Oppainter pulls the trifecta 2K1, 2K3, 2K5

Test things. Top scores reward top work.

I've never had a machine capable of the numbers that macci, DJ, or OPP put down but in the class I compete in I've had unrivaled scores that spanned 6 months.

Then a pack of wolves :banana::banana::banana::banana::banana: and cry and moan over OS tweaks I use and wont share. But ya know what? It took me time to figure them out. It ought to take them time as well.

word :)



dont get pissed ;)


u are right

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by STEvil

I think macci knows ;)

Gomer - it is, but you cant reveal everything! That'd take the fun and adventure out of learning all this crap ;)

---

Totally agree STEvil, but still thinking sharing info like Hipro5 just did and other tweaks and voltmods is great. I and others (including some of the "big" ones) aprriciate when people are sharing mods from you, Hell-Fire, KYOSEN etc....Well they could just find out about it themselves :) (kinda of bad Danish humour :) )
Not just for 3DMark but in generel for optimizing forum users 24/7 settings etc.
Well just an opinion, not for starting an diskussion (or what its called in english :) )


btw. gratz on the fine tweaks Macci and the aswsome results Opp.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hallowed

If everyone shared all the damn time, wed all have the same scores.

---

No, don't think so.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by I²K

No, don't think so.

---

Maybe not but it takes the fun out learning.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by iceman2g

Maybe not but it takes the fun out learning.

---

But it would be a nice competition :-)

Quote:

---

One thing is funny thou: I'm getting silly low Drago low score?? is that cos of 512k cache?

---

The more I surf thru the ORB the more I see 512k chips getting poor drago low scores and 1024k chips getting good drago low scores. I guess its just the cache making the difference in that particular test. Difference appears to be quite huge thou - around 50 FPS at default speeds!
But I need to test w/ 1M s939 chip to confirm this :D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by macci

The more I surf thru the ORB the more I see 512k chips getting poor drago low scores and 1024k chips getting good drago low scores. I guess its just the cache making the difference in that particular test. Difference appears to be quite huge thou - around 50 FPS at default speeds!
But I need to test w/ 1M s939 chip to confirm this :D

---

I think you're right about DL & cache Macci; I was looking at some scores the other day and noticed the exact same thing; the 512k loses massively compared to the 1mb. These are the scores I was looking at: Stevehat1's 32K with s939 512K and his 32K with s754 1MB. As you can see, his X800 XT is clocked very similar on both runs (4fps diff), so it's the system that determines those scores. The s939 512K Winchester @ 2.71 beats the s754 Clawhammer @ 2.64 in all tests, except in Drago High where they're tied and DL where the 512K gets it's ass handed to it by the Claw. :) Should help clear up the fact that DL really likes cache :2cents:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by twilius_basic

I think you're right about DL & cache Macci; I was looking at some scores the other day and noticed the exact same thing; the 512k loses massively compared to the 1mb. These are the scores I was looking at: Stevehat1's 32K with s939 512K and his 32K with s754 1MB. As you can see, his X800 XT is clocked very similar on both runs (4fps diff), so it's the system that determines those scores. The s939 512K Winchester @ 2.71 beats the s754 Clawhammer @ 2.64 in all tests, except in Drago High where they're tied and DL where the 512K gets it's ass handed to it by the Claw. :) Should help clear up the fact that DL really likes cache :2cents:

---

Or DL likes dual channel?

Quote:

---

Or DL likes dual channel?

---

Quote:

---

and DL where the 512K (dualchannel) gets it's ass handed to it by the Claw (1MB, Single Channel).

---

So no its not a DC vs. SC issue since the DC 512k chip is some 50FPS slower clock to clock compared to SC 1MB chip.

Epox 8KDA3+ Vcore/Vdimm modded //
AMD 64 3200+ XMPW 1MB @ 2.7Ghz //
OCZ PC3700EB @245Mhz 3-2-2-5 //
Club3D X800XT PE //

nVentiv Mach II Cooled

30450 3DMarks http://service.futuremark.com/compare?2k1=8049314

DFI Lanparty UT nF3 250GB 11x264 // 1024Mb OCZ 3700EB DDR528 SPD timings // Club3D Ati Radeon X800XT Pe Cooled by nVentiv Prometia Mach II

28452 3DMarks http://service.futuremark.com/compare?2k1=8167236


The NewCastle was meant to replace my 1Mb cpu, but now I've ordered a 3400+ 1Mb to replace this NewCastle. My old 2.7Ghz CH was just way faster. I used to play UT2004 on it with the CH @2.5, with the NC I played UT2004 @2.9Ghz. And there were some NASTY fps drops with the NewCastle, down to like 15fps when I was playing RPG Invasion and the Skaarj showed up (fps with the ClawHammer never dropped below 60). Especially wave 5 where plasma bolts are going all over the place :cool:
The NewCastle has 200Mhz on the Clawhammer and more memory bandwidth and it loses with around 3k points.
My opinion, NC's are like Durons.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by macci

So no its not a DC vs. SC issue since the DC 512k chip is some 50FPS slower clock to clock compared to SC 1MB chip.

---

Just goes to show that 90nM FX, 1M will be a real ROCKET :D

how can the newcastle be slow and the claw fast if theres 200-300 MHz difference? a 2.6GHz newcastle should run games as well as a 2.3GHz claw. Yes drag low sure likes teh cache, but so do all other tests except nature and car high doesnt care too much. car low is the 2nd most cache intensive test. Yes the 90nm fx57 should be a rocket, dubbed "san diago" those monsters will start at 2.8GHz and probably used strained silcon and overclock to around 3.1GHz with high end air cooling

Ace, its San Diego.

what I really want to figure out is how to enable the extra 512k on my 2800+ clawhammer :D

http://service.futuremark.com/compare?2k1=8219965


OMG OPP breaks 42k marks!!!!!!!!!!!! 42330!!!!!!!!! 800+ drag low, 500+ lobby low!!!!!!! :slobber: Nice 340 nature, 186 car high too! such a shame win2k doesnt work on this fx53 or it would be like 42.5k easy. I never imagined 42k would be broken for 6 months, but that was because I did not think the fx55 would overclock better than the fx53! ~3.6GHz is just darn amazing!!!!!!!! You got me very curious what youd get on your 9800xt now ;) 34k is my guess with that new cpu and the latest 4.10 cats. :p: wanna find out? ;) :D

your 9800xt score:

http://service.futuremark.com/compare?2k1=7382155

does the 4.10 cats boost nature any? They boost the fps of all other tests plus you now got an extra 500MHz cpu power. should easily account for another 3.7k for 34k ;)

Stunning. Look at the cpu speed. - I am outta words

wow, I am speechless

congrats OPP, that is truly amazing :toast:

Dayamn.

Way to go OPP :toast: :slobber:

interesting to see you used > Microsoft Windows Server 2003 think its time to install it and see :D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by stestan

Way to go OPP :toast: :slobber:

interesting to see you used > Microsoft Windows Server 2003 think its time to install it and see :D

---

dont bother, OPP tried using win2k but his fx55 for some strange reason isnt stable under win2k when superchilled. Id have to see if others are able to run their fx55 superchilled under win2k, if not then something in the fx55 is the curlpit.

Good Job OPP
42k :slobber: :slobber: :slobber:

Congrats

Héhé , 2K3 server is a good OS for 3D benchmarks ;) congratz again OPP :toast:

Opp tearing up the 3D, lets see a high end screen shot from that rig. Might be a world record. If you can add Superpi to your bench drive that would mucho appriciated by all.

Sandra memory bandwidth shot would also be nice too.

Awesome job once again

Looks like OPP got the settings figured out :D

Simply amazing! :toast: