posted :)
should be nuked in some hours :D
Printable View
posted :)
should be nuked in some hours :D
still there...
my A64 at 10x268 at 1:1 cas 2-2-2-5, with a 256 meg version of the 6800NU, with 16 pipelines, and 6 vertex shaders, running 470/1205, is certainly faster then a
3.0C at stock, and a 128 meg version at stock 325/700...
my Fill rate is only 7500. while this persons is well over 25,000.
yet the score is still there.
http://service.futuremark.com/compare?2k3=3216137
the fake-Fill Rate (Multi-Texturing)
(Texels/s) "25261.5"
Mine-below with the system above.
Hmm! 145fps on GT3 - Troll's Lair, I don't think so! :stick:
http://service.futuremark.com/compare?2k3=3317632
9800 SE-15,300 on 2003.
not possible.
Bugged Proxycon.
http://service.futuremark.com/compare?2k3=3304868
Riiiiiiiiiiiiiiight. :p:
http://service.futuremark.com/compare?2k1=8157745
NF7-S/NF7,NF7-V (nVidia-nForce2)
AMD Athlon(tm) Processor 2186 MHz
ATI RADEON 9700
:confused: = 35000 marks.
http://service.futuremark.com/compare?2k1=8212473
That Score really piss me off :mad: Took me place 7 in ORB ;D
all posted :)
a bad 9600xt score..........
http://service.futuremark.com/compare?2k1=7890658
has been removed already :)
guy is getting better nature scores with a 8500 64mb than the top 9800 pro
http://service.futuremark.com/compare?2k1=8231206
He beats my nature score by nearly 80FPS, that doesn't necessarily make it bugged. I think the 8500 is only DX7.0 so it's not rendering all the details my 6800 GT is.Quote:
Originally Posted by LSANTHRAX
If the 8500 is only dx 7 then why does mine support the dx8 tests..?
Mine is also a 128mb version and it averages 1/4 of his in nature....i think his might be just a little bugged....not to mention the fact that his fsb is 14mhz...:)
http://service.futuremark.com/compare?2k1=8138914
he says its replicable, so it must be bugged. 3.5ghz p4 should score 24k or less
all posted :)
I find this one rather interesting:
http://service.futuremark.com/compare?3dm05=378115
3.88GHz A64, 849/693 X800XT PE and 8.8k.
Clocks and the score pretty much match. Everything looks right.
The clockspeeds just are pretty much unreachable with current hardware. Not totally absurd speeds but running A64 at 3.88? Running X800XT PE @ 849/693? running them BOTH thru 3DMark05?
By far one of the "best" ORB cheats I've seen.
Looks like he has found a way to make the ORB read whatever he wants.
edit: and I think that he made one mistake there - ORB doesn't detect correct AGP speed w/ the MSI board..
Instead of "8x / 8x" it should say "0x /"
http://service.futuremark.com/compare?2k1=7552704
Definetely fake, look at it compared to my score.
what is up with blueremy still up in 05? The guy has admitted to cheating. None of his scores should be taken seriously.
Ok, how about an FX 5900 Ultra, and AMD 1.8 GHZ for a 15,964 3Dmark03 score ?? Nice null run.
http://service.futuremark.com/compare?2k3=2845933
http://service.futuremark.com/compare?2k3=3540206
9600xt getting 312 proxycon?
all posted :)
thx a lot guys! :toast:
http://service.futuremark.com/compare?2k3=3374084
over 100fps in Trolls Lair with ATI 9550 ???
lol..... that one's a stinker.Quote:
Originally Posted by LSANTHRAX