monitor, and wouldn't ya think that someone who had made an honest mistake would at least change the title of their thread ?

[flesheatinvirus]

HDMI is DVI with eight channels of sound not component like I stated before, my mistake on that one.

[cale]

sorry guys iv been away from my pc for a while.
that run was done one the 169.25 drivers and i could not get a digital out from the video card and windows was stuck in 1024 x 768 and i could not do anything to change it, i did not know its would effect my score like that as i assumed futuremark factored those sorts of variables in. and gave their scores with that in mind as it seems like such an obvious thing to do in my eyes anyways


in true res i get 16,100 or there abouts.
once i get back up and running ill try post a orb thingy

[BTK]

sorry guys iv been away from my pc for a while.
that run was done one the 169.25 drivers and i could not get a digital out from the video card and windows was stuck in 1024 x 768 and i could not do anything to change it, i did not know its would effect my score like that as i assumed futuremark factored those sorts of variables in. and gave their scores with that in mind as it seems like such an obvious thing to do in my eyes anyways


in true res i get 16,100 or there abouts.
once i get back up and running ill try post a orb thingy

i think it would bring it down to even less than 16k with 1280x1024

and you wouldn't of covered the resolution settings up if you were hiding anything........

[dengyong]

I think these people that start threads with lying/misleading titles about their scores must have an inferiority complex.

If they were truly mistaken they would change the title of the thread. :shakes:

[Sepander]

17652 points (http://service.futuremark.com/compare?3dm06=4541940)

Q6600 @ 4,2GHz
Inno3D 8800GTS "overclock" 512Mb @ 837/2106/1123 (core/shader/mem)
- stock cooling
- no vmods